Agenda of Council - 29 00 2020

Council

29 September 2020

Update on the Zero Carbon work programme, and Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance concept

Department: Civic

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report provides an update on the Dunedin City Council’s (DCC’s) Zero Carbon work programme, relating to climate change mitigation.

2 Specifically, the report:

a) describes the updated city-wide emissions profile for Dunedin (based on 2018/19 data), and sets out changes in this since the first profile was completed in 2016 (based on 2014/15 data),

b) sets out work underway to ensure the draft 10 Year Plan responds to the Council’s Zero Carbon 2030 target, and next steps for the Zero Carbon work programme, and

c) seeks Council endorsement of a possible partnership approach (a ‘Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance’) to progress city-wide emissions reduction efforts, with Kāti Huirapa Rūnaka ki Puketeraki, Ōtākou Runaka, Otago Regional Council, Southern District Health Board, University of Otago and Otago Polytechnic to be approached as potential founding members.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes the Zero Carbon work programme update, including the updated emissions profile for Dunedin city

b) Approves in principle the concept of establishing a ‘Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance’ to take a partnership approach to city-wide emissions reduction, with Kāti Huirapa Rūnaka ki Puketeraki, Ōtākou Runaka, Otago Regional Council, Southern District Health Board, University of Otago and Otago Polytechnic to be approached as potential founding members, and

c) Notes that, should the ‘Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance’ concept be approved, Terms of Reference will be developed with potential founding members and a final draft reported back to Council.

BACKGROUND

3 ‘Climate change mitigation’ refers to actions taken to limit the degree or speed of climate change, either by reducing the magnitude or rate of emissions being generated (‘emissions reduction’), or by increasing the amount of carbon stored in ‘carbon sinks’ (e.g. through reforestation).

4 The DCC has been progressing work on climate change mitigation and adaptation since 2009. In June 2019, Council declared a climate emergency.

5 As confirmed by Council, Dunedin’s emissions reduction target is in two parts:

· Net zero emissions of all greenhouse gases other than biogenic methane by 2030; and

· 24% to 47% reduction below 2017 biogenic methane emissions by 2050, including 10% reduction below 2017 biogenic methane emissions by 2030.

6 Reduction related to biogenic methane is aligned to the national target. It is absolute, meaning it must be achieved without carbon offsetting. All other greenhouse gases are to reach ‘net zero’, meaning carbon offsetting can be employed, if necessary, to achieve the goal.

7 To date, it has been assumed that this emissions target is intended to be implemented in relation to the methodology and scope of Dunedin’s city-wide emissions inventory, first measured in 2016 using data from the 2014/15 year. The DCC’s internal emissions measurement, reporting and reduction efforts (underway since 2014) are seen as a contribution towards this city-wide target.

DISCUSSION

Dunedin’s updated emissions profile

8 The first comprehensive snapshot of Dunedin’s emissions profile as a city was produced in 2016 using the Global Protocol for Community Scale Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GPC) methodology. It used the most recent data available at the time, from the 2014/15 year. An updated emissions profile for the city has just been completed, using data for the 2018/19 year (Attachment A). At the same time, the profile for the 2014/15 year was re-run incorporating updates to the methodology, to enable direct comparisons between the two profiles.

9 GPC reporting is production-based, rather than consumption-based, so excludes embodied emissions relating to products produced elsewhere but consumed within Dunedin (e.g. building materials, consumables). A full set of assumptions and exclusions is set out in the report, but it should also be noted that in some cases there is a reliance on national data, which is then attributed to Dunedin on a per capita basis.

10 In the 18/19 reporting year, Dunedin emitted a gross 1,694,532 tCO2e. This is an increase of 4% on 2014/15 emissions.

Figure 1: Dunedin city’s gross emissions (2018/19)

11 Since 2014/15, emissions from the Transport sector have increased by 30%. Transport is now the city’s largest source of emissions, accounting for 43% of total gross emissions. Within the transport sector, the largest emissions category is land transport (petrol and diesel, on- and off-road) accounting for 69% of transport emissions.

12 Agriculture is the second largest emitting sector in Dunedin (35% of gross emissions) with livestock accounting for 99% of agricultural emissions. Stationary Energy is the third highest emitting sector in the region (12% of gross emissions), followed by Waste (7% of total gross emissions) and Industry (2% of total gross emissions). With the exception of Stationary Energy, emissions from all of these sectors reduced between 2014/15 and 2018/19, for different reasons:

a) Agricultural emissions reduced (by 12%) mainly due to a reduction in the number of livestock farmed within the region

b) Industrial emissions have fallen across New Zealand, and the Dunedin figure relies on national data (a 2% reduction)

c) Improved landfill gas capture at Green Island Landfill has reduced (by 9%) emissions from the Waste sector.

13 In the Stationary Energy sector, an increase in the use of petrol, diesel and LPG drove an increase in emissions, but this was offset by increased use of renewable energy in the national grid, ultimately resulting in a 1% increase in emissions from this sector.

Zero Carbon 2030 work programme initiatives underway

14 A core focus of the Zero Carbon work programme since the last update report to Council in May has been supporting development of the draft 10 Year Plan. An update on each of the key initiatives is provided in the following table:

Initiative	Details/objectives	Timeframe
Emissions Reduction Plan refresh	The DCC has been measuring and reporting on organisational emissions as part of the Toitū carbonreduce programme (formerly CEMARS), since 2014. 2018/19 marked the end of the first target period set under the Council’s Emissions Management and Reduction Plan. A refresh of this Plan is underway, in parallel with, and to help inform, 10 Year Plan budget development.	Underway
Climate 2030 Rapid Review	Coffey Services (NZ) Limited, in conjunction with a team of specialists, is in the final stages of conducting a rapid review of DCC’s work programmes (and service and activity measures), checking alignment with the 2030 target, idenfiying intitaitives to reduce and/or offset Dunedin’s GHG emissions, and increasing the community’s and DCC’s resilience to the effects of climate change. While the timing of the review has been delayed due to COVID-19 impacts, staff have worked to ensure review findings are iteratively informing 10 Year Plan development. Report findings will be presented to Council toward the end of the year, to support the 10 Year Plan.	Underway
Emissions impact of capital and operational budgets	High level guidance for teams was produced to support teams to consider impacts on both city-wide and DCC emissions as part of budget development. Teams were asked to complete an Emissions Impact Statement for each new capital programme element, and for proposed operational budgets. An overall, high level Emissions Impact Assessment was then completed for the proposed capital programme.	Completed
Draft Zero Carbon work programme and budget for 2021/22-23/24	As part of 2019/20 Annual Plan deliberations, the Council approved funding to establish and commence the delivery of a detailed work programme for climate mitigation and adaption at a cost of $525,000 for 2019/20 and $572,000 in 2021/22. The programme was proposed for 2019/20 and 2020/21, acknowledging that a longer-term work programme would be considered through the 10 Year Plan process. A draft Zero Carbon work programme, budget and implementation structure for 2021/22 – 23/24 is in development, to support Council’s deliberations on the 10 Year Plan.	Underway
Infrastructure strategy	In discussion with 3 Waters and Transportation, consideration is also being given to the implications of the Zero Carbon 2030 target for their work programmes over the coming decade, with a focus on Years 1-3.	Underway
Early engagement with public and stakeholders	At the time of the last update report to Council, it was hoped that DCC-led engagement with the public and stakeholders could be timed for June/July, welcoming initial suggestions from the community about actions that could contribute towards the city’s Zero Carbon 2030 target. Due to COVID-19 impacts, this proved impossible. As a result, the first opportunity for the public to provide feedback on the relative priority of any emissions reduction efforts, along with any specific ideas they might have, is via the planned 10 Year Plan early engagement. It is intended that the Zero Carbon 2030 target and work programme is flagged, but alongside a wide range of other issues. The public will have the opportunity to provide further feedback through the formal consultation process in early 2021.	September/ October / November 2020

15 As a result of this work programme, councillors can expect to see some reflection of the Zero Carbon 2030 target in the options papers and early drafts of the 10 Year Plan, in particular the draft service and activity measures, draft capital work programme and operating budgets, and draft Infrastructure Strategy.

Progress towards a city-wide Action Plan

Background

16 In November 2015 the Council resolved to commit to the (then) ‘Compact of Mayors’. Following a merger with the ‘Covenant of Mayors’ this body is now known as the ‘Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy’ (GCoM). Within three years of this commitment (although flexibility of timeframe is allowed, to suit local circumstances and needs), cities need to develop, adopt, and regularly report on a formally adopted plan(s) addressing climate change mitigation/low emission development, and access to sustainable energy.

17 In June 2019, the Council recommitted to the development of an emissions reduction plan for Dunedin, resolving as follows:

Moved Cr Hawkins / Cr Laufiso

“That the Council:

a) Declares a Climate Emergency.

b) Acknowledge that all levels of central government need to act.

c) Agrees that a business as usual transition to a low carbon economy is inadequate.

d) Develops a Climate Emergency Plan that:

i) Sets a city target of net zero carbon by 2030, with interim milestones;

ii) Quantifies the actions available to Council, community and central government to ensure these targets are met.”

Motion carried

18 Emissions reduction plans have been developed, or are under development, in a number of centres around the country. Multi-stakeholder collaboration is a hallmark of the approach being taken by a lot of authorities. Two recent examples include Auckland Council’s Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan, and Queenstown Lakes District Council’s Climate Action Plan.

19 To date, the focus of the DCC’s Zero Carbon work programme has been on updating the city-wide emissions inventory, and on supporting draft 10 Year Plan development, with city-wide partnership work that may support emissions reduction progressing only through related work streams such as the Energy Plan 1.0, Waste Futures, and various Transportation initiatives. However, when there is a reduction in calls on staff time to support draft 10 Year Plan development, the focus of the Zero Carbon work programme can shift to the city-wide emissions reduction plan development envisaged by the Council.

20 Given the large number of stakeholders and other complexities involved in establishing a city-wide approach to emissions reduction, it is anticipated that the development of an emissions reduction plan for the city will be a significant undertaking, and will take some time to conclude.

21 Given the proxmity of the Council’s Zero Carbon 2030 target, and the fact that emissions have continued to increase since 2016, it is considered essential to amplify existing partnership-based emissions reduction efforts while plan development is underway. A formal partnership of major agencies committed to emissions reduction could also play a key support role in the development of a city-wide emissions reduction plan.

22 An opportunity has been identified to replace an existing, inactive city-wide initiative relating to energy, with a new partnership that encompasses energy-related ambitions but focuses on the broader issue of emissions reduction.

Dunedin Energy Leaders’ Accord

23 In 2015 a Dunedin Energy Leaders Accord set up under the Dunedin Energy Plan 1.0 established a formal alliance between the city’s major energy users, energy businesses, and membership-based organisations representing major sectors.

24 Members of the Accord signalled their recognition of the importance of energy efficiency and security to achieving economic development ambitions and commercial opportunities, committing to sharing and publicising best practice, and working together to deliver better energy outcomes, including emissions reduction.

25 While the Accord represents a range of key stakeholders with significant roles to play in improving Dunedin’s energy system, there are some significant gaps, including the absence of mana whenua representation. In addition, while some Accord signatories have worked together on energy-related opportunities (e.g investigative work into district energy scheme opportunities undertaken by the Southern District Health Board, University of Otago, DCC and Ministry of Health), and many members have met regularly to share progress through the Otago Chamber of Commerce Energy Committee, the regular meetings, public engagement and degree of collaboration originally envisaged by the Accord have not been realised. As such, the Accord itself can best be described as inactive.

Potential Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance

26 Since 2015, the focus of a number of Accord members has shifted from energy efficiency to emissions reduction. In addition to the DCC’s city-wide emissions reduction target, the University of Otago and Otago Polytechnic are now targeting net carbon neutrality in operations by 2030, while the SDHB has aspirations to reduce emissions by 80% on 2016/17 levels by 2030. It is suggested that the aims of the Dunedin Energy Leaders Accord are encompassed by, and to a degree have been superseded by, this broader focus on emissions.

27 It is proposed that the original ambitions of the Accord could be progressed within a new partnership that aligns more closely with the present-day ambitions of the DCC and other major city stakeholders, and better represents the DCC’s commitment to a partnership with mana whenua. A working title of ‘Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance’ has been adopted for this potential entity.

28 The Terms of Reference for the Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance would be finalised in discussion with founding members, but in order to seek an initial indication of interest from key stakeholders, an outline of possible guiding principles, aims, membership and commitments has been developed (attached as Appendix B).

29 The starting point for the aims, membership and commitments was the original Energy Leaders’ Accord. The DCC’s immediate past Kaiwhakamaherehere, Rachel Wesley, provided some initial high level feedback which led to the addition of the guiding principles section.

30 The Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance is considered most likely to succeed if it is founded by a small group of members already committed to emissions reduction, and already working in partnership on related projects. It is suggested the following entities might be approached as potential founding members:

· Kāti Huirapa Rūnaka ki Puketeraki

· Ōtākou Runaka

· Otago Regional Council

· Southern District Health Board

· University of Otago

· Otago Polytechnic

31 Once the Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance is established, membership could be expanded to include other organisations that meet agreed criteria and participation requirements.

Initial feedback on the concept

32 As a first step, initial feedback on the concept was sought from the Māori Participation Working Party, the Grow Dunedin Partnership and the Te Ao Tūroa Steering Group. The Māori Participation Working Party considered the concept at its recent meeting and is recommending to the rūnaka that the concept is worthy of in principle support. Grow Dunedin and the Te Ao Tūroa Steering Group have also endorsed the approach.

33 In addition, in principle confirmation of interest in the initiative has been received from a number of potential founding partners, including the University of Otago, Southern District Health Board, and Otago Polytechnic. At time of writing the Otago Regional Council was considering the proposal, but had yet to provide feedback.

OPTIONS

34 The majority of this report provides an update on the Zero Carbon work programme only. However, two options have been identified in relation to the potential Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance.

Option One – Support in principle the concept of a ‘Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance’

35 Under this option, staff would seek to formalise a partnership approach to emissions reduction (a ‘Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance’) between local rūnaka, the University of Otago, the Otago Polytechnic, the Southern District Health Board and potentially the Otago Regional Council. A first step would involve development of an agreed Terms of Reference for the entity, which would then be brought back to Council for approval.

Advantages

· A formal partnership will support and provide an opportunity to amplify existing partnership-based emissions reduction efforts while city-wide emissions reduction plan development is underway.

· A formal partnership of major agencies committed to emissions reduction could also play a key support role in the development of a city-wide emissions reduction plan, and ensure that the plan has a greater chance of being effectively implemented.

· The proposed partnership would replace an existing, inactive city-wide initiative relating to energy, with a new partnership that encompasses energy-related ambitions but focuses on the broader issue of emissions reduction.

· The proposed partnership would better reflect the DCC’s commitment to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

Disadvantages

· Energy-related aspirations that do not contribute strongly to emissions reduction may have more limited focus under a ‘Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance’, than under a reinvigorated Energy Leaders’ Accord (although the latter has not been explored as an option with signatories).

· A number of Energy Leaders Accord signatories would not meet the criteria proposed for new Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance membership, and care would need to be taken to ensure that these smaller entities are engaged and supported in their work, and in their engagement with the DCC, through a different forum.

Option Two – Status Quo

36 Under this option, partnership work with other major city stakeholders on emissions reduction would continue to be progressed through other work streams. Staff will consider alternative approaches to engagement with major city stakeholders to support development of a city-wide emissions reduction plan for the city. Reinvigoration of the existing Energy Leaders Accord could be explored with existing signatories as a vehicle to progress city-wide energy-related initiatives.

Advantages

· Were reinvigoration of the Energy Leaders Accord supported by signatories, it would provide an opportunity for all signatories to contribute, and for all goals of the Energy Plan 1.0 to be progressed, as originally envisaged.

Disadvantages

· Existing partnership projects that have emissions reduction potential would continue to be progressed but are unlikely to realise their full potential given a lack of coordination.

· An alternative approach to engaging major agencies in city-wide emissions reduction plan development and implementation, would need to be identified.

· An alternative approach to better reflecting the DCC’s commitment to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in both its work on both energy and emissions, would need to be identified.

· An opportunity to realign resourcing with the DCC’s increased focus on emissions, would be lost.

NEXT STEPS

37 Along with completion of the initiatives underway, listed above, should Council wish to progress with the Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance concept, working with potential founding members to develop an agreed Terms of Reference for the group will be a priority action between now and December.

38 In addition, staff will seek to progress the introduction of climate impact statements into InfoCouncil reports, and the development of a draft Climate Policy for the DCC (both of which will incorporate climate adaptation elements as well as mitigation), and support for teams across the DCC to build an emissions reduction focus into business-as-usual.

39 In addition, staff are considering whether an update to the city-wide emissions profile using 2019/20 data could be achieved within existing budgets within the 2020/21 year. A future report to Council will seek some clarity on the frequency with which it would like city-wide emissions to be measured and reported.

Signatories

Author:

Jinty MacTavish - Principal Policy Advisor

Authoriser:

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Dunedin Community Carbon Footprint Report 2018/19	62
⇩b	Possible Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance framework	94

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

The Zero Carbon work programme is anticipated to promote the social, economic and environmental well-being of communities in the present and for the future, by facilitating a transition to a low carbon economy.

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 Zero Carbon work programme has been assessed as directly contributing to the goals of the Economic Development and Environment Strategies, with clear links to the 3 Waters Strategy, Spatial Plan and Integrated Transport Strategy, Energy Plan 1.0, and the DCC’s Emissions Management and Reduction Plan. Action to reduce emissions is also likely to have co-benefits that contribute to the goals of the Social Wellbeing and Arts and Culture Strategies.

Māori Impact Statement

The report discusses the establishment of a Zero Carbon Alliance or similar partnership-based approach to city-wide emissions reduction efforts. The Māori Participation Working Party considered the concept at its recent meeting, and is recommending to the rūnaka that the concept is worthy of in principle support.

Sustainability

Climate change mitigation/emissions reduction efforts are considered key to sustainability. ‘Climate Action’ is one of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals, reflecting the centrality of action on climate change to the achievement of sustainable development. Without significant cuts to emissions, climate change impacts will further accelerate, with commensurate negative impacts on the social, environmental, cultural and economic wellbeing of New Zealand communities. Conversely, actions to reduce emissions generally have significant co-benefits in terms of community wellbeing.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The Zero Carbon work programme can be progressed within existing budgets during 2020/21. Council will need to consider resourcing for the Zero Carbon work programme for 2021/22 as part of 10 Year Plan deliberations. The extent to which the DCC’s emissions reduction target is achievable, will depend on decisions made across a wide range of budget lines as part of the 10 Year Plan process.

Financial considerations

Significance

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

Engagement – external

Initial feedback on the concept of a Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance was sought from the Māori Participation Working Party, the Grow Dunedin Partnership and the Te Ao Tūroa Steering Group. In addition, in principle confirmation of interest in the initiative has been received from a number of potential founding partners, including the University of Otago, Southern District Health Board, Otago Polytechnic. At time of writing, the feedback from the Otago Regional Council had been sought, but had yet to be received.

Engagement - internal

The Zero Carbon work programme has involved engagement with most DCC departments over the last six months.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

It is considered that there are some reputational risks for the DCC associated with non-delivery on emissions reduction ambitions, given the target adopted by Council in 2019. A potential partnership approach is proposed between five key city stakeholders, to start building momentum around city-wide emissions reduction efforts while a formal Zero Carbon Plan for the city is developed.

Conflict of Interest

No conflict of interest has been identified.

Community Boards

There has been no engagement to date with Community Boards as part of the Zero Carbon work programme.

Council

29 September 2020

Sustainability framework options

Department: Civic

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The Dunedin City Council’s (DCC’s) Strategic Framework is underpinned by the guiding principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and Sustainability. A clearer representation of these guiding principles is being explored as a first step in further development of the Strategic Framework.

2 Three sustainability frameworks are presented for Council’s consideration, selected either because they are in common use, or because they are in use by key partners:

a) New Zealand Treasury’s Living Standards Framework

b) United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals

c) The Thriving Cities Initiative’s City Portrait

3 Council direction is sought as to whether one of these frameworks is considered appropriate for further development and adaptation to the Dunedin context, within the DCC’s strategic and legislative context, or whether staff should further investigate alternative approaches to framing or defining ‘Sustainability’.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Considers the sustainability frameworks set out in the report, and

b) Indicates which framework(s), if any, Council wishes to adopt for further development and adaptation to the Dunedin context.

BACKGROUND

4 In 2009, a vision for Sustainable Practice at the DCC was adopted for use in the 10 Year Plan, in response to community feedback.

5 The vision was visually represented as set out in Figure 1, and was based on the definition of Sustainability developed by the Brundtland Commission of the United Nations in 1987:

“Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Figure 1: The DCC’s 2009 representation of Sustainable Practice

6 In 2012, the concept of Sustainability was retained as a guiding principle across the new strategic framework, but the specific 2009 representation was dropped. Sustainability requirements were included in the Activity Management Plans for all Council activities and a section on Sustainability was also added to Council report templates, to help embed a focus in all decision-making.

7 It is recognised that in the absence of a formal definition or framing of Sustainability, there is room for ambiguity in its interpretation. In 2019, an internal review assessed understanding of sustainability, and application of sustainable practice across the organisation. Sustainability was generally understood by staff as:

· using resources responsibly,

· having a long term view,

· considering future generations, and

· taking account of the social, economic, environmental and cultural effects of our decisions.

Examples of sustainable practice were found across the organisation, but the interpretation and areas of focus were variable.

8 A refresh of the Strategic Framework is anticipated, with a process scheduled to come to Council for approval later this year. This process will incorporate options for appropriate stakeholder and community input, but it is considered that a clearer representation of the Sustainability guiding principle (along with that of the Treaty of Waitangi, progressed in parallel) would be a helpful first step in further development of the Strategic Framework.

DISCUSSION

Proposed approach to development/adaptation

9 Considerable work will be required to adapt a sustainability framework to the Dunedin context. Given this, the preference would be for Council to approve a single framework for development and adaptation.

10 Initial engagement with Aukaha has suggested potential mana whenua interest in being involved in the DCC’s development of a representation of Sustainability. However, their preference is for the DCC to adopt a preferred framework as a starting point for that discussion.

Sustainability frameworks

11 There are a vast number of representations of Sustainability in use. This report presents three frameworks for Council’s consideration that are either in common use, or in use by key partners:

a) New Zealand Treasury’s Living Standards Framework

b) United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, and

c) The Thriving Cities Initiative’s City Portrait.

New Zealand Treasury’s Living Standards Framework

12 The Living Standards framework developed by the New Zealand Treasury was adopted by the New Zealand Government for the 2019 ‘Wellbeing Budget’. Sustainability is one part of the framework, alongside current wellbeing, and risk/resilience. A simplified representation of the Living Standards Framework is set out in Figure 1, with a more comprehensive representation in Attachment A.

Figure 1: A simplified representation of the New Zealand Treasury’s Living Standards Framework (Source - New Zealand Treasury)

13 The sustainability component is based on the OECD’s ‘four capitals’ approach - the premise that sustainability depends on how current human activities impact on the stocks of different types of capital (natural, economic, human and social), as set out in Figure 2.

Figure 2: The Four Capitals (Source - New Zealand Treasury)

14 The sustainability component is indicator-based, in the sense that each capital is represented by a set of measures, and progress will presumably be assessed by trends in these indicators over time – there are no specified targets. A Living Standards Framework dashboard has been developed to support public access to the data, and a cost benefit analysis tool has been developed to support Government Ministries to present options with a Living Standards Framework lens. The indicators and measures for each of the capitals are set out in Attachment A.

15 A wider set of indicators to support Living Standards Framework implementation have been developed by Statistics New Zealand under a programme called ‘Indicators Aotearoa New Zealand – Ngā Tūtohu Aotearoa’, designed to capture New Zealand’s wellbeing. This wider set of indicators includes additional indicators/measures for each of the capitals, as well as measures to capture transboundary impacts, and contextual indicators.

16 Staff are not aware of any application of a ‘four capitals’ approach to sustainability here in Dunedin, but it is presented given the emphasis placed on it by the central government.

United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals

17 In 2015, the United Nations member states (including New Zealand) adopted 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 associated targets as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The SDGs bring together economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, and apply to all countries. A summary of the SDGs is set out in Figure 3, with the full text in Attachment B.

Figure 3: The United Nation’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (Source - United Nations)

18 The SDGs are not legally binding, and implementation relies on countries’ own sustainable development policies, plans and programmes. New Zealand set out its first voluntary review of progress towards the SDGs in 2019. The review emphasises that New Zealand’s progress is supported and monitored through implementation of the Living Standards Framework and through application of the new Indicators Aotearoa New Zealand. Some examples of how Indicators Aotearoa New Zealand map to the SDGs are set out in Attachment B.

19 The United Nations, and indeed the New Zealand Government, have encouraged the private sector and civil society to engage with the SDGs. As a result, the SDGs (or often a subset thereof) have been adopted by a range of businesses and organisations to guide their approach to sustainability. In 2019, the Sustainable Business Council reported that over half their members were mapping their performance against the SDGs. By way of local examples, in 2018 the Otago Polytechnic started linking the SDGs with their Strategic Objectives, and in the same year the University of Otago signed up to the international SDG Accord, which commits the organisation to a degree of alignment with the SDGs.

20 Any United Nations-affiliated programme has a strong connection to the SDGs. Locally, this includes the UNESCO City of Literature initiative, and Whaiao Regional Centre of Expertise Otago, led by the Otago Polytechnic.

21 Elsewhere in New Zealand, the Waikato Regional and Hamilton City Councils have partnered with the WEL Energy Trust, iwi, and other local stakeholders to develop a regional set of goals mapped to a subset of the SDGs. These are supplied in Attachment B as an example of what a city-wide SDG-inspired framework might look like.

The Thriving Cities Initiative’s City Portrait

22 The City Portrait framework takes as its starting point British economist Kate Raworth’s Doughnut Economics model (set out in Figure 4), which in turn is based on the concepts of a social foundation and an ecological ceiling.

Figure 4: The Doughnut Economics model of social and planetary boundaries, with transgressions illustrated in red (Source – The Lancet Planetary Health)

23 The social foundation represents minimum standards of living for humanity, and the dimensions and indicators that comprise it are drawn from the SDGs. The ecological ceiling comprises nine planetary boundaries defined by collaboration of earth systems scientists, led by those at the Stockholm Resilience Centre. The model suggests that by monitoring the indicators that make up the social foundation and ecological ceiling, and avoiding any transgressions of these boundaries, it is possible to meet the needs of all people within the means of the planet. However, as illustrated in Figure 4, measures suggest that at a global level both the social foundation and the ecological ceiling are currently being transgressed.

24 The Thriving Cities Initiative (a collaboration between C40 Cities, Raworth’s Doughnut Economics Action Laboratory, Biomimicry 3.8, and Circle Economy) recently developed a methodology to downscale the Doughnut Economics model to the city-level. They call the approach a ‘City Portrait’, and it was piloted with C40 Cities Amsterdam, Portland and Philadelphia in 2019.

25 The City Portrait methodology applies four lenses to a city, by combining the two domains (ecological and social) and two scales (local and global), as shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: The four lenses of the Thriving Cities Initiative’s City Portrait (Source – The Thriving Cities Initiative)

26 In terms of local application, the City Portrait approach has been adopted by Southland’s economic development agency Great South as a model for their post-Covid recovery. Researchers at the University of Otago’s Business School are considering what a Dunedin City Portrait might look like, as part of work on low carbon economies.

27 The four lenses of the Amsterdam City Portrait are included as Attachment C, as an example of a City Portrait.

OPTIONS

28 Four possible options have been identified for Council to consider in relation to the development of a clearer representation of the Sustainability guiding principle.

Option One – Council approves one sustainability framework for development and adaptation

29 Under this option, Council would approve a single sustainability framework for development and adaptation to Dunedin’s context, which staff would report back to Council in early 2021, before final deliberations on the draft 10 Year Plan. In parallel, consideration would continue to be given to how input from mana whenua and other stakeholders might best feed into the development process, and to integration with the refresh of the Strategic Framework and work on the Treaty principle.

Advantages

· Enables the fastest progress to be made on a first draft of a Sustainability guiding principle, of all options presented.

· Supported by Aukaha as a ‘first step’.

Disadvantages

· The range of possible Sustainability frameworks considered by Council is limited to those presented in this report.

· Council will not be able to evaluate multiple sustainability frameworks adapted to Dunedin, before adopting one.

Option Two – Council approves multiple sustainability frameworks for development and adaptation

30 Under this option, Council would approve multiple sustainability framework for development and adaptation to Dunedin’s context, which staff would seek to report back to Council in early 2021, before final deliberations on the draft 10 Year Plan. In parallel, consideration would continue to be given to how input from mana whenua and other stakeholders might best feed into the development process, and to integration with the refresh of the Strategic Framework and work on the Treaty principle.

Advantages

· Council would have the opportunity to evaluate multiple sustainability frameworks adapted to Dunedin, before adopting one.

· Enables progress to be made on first drafts of a Sustainability guiding principle, albeit slower than Option 1 due to the additional work that would need to be undertaken.

Disadvantages

· The range of possible Sustainability frameworks considered by Council is limited to those presented in this report.

· A further decision point would be required to have a single framework for engagement with mana whenua, as requested by Aukaha.

· Progress on a first draft of a Sustainability guiding principle would be delayed relative to Option 1.

Option Three – Council directs staff to investigate other possible representations of Sustainability

31 Under this option, Council would instruct staff to investigate other possible representations of Sustainability, before adopting a single option for development. Staff would report back to Council in early 2021, before final deliberations on the draft 10 Year Plan. In parallel, consideration would continue to be given to how input from mana whenua and other stakeholders might best feed into the development process, and to integration with the refresh of the Strategic Framework and work on the Treaty principle.

Advantages

· Council would have the opportunity to evaluate a wider range of Sustainability frameworks before deciding on the most appropriate option for development.

· Enables progress to be made on first drafts of a Sustainability guiding principle, albeit slower than Options 1 and 2 due to the additional work that would need to be undertaken.

Disadvantages

· A further decision point would be required to have a single framework for engagement with mana whenua, as requested by Aukaha.

· Progress on a first draft of a Sustainability guiding principle would be delayed relative to Options 1 and 2. First adapted drafts of a chosen Sustainability guiding principle would not be available for Council’s consideration ahead of final deliberations on the draft 10 Year Plan.

Option Four – Status Quo

32 Under this option, staff would cease work on representations of Sustainability. The status quo (no formal representation) would prevail.

Advantages

· No further calls on staff time or resourcing

Disadvantages

· No further progress would be made on a Sustainability guiding principle.

· The current room for ambiguity in the interpretation of the Sustainability guiding principle would continue into the refresh of the Strategic Framework (if the latter is approved by Council).

NEXT STEPS

33 If Council approves a preferred framework(s) for development, staff would:

· seek to adapt it/them for Dunedin existing DCC targets, indicators and measures (as appropriate), and to identify gaps and possible approaches to fill them;

· progress conversations with Aukaha about the best approach to ensure mana whenua input is captured;

· consider how this work intersects with the refresh of the Strategic Framework, and work on the Treaty principle

· target the December meeting of Council for reporting on a first draft of the adapted framework, if Option 1 is approved

· target a meeting of Council early in 2021 for reporting on first drafts of adapted frameworks, if Option 2 is approved.

34 If Council directs staff to investigate other possible representations of Sustainability, further options will be brought to Council for consideration early in 2021.

35 If Council directs staff to cease work on representations of Sustainability, this will be carried out.

Signatories

Author:

Jinty MacTavish - Principal Policy Advisor

Authoriser:

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Additional information relating to the New Zealand Treasury's Living Standards Framework	109
⇩b	Additional information relating to the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals	112
⇩c	Additional information relating to the Thriving Cities Initiative's City Portrait	115

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

The Brundtland Report’s definition of sustainable development refers to that which “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Development and adoption of a clear representation of sustainability is likely to promote social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of communities in the present and for the future by ensuring that there is clarity on both the interpretation and the measures of sustainability, and promoting consistent application of a sustainable development approach.

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 adoption of a clear representation of sustainability has been assessed as contributing towards a clearer interpretation and more consistent application of all of the city’s strategies, as Sustainability is a guiding a principle underpinning all of them, but it not yet subject to a formally adopted definition or framing.

Māori Impact Statement

Initial engagement with Aukaha has suggested potential mana whenua interest in being involved in the DCC’s development of a representation of Sustainability. However, their preference is for the DCC to adopt a preferred framework as a starting point for that discussion. Should Council support continued work on a representation of Sustainability, conversations with Aukaha will continue about the best approach to ensure mana whenua input can be reflected in the development process.

Sustainability

- The DCC’s Strategic Framework is underpinned by the guiding principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and Sustainability. It is recognised that in the absence of a formal definition or framing of Sustainability, there is room for ambiguity in its interpretation. Development and adoption of a clear representation of sustainability is likely to promote social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of communities in the present and for the future by ensuring that there is clarity on both the interpretation and the measures of sustainability, and promoting consistent application of a sustainable development approach.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications.

Financial considerations

It is considered that development of a clearer representation of the Sustainability framework can be achieved within existing budgets.

Significance

This decision is considered of low significance in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, and it relates to initiating a first stage of development only.

Engagement – external

Initial engagement with Aukaha has suggested potential mana whenua interest in being involved in the DCC’s development of a representation of Sustainability. There has been no other external engagement.

Engagement - internal

Internal engagement has been limited to some very high level discussions about the possibility of developing a representation of Sustainability, with the Council’s strategy sponsors group.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks associated with the development of a clearer representation of Sustainability.

Conflict of Interest

No conflicts of interest have been identified.

Community Boards

No implications for Community Boards have been identified.

Council

29 September 2020

Electric Vehicle Fast Charger - Middlemarch

Department: Civic

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

1 This report seeks approval from Council to grant ChargeNet NZ Limited (ChargeNet) a licence to occupy Council-owned land in Middlemarch, to enable the installation, maintenance and operation of an electric vehicle (EV) fast charging station.

2 The Dunedin City Council (DCC) recently supported a Central Otago District Council (CODC) application for EECA co-funding to establish ChargeNet-owned EV fast chargers in Middlemarch and Omakau, along the soon-to-be-launched Central Otago Touring Route. It was assessed that SH87 was the major gap in Dunedin’s EV charging network. Funding for the project has recently been approved by EECA.

3 Facilitation of additional EV fast charging infrastructure will contribute to Council’s objectives related to electric vehicle uptake and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

4 A site has been identified on road reserve adjacent to Browns Rd, Middlemarch, near the intersection with State Highway 87. This will also require dedicating two adjacent car parks for EV charging.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves granting a licence to occupy for ChargeNet NZ Limited to install, operate and maintain an electric vehicle fast charging station on Council-owned land in Middlemarch.

BACKGROUND

5 There are currently 931 EVs registered in Dunedin, 21,829 EVs registered nationally, and 1,325 in Otago (Ministry of Transport vehicle fleet statistics, through to August 2020). An April 2020 University of Otago Centre for Sustainability study found that Dunedin continues to have one of the highest rates of EV ownership in New Zealand at around 6.1 vehicles per thousand people, compared to an Otago regional average of 4.7 and a national average of 3.8 vehicles per thousand people.

6 The New Zealand Government has set a goal of doubling the number of EVs nationally every year until 2021, to reach a total of 64,000 registered EVs. The EV fleet in Dunedin has steadily increased every year between 2012 and 2019, with 308 new registrations in the 2019 calendar year. 11% of these EVs are company owned with the remaining 89% for personal use.

7 To support continued EV uptake, it is key that there are sufficient charging facilities available in convenient locations for both local motorists and visitors.

8 Current production EVs are generally capable of being “slow charged” via a standard domestic wall socket, but can also be “fast charged” using a specialised fast charging station. Fast charging stations are relatively expensive and require a three phase 80 Amp supply. Their application is therefore primarily to facilitate the use of EVs for longer distance trips. Depending on the size of the vehicle’s batteries a fast charge can take 20-40 minutes.

9 To date, the New Zealand Government’s approach to the development of a nationwide EV fast charging network has been to support and enable the private sector, subject to their compliance with certain charger specifications.

10 While interest from a wider range of commercial players is slowly growing, ChargeNet is by far the most dominant player nationwide, having been very proactive in their partnership with lines companies, local authorities and corporate hosts, and in accessing Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) funding to support fast charger installation. Their model involves operating the charging stations remotely, and handling billing for the service. A smart phone application directs the client to the station location and advises when it is available.

11 In Dunedin, Delta Utility Services Limited (later Aurora Energy Limited) did own and operate the South Island’s first EV fast charger at the DCC’s Filleul St carpark. Use of the Filleul Street fast charger was free of charge as part of an initiative by DCC and Delta/Aurora to encourage EV uptake. However, this unit suffered from reliability issues and once commercial options became available in Dunedin, it was discontinued. Aurora Energy’s preference is now to work with commercial providers to develop EV charging infrastructure on its network, rather than operating its own fast charging stations.

12 In April 2017, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency set a vision for nationwide coverage of fast charging stations every 75 km along the state highway network.

13 Five EV fast chargers are now available within Dunedin City, all owned and operated by ChargeNet:

a) University of Otago, 362 Leith Street, North Dunedin (1x CHAdeMo/CCS)

b) Water St, Dunedin (2x CHAdeMo/CCS)

c) Pak n Save, 86 Hillside Road, South Dunedin (1x CHAdeMo/CCS)

d) Mosgiel New World, 10 Hartstonge Avenue, Mosgiel (1x CHAdeMo/CCS)

14 In terms of Dunedin’s three state highway ‘gateways’, there are EV charging stations:

a) 55km to the south, at Milton (ChargeNet, 1x CHAdeMo/CCS)

b) 130km to the west, at Ranfurly (ChargeNet, 1x CHAdeMo/CCS)

c) 80km to the north, at Hampden (Network Waitaki, 1x CHAdeMo/CCS).

ChargeNet has also been allocated co-funding from EECA to install an EV fast charger at Palmerston (55km to the north), but this site is not yet operational.

DISCUSSION

Middlemarch fast charger application

15 The Dunedin City Council recently supported a Central Otago District Council (CODC) application for EECA co-funding to establish ChargeNet-owned EV fast chargers in Middlemarch and Omakau, along the soon-to-be-launched Central Otago Touring Route. It was assessed that, with SH87 being the major gap in Dunedin’s EV charging network, an additional fast charger in Middlemarch would contribute to DCC ambitions around emissions reduction, transport resilience and connectivity, as set out in:

a) Te Ao Tūroa/Dunedin’s Environment Strategy

b) the Integrated Transport Strategy

c) the Economic Development Strategy, and

d) the Energy Plan 1.0.

Emissions reduction

16 Transport is Dunedin’s most significant, and only growing, source of greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions from transport have been assessed as having grown 30% since 2014/15, and are responsible for 43% of Dunedin’s total emissions. Within the transport sector, emissions from land transport (petrol and diesel, on- and off-road) are both the largest contributor and the area of most significant growth, accounting for 69% of transport emissions (2018/19 data). Achieving the Council’s target of net city-wide carbon neutrality (excluding biogenic methane) by 2030, will require a significant reduction in transport-related emissions.

17 Driving an EV reduces greenhouse gas emissions by about 80% compared to a conventional fossil-fuelled vehicle, because most of the electricity used to charge an EV is generated from renewable energy sources.

Transport resilience

18 The distances between existing fast chargers in rural parts of Dunedin, means rural residents wishing to transition to EV must commit to high-range, higher cost models. With the installation of rapid chargers in Middlemarch and Omakau, use of lower-range, lower-cost electric vehicles for personal transport will become a proposition in these communities.

19 The chargers also add some resilience to Dunedin’s charge network, providing alternative routes for shorter range EVs to the west and north from Dunedin, in the event of disruptions to the primary routes out of the city.

Connectivity

20 The Central Otago Touring Route (scheduled to launch this summer) is approximately 316km long and will link the Southern Scenic Route from Queenstown to Dunedin through Central Otago via the Maniototo (State Highway 85 and 87). This route is only accessible to longer range EVs due to the lack of charging infrastructure. Provision of fast chargers along this route enables EV touring options to be built into planning and marketing for the Route, supporting the development of more sustainable, lower impact tourism.

21 The CODC application was also supported by the Strath Taieri Community Board, the Otago Regional Council, the Dunedin EV Owners Group, and the Otago Central Rail Trail Trust.

22 In August, it was announced that the CODC application had been successful.

Site, and License to Occupy

23 With EECA co-funding approved, ChargeNet has expressed an interest in ensuring the Middlemarch fast charger is operational by November. In consultation with Powernet, ChargeNet, the Strath Taieri Community Board and relevant DCC departments, a preferred site was identified on road reserve adjacent to Browns Rd, Middlemarch, near the intersection with State Highway 87. This is based on the proximity of suitable electricity supply, good access to SH87, and availability of nearby amenities such as toilets. Feedback has been sought from the owners of the adjacent site (the Strath Taieri A&P Society) about the proposed site, who are taking the time to liaise with potentially interested user groups. An update on their position will be provided at the meeting.

24 A proposed site plan supplied by ChargeNet is provided as Attachment A, but this is subject to final design and approval by officers.

25 City Planning have confirmed that EV charging stations fall within the definition of small scale network utilities under the proposed District Plan, which are a permitted activity on the proposed site subject to compliance with a scale threshold performance standard.

26 In order to facilitate use of the site by ChargeNet for the installation and operation of a fast charge station, the DCC must issue a Licence to Occupy under Section 354 of the Local Government Act 1974.

27 The proposed licence to occupy for the site would mirror that developed for the ChargeNet-owned fast chargers at the Water St site, and would include appropriate conditions to delineate responsibilities and mitigate any potential risks to the DCC, including:

a) The structure must not compromise roading or services maintenance activities.

b) Ongoing maintenance of the structure is to be the responsibility of the Licensee along with any damage that may occur to the road reserve as a result of the structure.

c) Any works within the licence area to be undertaken to the specification and approval of Council’s Engineers.

d) Licence to be for an initial term of 5 years with two further 5-year renewals at Council’s sole discretion.

e) No rent will be charged for the initial term however any further renewals will be charged at a rate set by Council.

f) One or two EV fast charging units will be installed with two car parking stalls marked and signed for EV charging.

g) Should Council require the charging station/s and stalls to be moved within the initial 5-year term, then Council at its cost will identify a suitable alternative location and relocate the facility.

Identification of sites for future EV charge infrastructure

28 The DCC is regularly being approached by private suppliers wishing to install charging infrastructure on DCC land. Currently there is no prioritisation of potential charging sites, or the type of infrastructure that should be installed on these sites to optimally support the DCC’s strategic ambitions.

29 To ensure a high level of customer service, and alignment with the DCC’s wider strategic ambitions (particularly those relating to emissions reduction and sustainable transport), the DCC has embarked on the development of an EV Charge Infrastructure Plan for the city. This plan will be informed by an assessment of the projected degree and timing of need for charging infrastructure in Dunedin, looking out to 2030. It is anticipated to be completed by end of calendar year 2020, and will be used to guide DCC support of future EV charge infrastructure in the city.

OPTIONS

30 The Council can either choose to grant ChargeNet a licence to install the EV fast charging station, or choose to maintain the status quo.

Option One – Grant ChargeNet licence to install EV fast charging station, subject to appropriate conditions

31 Approve a licence to occupy for ChargeNet NZ Limited to install, operate and maintain an electric vehicle fast charging station on the road reserve adjacent to Browns Rd, Middlemarch, near the intersection with State Highway 87.

Advantages

· Minimal capital and operational expenditure by the DCC.

· Minimal risk to the DCC as licence term will be of limited duration.

· Facilitating the development of charging infrastructure in this location has been assessed as likely to contribute to Council’s emissions reduction target by encouraging uptake and use of EVs. It has also been identified as supporting ambitions around transport resilience and connectivity, particularly for rural communities, as well as more sustainable development of a new tourism initiative.

Disadvantages

· Potential negative response from local conventional vehicle owners who perceive an overall reduction in car park stall numbers and little value in EV uptake.

· By offering a free licence for the initial period, the DCC may be seen to be subsidizing a commercial operator.

Option Two – Status Quo

32 Council does not approve a licence to occupy for ChargeNet NZ Limited to install, operate and maintain an electric vehicle fast charging station on the road reserve adjacent to Browns Rd, Middlemarch, near the intersection with State Highway 87.

Advantages

· No additional capital and operational expenditure for the DCC, and no additional risk associated with a new licence.

· The DCC will not be seen to be subsidising a commercial operator.

Disadvantages

· Potential negative response from local EV owners who perceive a lack of DCC support for the development of EV charging infrastructure.

· Potential negative response from partners to the Central Otago Touring Route project, and the CODC application for funding.

· Failing to facilitate EV charging infrastructure in this location could slow the uptake of EVs in Dunedin, contributing to increased greenhouse gas emissions (including from the new Central Otago Touring Route) and detracting from rural transport resilience and connectivity.

NEXT STEPS

33 If a licence to occupy is granted to ChargeNet, ChargeNet will work with Powernet and local contractors to supply electricity and install the unit. ChargeNet will manage the installation process.

34 The carparks will need to be painted to indicate they are for EV charging only, and appropriate road signage indicating the location of the charger will need to be installed.

Signatories

Author:

Jinty MacTavish - Principal Policy Advisor

Authoriser:

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Proposed site plan for Middlemarch supplied by ChargeNet	127

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision promotes the social, economic and environmental well-being of communities in the present and for the future, by promoting emissions reduction, transport resilience and connectivity.

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	☒	☐	☐

As discussed in the body of the report, it has been assessed that facilitating the installation of an EV fast charger in Middlemarch would contribute to DCC ambitions around emissions reduction, transport resilience and connectivity.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

Conversely, actions to reduce emissions generally have significant co-benefits in terms of community wellbeing. In this case, installation of an EV charger has been assessed as promoting positive social and economic outcomes around transport resilience and connectivity, particularly for rural communities.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications. The installation of signage at the site can be covered within existing Transport budgets.

Financial considerations

The installation of the charger will be at no cost to Council. The installation of signage at the site can be covered within existing Transport budgets.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

Central Otago District Council, ChargeNet, Powernet, Strath Taieri Community Board, Otago Central Rail Trail Trust, Otago Regional Council, Dunedin EV Owners Group, EECA, the Strath Taieri A&P Society.

Engagement - internal

Transport and Property have been involved in site evaluation and Licence development. City Planning were consulted to confirm there were no District Plan issues.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

As discussed in the body of the report, the potential for reputational damage and negative implications for social, economic and environmental wellbeing have been identified should the DCC decide not to issue the Licence. It is considered that legal risks are covered off by the content of the Licence.

Conflict of Interest

No conflict of interest has been identified.

Community Boards

The Strath Taieri Community Board supported the original CODC application, and endorsed the proposed site.

Council

29 September 2020

Representation Review

Department: Civic

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The Local Electoral Act 2001 (the Act) requires local authorities to review its representation arrangements every six years. The Dunedin City Council last considered its arrangements in 2015. Therefore, it is required to conduct a representation review in 2021. This report asks Council to determine how it wishes to carry out the review.

2 The Council is required to identify an initial proposal, call for submissions, consider those submissions and decide on its final proposal. Appeals and objections may then be lodged. These are referred to the Local Government Commission (the Commission) together with information considered by the Council during the review. The Commission then considers any appeals and/or objections and makes a determination. It is this decision that provides the representation arrangements for elections to be held in 2022 and 2025.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes that a Representation Review will be carried out during this triennium.

b) Agrees to establish an independent review panel to conduct a review of the Council’s representation arrangements.

BACKGROUND

3 The Act requires local authorities to review their representation arrangements at least once every six years. The Council reviewed their arrangements in 2003, 2009, and 2015. The Council is therefore required to conduct a review in 2021.

4 The process for representation reviews is provided for in the Local Electoral Act 2001, specifically Part 1 A. It requires Councils to review is arrangements of:

· How Councillors are elected – at large (status quo), a ward structure, or a combination of both - Section 19H

· The number of councillors – Section 19H

· The names and boundaries of wards (if applicable) – Section 19H

· Whether there should continue to be community boards and if so, how many, the boundaries and names of those boards and the number of members on community boards. – Section 19J

· Section 19T of the Act requires the Council to consider effective representation of communities of interest within the district and other factors in determining its membership and basis of election.

· Section 19V also requires Council to consider fair representation and other factors in determining members for wards and subdivisions.

5 The position of Mayor is not part of the arrangements to be reviewed.

6 Following amalgamation in 1989 the new Dunedin City was incorporated from the former Dunedin City Council, the Port Chalmers, Mosgiel, St Kilda and Green Island Borough Councils, Silverpeaks County Council and several boards. It was established with the Mayor, 21 Councillors and five Community boards

7 Following several representation reviews by 2004 the Council had a ward-based structure with 14 councillors elected from six wards and six community boards. The representation review conducted in 2009-2010 saw a 3 ward system developed with a central ward electing 11 councillors, a Mosgiel-Taieri ward electing two councillors and a Waikouaiti Coast-Chalmers ward electing one councillor. The number of community boards remained at six with some changes to boundaries of two community boards. The 2010 determination from the Commission is attached.

8 The representation review conducted in 2015 saw Council move to 14 Councillors elected on an at large basis across the city. Following appeals the number of community boards remained at six. The 2016 Commission determination is attached.

9 The number of councillors has remained at 14 since 1998 and the number of community boards at six.

DISCUSSION

10 Council must complete its representation review within a prescribed timeframe in the Act in the year prior to an election being held. Council must decide on an Initial Proposal no earlier than 1 March 2021 and no later than 7 September 2021. Public notice is given no later than 8 September 2021. The proposal is open to submissions for a month. If submissions are received, the Council has six weeks to consider these, determine its final proposal and to give public notice of its final proposal and of the right for appeals or objections to be lodged. (Section 19N).

11 If appeals and/or objections are received they and all the documentation Council considered as part of the review are sent to the Local Government Commission for the Commission to consider and issue a determination prior to 10 April 2022.

12 The table below shows the final dates by which these steps in the process must be achieved. The whole process may be brought forward, however, the statutory part of the process (excluding the initial work leading up to the reports for be prepared for Council consideration takes over four months (and over seven months, should there be any appeals or objections to the Commission).

Action/Resolution	Last date by which action can be taken
Council determines its proposed representation arrangements (S19 H, J, K M)	Not prior to 1 March 2021 and no later than 7 September 2021
Public Notice of resolution for initial proposal (S19M(1))	8 September 2021
Submissions on initial proposal close (not less than one month after notice) (S19M(2)	11 October 2021
Council must consider submissions, determine its final proposal and give public notice of final proposal (within six weeks) (S19N)	19 November 2021
Public appeals and objections close (S19O & P)	20 December 2021
Forward appeals and objections and relevant documentation to Local Government Commission (S19Q)	15 January 2022
Final date for Local Government Commission determination (S19R)	10 April 2022
Election day (S10(2))	8 October 2022

13 In the past Council has undertaken its reviews by different means. Some reviews have been carried out in-house by staff, while more recently reviews have been carried out by review teams/panels which were either completely independent or a mixture of independent and Council members.

14 If Council chooses to appoint an independent review panel it can either ask the panel to conduct the review of representation arrangements and present an initial proposal to Council, or ask the panel to conduct the pre-engagement on behalf of Council. Council would then determine its initial proposal. More recently the Council has asked the independent review panels to present a draft initial proposal.

OPTIONS

15 There are three options.

Option One – Recommended Option - Establish an Independent Review Panel to conduct a review and provide the initial proposal

16 In this option a panel, appointed by Council and supported by staff, would conduct a review and report to Council with its recommendations for the initial proposal for the representation arrangements for Dunedin City in the required timeframe.

Advantages

· An independent review panel would bring an external perspective to the process and may be perceived by submitters as being more independent.

· The panel membership would look to cover a variety of skills and community-based interests including possible representation from mana whenua.

· Elected members may or may not part of the panel.

Disadvantages

· The panel could be considered to be more theoretical and depending on membership, removed from understanding and knowledge of the relationship between residents and elected members.

· Elected members may be seen to be removed from a process that is intrinsically linked to their role in representative democracy.

· If members of the panel are remunerated for their work there would be a cost to that.

Option Two – Recommended Option - Establish an Independent Review Panel to conduct pre-engagement

17 This option is similar to option one, but the panel would conduct pre-engagement only and Council would, based on the outcome of the pre-engagement, determine its draft initial proposal itself.

Advantages

· An independent review panel would bring an external perspective to the process of pre-engagement.

· The panel membership would look to cover a variety of skills and community-based interests including possible representation from mana whenua.

· Elected members would be more directly involved in drafting the initial proposal.

Disadvantages

· The panel could be considered to be more theoretical and depending on membership, removed from understanding and knowledge of the relationship between residents and elected members.

· Determining the initial proposal may take place at the same time as other competing demands on councillors’ time.

· If members of the panel are remunerated for their work there would be a cost to that.

Option Three – Council conduct its review

18 This option would see Council supported by staff conduct pre-engagement and determine its initial proposal for representation arrangements. Council would need to determine whether all councillors or a subset of councillors conduct the review.

Advantages

· The option provides Council with an opportunity to engage directly with residents and members of community boards over what Council’s representation arrangements should be.

· Elected members will be supported by staff throughout the process.

· By being directly engaged in the full process the Council may develop a process in which there are fewer objections and appeals.

Disadvantages

· This work will take place at the same time as other competing demands on councillors’ time.

· Council may not benefit from having an independent lens over the process.

NEXT STEPS

19 If the recommended option is agreed, expressions of interest will be sought from the public and a report will be presented to Council with possible appointments and terms of reference for the panel.

20 If Council decides to conduct the review itself, staff will begin the preparation.

Signatories

Author:	Clare Sullivan - Team Leader Civic
Authoriser:	Sandy Graham - Acting Chief Executive

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	LGC Determination 2010	136
⇩b	LGC Determination 2016	148

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities and enables representative and electoral participation in local elections.

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 electoral arrangements are administrative and do not directly contribute to any strategy.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no specific known impacts for tangata whenua, but representation arrangements provide the opportunity to enhance representation.

Sustainability

There are no implications for sustainability

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications

Financial considerations

There are costs associated with a representation review. These will be managed.

Significance

This decision is not significant in terms of the significance and engagement strategy.

Engagement – external

No external engagement has been undertaken. Engagement will be undertaken in the course of conducting the review.

Engagement - internal

There has been no internal engagement.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

No risks have been identified.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The review of representation arrangements will affect community boards and they will be engaged with during the process.

Council

29 September 2020

Appointment of the Audit and Risk Subcommittee Independent Member

Department: Civic

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval to commence the appointment process for a new Independent member of the Audit and Risk Subcommittee (the Subcommittee).

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the appointment process outlined in the report.

b) Agrees that the appointment panel will consist of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Audit and Risk Subcommittee, the Mayor or his nominee, and the Acting Chief Executive Officer/Chief Executive Officer.

c) Notes that the appointment panel will make a recommendation to Council on the appointment of a new Subcommittee independent member and Chair.

BACKGROUND

2 The Subcommittee currently has two independent members including an independent Chairperson as constituted by Council at its meeting held on 31 January 2020.

3 At the Council meeting held on 30 June 2020, Ms Susie Johnstone (current Chairperson of the Subcommittee) was appointed to the Boards of Dunedin City Holdings Limited, Dunedin City Treasury Limited and Dunedin Stadium Property Limited.

4 As a result of these appointments, Ms Johnstone will step down from her role on the Subcommittee and there will be a vacancy for an independent member on the Subcommittee.

DISCUSSION

5 Ms Johnstone’s appointment to the above Boards will commence in February 2021. A recruitment process to appoint a new independent member of the Subcommittee has commenced. The position is currently being advertised in the Otago Daily Times, on the Dunedin City Council website and various other online platforms.

6 The skills mix required for Audit and Risk Committees is defined by the Auditor General, in his guidance to Local Authorities. He recommends Audit and Risk Committees/Subcommittees need a mix of skills and experience to provide the appropriate level and type of oversight, and in particular an independent Chairperson. As the current Chairperson has an accounting background it would be desirable for her replacement to have similar skills.

7 Expressions of Interest are being sought by way of a public process.

8 It is proposed that an appointment panel be established consisting of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Subcommittee; the Mayor or his nominee; and the Acting Chief Executive Officer/Chief Executive Officer.

9 Once applications are received, a skills matrix, similar to the one used for Dunedin City Holdings Limited applicants, will be used to assess the applicants and short listed applicants will be interviewed by the Appointment Panel.

NEXT STEPS

10 If approved, the panel will consider the applicants and make a recommendation to Council by December 2020.

Signatories

Author:	Wendy Collard - Governance Support Officer
Authoriser:	Clare Sullivan - Team Leader Civic

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

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

Fit with strategic framework

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

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

There are no implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications for these documents.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications as the remuneration has been included in the budgets.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

There has been no internal engagement

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications for Community Boards.

Council

29 September 2020

DCC submission on the Future of Tourism

Department: Enterprise Dunedin

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval of a submission (Attachment A) to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) on the Tourism Futures consultation.

2 The consultation seeks feedback on the strengths of the tourism sector and the steps needed to increase these strengths. It also asks submitters to identify the challenges facing the sector, now and pre-COVID and what actions are needed to address these challenges.

3 Submissions on the proposals were due on 22 September 2020, but Enterprise Dunedin sought an extension to provide feedback by 30 September 2020 to enable Council to contribute.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the draft Dunedin City Council submission to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment on the future of tourism.

BACKGROUND

4 The Tourism Minister established the New Zealand Tourism Futures Taskforce to lead the thinking on the future of tourism in New Zealand, and create a more sustainable, productive and inclusive tourism system post COVID-19.

5 The New Zealand tourism system should be one that is fit for purpose, promotes innovation, builds resilience, supports and encourages sustainable and productive practices, fosters the participation of Māori and the incorporation of Tikanga Māori, and is managed across all dimensions of a destination/community.

6 The Taskforce is supported by an Advisory Group that includes a range of sector expertise. In addition, it is also seeking input from interested parties and the public across New Zealand, to submit views on the future of tourism and help inform the Taskforce.

7 The consultation seeks feedback on the strengths of the tourism sector and the steps needed to increase these strengths. It also asks submitters to identify the challenges facing the sector, now and pre-COVID and what actions are needed to address these challenges.

8 Submissions on the proposals were due on 22 September 2020, but Enterprise Dunedin sought an extension to provide feedback by 30 September 2020 to enable Council’s input into the submission.

DISCUSSION

9 The DCC sees opportunities to focus on the increasing recognition of sustainability, the role of the natural and built environment, mana whenua in the sector and the importance of domestic tourism.

10 One of the key challenges is ensuring that the diverse groups that encompass the tourism sector are considered in any future development of the tourism sector, including community voices.

11 Future initiatives the DCC would like to see are:

· sustainability as an integral component of the tourism ecosystem;

· accessible, timely and relevant data that provides direct guidance to, and integrates and guides Destination Marketing and Management initiatives across the tourism ecosystem and;

· community lead and integrated Destination Management plans that are relevant to the community, which are also integrated across and with national initiatives.

OPTIONS

Option One (Recommended Option) – Submit on the Tourism Futures consultation

12 Approve the DCC submission to MBIE on the Tourism Futures consultation.

Advantages

· The DCC has input to the work of the Tourism Futures Taskforce.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Do not submit on the Tourism Futures consultation

13 Do not submit on the Tourism Futures consultation.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· Missed opportunity for the DCC to input to central government initiatives on the future of tourism.

NEXT STEPS

14 If the Council approves the draft submission, Enterprise Dunedin will send the submission to MBIE on 30 September 2020.

Signatories

Author:

Malcolm Anderson - City Marketing Manager

Authoriser:

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

John Christie - Director Enterprise Dunedin

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	DCC submission on the Future of Tourism	174

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	☒	☐	☐

A sustainable and community oriented approach to tourism will support the DCC’s strategic objectives in a number of areas.

Māori Impact Statement

This submission highlights the importance of the role of mana whenua in the tourism sector.

Sustainability

This submission highlights the importance of a sustainable tourism sector.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no known implications for these documents.

Financial considerations

There are no known financial implication of this report.

Significance

This report is considered to be of low significance under the DCC’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement on this report.

Engagement - internal

Due to the short timeframes, there has been no internal engagement on this report.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Community Boards may have interest in this report.

Council

29 September 2020

Draft DCC submission on Building for Climate Change

Department: Civic and Customer and Regulatory Services

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval of a draft submission (Attachment A) to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) on the proposals for Building for Climate Change: Transforming operational efficiency and reducing whole-of-life embodied carbon.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the draft Dunedin City Council submission to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment on proposals for the Building for Climate Change Programme.

BACKGROUND

2 The New Zealand government under the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019 has committed the country to meet net zero carbon emissions by 2050. The building and construction sector currently accounts for around 20% of New Zealand’s carbon emissions through the energy and materials used in buildings. The building for climate change consultation is a step by MBIE to begin addressing emissions from the sector and contribute to the national reduction goal.

3 The Building for Climate Change programme proposes two frameworks to reduce emissions across the building and construction sector. They are:

· Transforming Operational Efficiency, which focuses on how improving the operational efficiency of buildings can reduce emissions, reduce water use, and improve occupant health and wellbeing;

· Whole-of-Life Embodied Carbon Emissions Reduction, which focuses on all emissions attributable to the life cycle of a building. This includes emissions across the supply chain of construction and materials.

4 Submissions on the proposals were due on 30 September 2020, but the deadline for submissions has subsequently been extended to 11 October 2020.

5 SOLGM is preparing a submission on the proposals which will go out for sector feedback in the next couple of weeks. SOLGM note their draft submission will support the intent of the proposals and advise on local authority Building Consent Authorities and carbon mitigation issues, as raised in the consultation.

DISCUSSION

6 The DCC submission is supportive of MBIE’s vision of working towards operational efficiency and significantly decreasing the carbon emissions associated with construction products and materials in New Zealand. The DCC submission is supportive of the two frameworks proposed by MBIE as a mechanism for reducing emissions.

7 The DCC notes that additional support and training will be required for Building Consent Authorities to implement new consenting requirements as part of the building for climate change proposals.

OPTIONS

Option One (Recommended Option) – Submit on the Building for climate change programme

8 Approve the DCC submission to MBIE on the Building for Climate Change: Transforming operational efficiency and reducing whole-of-life embodied carbon proposals, with any suggested amendments.

Advantages

· The DCC is supportive of central government initiatives that enable the DCC to achieve its Zero Carbon ambitions.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Do not submit on the Building for climate change programme

9 Do not submit on the Building for Climate Change: Transforming operational efficiency and reducing whole-of-life embodied carbon proposals.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· Missed opportunity for the DCC to support central government initiatives to reduce carbon emissions.

NEXT STEPS

10 If the Council approves the draft submission it will be sent to the MBIE for consideration by 11 October 2020.

Signatories

Author:

Jinty MacTavish - Principal Policy Advisor

Paul Henderson - Building Solutions Manager

Authoriser:

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Draft DCC submission on Building for Climate Change	182

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This proposal 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.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

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

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

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

Financial considerations

There are no direct financial impacts on the DCC from a decision to approve the draft DCC submission.

Significance

This report is considered to be of low significance in terms of the DCC’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement on this submission.

Engagement - internal

Staff from Corporate Policy, Building Services, Waste and Environmental Solutions, Property and 3 Waters teams 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 DCC submission may be of interest to Community Boards.

Council

29 September 2020

Further submissions on Otago Regional Council Omnibus and Water Permits plan changes

Department: 3 Waters

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 On 17 August 2020 the DCC submitted on the Otago Regional Council’s (ORC) Omnibus and Water Permits plan changes. The submission covered matters relating to dust suppressants, landfills, water permits, sediment runoff from residential earthworks, and stormwater and wastewater discharge management.

2 On 18 September 2020 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notified a summary of submissions received and provided 10 working days for further submissions to be made. This report recommends the DCC makes further submissions and seeks approval for detailed further submissions to be circulated to Councillors for comment prior to authorisation by the Mayor, before the deadline of 2 October 2020.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the development of further submissions to the Environmental Protection Authority on Otago Regional Council’s Omnibus Plan Change and Water Permits Plan Change

b) Authorises the Mayor to approve the further submissions.

BACKGROUND

3 The Omnibus Plan Change comprises Plan Change 1 (PC1) to the Regional Plan: Waste and Plan Change 8 (PC8) to the Regional Plan: Water. PC1 includes provisions for dust suppressants and landfills, while PC8 includes provisions for sediment runoff from residential earthworks and management of stormwater and wastewater discharges.

4 The Water Permits Plan Change, or Plan Change 7 (PC7) to the Regional Plan: Water proposes a planning framework to apply to all new and replacement water permits from now until 2025 when a new Land and Water Regional Plan is completed.

5 Any person may submit on those proposals. The submission period closed on 17 August 2020. Submitters may seek changes to the proposal that has potential impacts beyond the original proposal. PC1 received 20 submissions, PC7 received 289 submissions and PC8 received 96 submissions.

6 The Resource Management Act 1991 requires a summary of submissions received to be notified. There is a ten-day opportunity for further to submissions to be made by persons representing a relevant aspect of the public interest, or with an interest in the proposal greater than the interest the general public. A further submission is limited to a matter in support of, or opposition to, an original submission. The further submission period for PC1, PC7 and PC8 closes on 2 October 2020.

DISCUSSION

7 Submission made on PC1, PC7 and PC8 may request an outcome that the DCC supports, or it could request an amendment that if given effect, could adversely impact the activities of the DCC, including infrastructure provision, its ability to comply with regulatory requirements and district planning.

8 The DCC has the opportunity to consider those submissions, identify individual submission points it is interested in, and make a further submission. A further submission must state if it supports or opposes the original submission, and the reasons for that position.

9 It is likely any further submissions will cover matters raised by submitters that have the potential to impact, or align with, the DCC’s activities or interests in relation to dust suppressants, landfills, community water permits, sediment runoff from residential earthworks and stormwater and wastewater discharge management.

OPTIONS

Option One – Make a further submission on the proposed ORC Omnibus and Water Permits Plan Changes (Recommended Option)

10 Approve the development of a further submission to the Environment Protection Agency on the proposed ORC Omnibus and Water Permits Plan Changes, for approval by the Mayor.

Advantages

· Further submitting allows the DCC to continue to advocate and influence on the regional planning framework which impacts both infrastructure service provision and district planning.

· Further submitting allows the DCC to be part of any Environment Court discussions that may occur prior to a decision being made.

· Further submitting is crucial as there is no opportunity for appeals in the process (other than for a point of law).

Disadvantages

· Further submitting requires time of staff, Councillors and the Mayor to prepare and review a further submission.

Option Two – Do not make a further submission on the proposed ORC Omnibus and Water Permits Plan Changes

11 Do not make a further submission to the Environment Protection Agency on the proposed ORC Omnibus and Water Permits Plan Changes.

Advantages

· Staff, Councillor and the Mayor’s time could be used to progress other work.

Disadvantages

· There is a missed opportunity to highlight matters raised through submissions that could impact infrastructure service provision and district planning, for consideration during the Environment Court process.

· The Plan Changes could increase complexity, uncertainty and cost for the DCC in terms of how it is regulated by the ORC.

NEXT STEPS

12 If the Council approves Option One, staff will develop further submissions on submissions to the Omnibus Plan Change and Water Permits Plan Change. Further submissions must be lodged with the EPA and served on those submitters to whom the further submission relates, by 2 October 2020. The draft further submission will be circulated to Councillors for comment prior to authorisation by the Mayor.

13 The ORC has indicated submitters that wish to be heard will be contacted directly after the closure of further submissions, and hearings will be heard late this year or early next year.

Signatories

Author:

Karen Sannazzaro - Regulation and Policy Team Leader

Authoriser:

Chris Henderson - Group Manager Waste and Environmental Solutions

Tom Dyer - Group Manager 3 Waters

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

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

Fit with strategic framework

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

This decision to further submit on submissions to the Omnibus and Water Permits Plan Changes is consistent with the DCC strategic framework, in particular the 3 Waters Strategy, which looks to improve the quality of its discharges while being cost-effective, and the Environment Strategy, which notes the importance of coastline and waterways to Dunedin’s natural environment.

Māori Impact Statement

This decision to further submit on submissions to the Omnibus and Water Permits Plan Changes has no known impacts for tangata whenua. Tangata whenua will otherwise be engaged independently through the RMA process.

Sustainability

This decision to further submit on submissions to the Omnibus and Water Permits Plan Changes itself has no implications on sustainability. However, the changes proposed by the ORC, and submitter requests are likely to have some impact on economic and environmental sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

This decision to further submit on submissions to the Omnibus and Water Permits Plan Changes itself has no financial or planning implications. However, the changes proposed by the ORC and submitter requests are likely to have some impact on financial and strategic planning.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications of further submitting on submissions to these Plan Changes.

Significance

The decision to further submit on submissions to these Plan Changes has been assessed under the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy as being of low significance.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement in preparing this report.

Engagement - internal

Staff from 3 Waters, Waste and Environmental Solutions, Transport, City Development and Corporate Policy will contribute to evaluating submissions and drafting further submissions.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified legal or health and safety risks in making further submissions on submissions to these Plan Changes.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications to Community Boards.

Council

29 September 2020

Resolution to Exclude the Public

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

General subject of the matter to be considered	Reasons for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution	Reason for Confidentiality
C1 Confirmation of the Confidential Minutes of Ordinary Council meeting - 25 August 2020 - Public Excluded	S7(2)(g) The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege. S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. S7(2)(i) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations). S7(2)(a) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person. S6(a) The making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the maintenance of the law, including the prevention, investigation, and detection of offences and the right to a fair trial.	.
C2 Confirmation of the Confidential Minutes of Ordinary Council meeting - 14 September 2020 - Public Excluded	S7(2)(a) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person. S7(2)(g) The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege. S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. S7(2)(i) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).	.
C3 Confirmation of the Confidential Minutes of Audit and Risk Subcommittee - 2 July 2020 - Public Excluded	S6(b) The making available of the information would be likely to endanger the safety of a person.S7(2)(a) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.	.
C4 Confidential Council Forward Work Programme	S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.
C5 Confidential Council Actions from Resolutions at Council Meetings	S6(a) The making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the maintenance of the law, including the prevention, investigation, and detection of offences and the right to a fair trial.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 6.
C6 Remuneration Matter	S7(2)(a) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural person.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 6.

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

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 25 August 2020 (Under Separate Cover 1)

Author:	Sharon Bodeker - Corporate Planner
Authoriser:	Sandy Graham - Acting Chief Executive

Author:	Jenny Lapham - Governance Support Officer
Authoriser:	Clare Sullivan - Team Leader Civic