Agenda of Planning and Environment Committee

Notice of Meeting:

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee will be held on:

Date: Tuesday 22 September 2020

Time: 1:30pm (or at the conclusion of the previous meeting whichever is later)

Venue: Edinburgh Room, Municipal Chambers, The Octagon, Dunedin

Sandy Graham

Acting Chief Executive Officer

Planning and Environment Committee

PUBLIC AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

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

Senior Officer Robert West, Acting General Manager City Services

Governance Support Officer Lauren McDonald

Lauren McDonald

Governance Support Officer

Telephone: 03 477 4000

Lauren.Mcdonald@dcc.govt.nz

www.dunedin.govt.nz

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

Planning and Environment Committee

22 September 2020

Part A Reports

Animal Services Annual Report to the Department of Internal Affairs

Department: Customer and Regulatory Services

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 requires territorial authorities to publicly report each year on:

· The administration of their dog control policy and their dog control practices (section 10A (1)); and

· A variety of dog control related statistics (section 10A (2)).

2 The attached report (Attachment A) outlines the operations of the Dunedin City Council’s Animal Services Unit for the year ending 30 June 2020.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Planning and Environment Committee:

a) Notes the Animal Services annual report to the Department of Internal Affairs.

BACKGROUND

3 In accordance with section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 (DCA) the Dunedin City Council (DCC) is required to publicly report each financial year on the administration of its dog control policy, its dog control practices (Section 10A (1)) and on a variety of dog control related statistics (Section 10A (2)).

4 The primary purpose of this report is to enable the community to see how the Council is managing its dog control responsibilities.

5 This report is for the period 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020.

Signatories

Author:

Ros MacGill - Manager Compliance Solutions

Authoriser:

Paul Henderson - Building Solutions Manager

Graeme Riley - Chief Information Officer

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Animal Services Annual Report to the Department of Internal Affairs	21

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	☐	☐	☒

Animal Services contributes to the ‘healthy and safe people’ strategic direction of the Social Wellbeing Strategy, and the ‘people are active’ draft Parks and Recreation Strategy.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

There are no implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

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 legal or health and safety risks.

Conflict of Interest

There is no known conflict of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications for Community Boards.

Planning and Environment Committee

22 September 2020

Review of the Truby King Recreation Reserve Management Plan 1998

Department: Parks and Recreation

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 It is a requirement under the Reserves Act 1977 to consult with the public when a reserve management plan is being created or reviewed.

2 The Truby King Recreation Reserve Management Plan 1998 (the 1998 Plan) is over 20 years old. This report seeks approval to commence the public consultation process required by section 41(6) of the Reserves Act 1977, and approval of the Statement of Proposal to replace the original plan with the proposed Draft Truby King Reserve Management Plan (the Draft Plan).

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Planning and Environment Committee:

a) Approves the Statement of Proposal, Draft Truby King Reserve Management Plan and Public Submission Form and the commencement of the public consultation process required by section 41(6) of the Reserves Act 1977.

b) Notes that the Hearings Committee will hear submissions and, following the hearing of submissions, will make a recommendation to the Planning and Environment Committee under a covering report from staff. If there are no requests to be heard, then staff will report back directly to the Planning and Environment Committee on the outcome of the public consultation.

c) Notes that the Chairperson of the Hearings Committee may appoint members if required.

BACKGROUND

3 The Reserves Act 1977 requires management plans for all Council administered reserves. Section 41(4) of the Reserves Act 1977 states “The administering body of any reserve shall keep its management plan under continuous review….” It is also a requirement under the Reserves Act 1977 to consult with the public when a reserve management plan is being created or reviewed.

4 Section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977 sets out the process and requirements for public consultation on the Draft Plan.

5 A review of the 1998 Plan commenced in July 2018. The 1998 Plan was written collaboratively between the Truby King Recreation Reserve Committee and Council. It emphasises management rather than development of the reserve. The sentiment at the time was to allow the Truby King Recreation Reserve Committee to be involved in the management of the reserve by monitoring it and liaising with Council when required.

6 In contrast, the Draft Plan differs in these ways:

· It has a development plan and an implementation strategy, outlining various projects planned along a ten-year timeline. The ten-year timeline coincides with the Council’s 10-Year Plan.

· Acknowledging the national importance of the site culturally, historically and botanically requires a more thorough management plan. These three aspects of the site are the key motivators for incorporating a project programme into the Draft Plan.

7 In November 2019, initial plan drafting commenced and staff sought public feedback to inform the formal review of the 1998 Plan. This included close liaison with the Truby King Recreation Reserve Committee and early engagement with Kati Huirapa Runaka ki Puketeraki.

DISCUSSION

8 The Truby King Recreation Reserve has significant heritage status due to the Seacliff Asylum that was sited there and has an Historic Place Category 1 classification under the Heritage NZ Pouhere Taonga Act 2014. The 1998 Plan was maintenance focussed and not project or development focussed. As a result, grass mowing has been the only regular cost associated with the reserve.

9 The Draft Plan has a range of projects that will honour the past while encouraging greater use of the reserve, through passive recreation and educational opportunities.

10 The recommendations in the Draft Plan, if implemented, will result in increased operational costs and capital costs. The increased operational cost will be approximately $50,000 per year. Capital costs will be approximately $405,000 over the 10-year period.

11 Under section 41(5) of the Reserves Act 1977, the administering body (the Dunedin City Council) shall give public notice of its intention to prepare or review a reserve management plan and in that notice invite persons and organisations interested to send written suggestions on the Draft Plan within a specified time frame.

12 The public notice for the intention to review the 1998 Plan ran from 21 May 2019 until 21 June 2019. There were 12 responses. The Draft Plan was prepared with full consideration of the comments received.

13 Under section 41(6) of the Reserves Act 1977, the management plan shall be prepared by the administering body in draft form and give public notice stating that the draft plan is available for inspection at a place and at times specified in the notice. The notice calls on persons and organisations interested to lodge with the administering body written objections to or suggestions on the draft plan before a specified date being not less than 2 months after the date of publication of the notice.

14 As well as the public notice in the Otago Daily Times there will be a media release for the wider media outlets. The project will be listed as a consultation project on the Council website.

15 This report seeks approval to start the public consultation process required by section 41(6) of the Reserves Act 1977 and approve the consultation documentation that will be available to the public as part of the process.

16 The Statement of Proposal, at Attachment B, sets out background information, what is being proposed, reasons for the plan, how submissions on the proposal may be made and how long the consultation period will run for. The submission period will start on the 5 October and will remain open until 8 December 2020.

17 The Submission Form, at Attachment C, will be available for submitters to the Draft Plan.

18 Every person or organisation who submits on the Draft Plan who asks to be heard will have the opportunity to appear before a Hearings Committee. The Hearings Committee will hear submissions and then make a recommendation back to the Planning and Environment Committee under a covering report from staff. If there are no requests to be heard, then staff will report directly back to the Planning and Environment Committee on the outcome of the public consultation and proposed Truby King Reserve Management Plan for adoption.

OPTIONS

Option One – Recommended Option

19 The Planning and Environment Committee approves the Statement of Proposal, Draft Plan and Public Submission Form for the purposes of a public consultation process, as required by section 41(6) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Advantages

· Staff can begin the public consultation process, as required by section 41(6) of the Reserves Act 1977, allowing the public to provide submissions on the Draft Plan.

Disadvantages

· There are associated costs for Council involved in the public consultation process required by section 41(6).

· There is an estimated approximate operational cost of $50,000 per annum to implement what is proposed under the draft Plan.

Option Two – Status Quo

20 The Planning and Environment Committee rejects the Statement of Proposal, the Draft Plan and Public Submission Form and does not initiate a public consultation process.

Advantages

· Increased operational costs of $50,000 per annum not required.

Disadvantages

· The Truby King Recreation Reserve would continue to be managed by the 1998 Plan until a revised Statement of Proposal, Draft Truby King Reserve Management Plan and Public Submission Form are approved for public consultation.

· Further work may be required to amend the Draft Plan.

NEXT STEPS

21 If approved, staff will follow the public consultation process required by section 41(6) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Signatories

Author:

Ashley Reid - Parks and Recreation Planner

Authoriser:

Scott MacLean - Acting Group Manager Parks and Recreation

Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Draft Truby King Reserve Management Plan	31
⇩b	Draft Truby King Reserve Statement of Proposal	71
⇩c	Draft Truby King Reserve Submission Form	74

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

Fit with strategic framework

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

The cultural, historical and recreational attributes of the site all contribute to the Social Wellbeing, Arts and Culture and Parks and Recreation Strategies of the Council.

Māori Impact Statement

As Truby King Reserve is part of the Kāti Huirapa Runaka ki Puketeraki rohe, their feedback was sought regarding the Māori history of the Seacliff area and constitutes part of the management plan. Local iwi will be notified and encouraged to comment on the draft management plan during the submission process.

Sustainability

One of the aims of the Draft Plan is to preserve the botanical and cultural legacy of the site.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The ten-year schedule of works planned in the Draft Plan will result in increased level of service due to increased maintenance of green space and several improvement projects. The costs will be incorporated into the 10 Year Planning process.

Financial considerations

The moderate schedule of works planned for the Truby King Recreation Reserve from 2020-30 will be incorporated into the 10 Year Planning process. Implementation of the Draft Plan will result in an approximate operational cost of $50,000 per annum.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

Staff have worked closely with the Truby King Recreation Reserve Committee and Kati Huirapa Runaka ki Puketeraki in the preparation of the draft plan.

Engagement – internal

Parks and Recreation staff have engaged with staff with specialised knowledge such as pest control and arboriculture and with Communications.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

The Draft Plan and proposed consultation process have undergone full legal review and are compliant with the Reserves Act 1977.

Conflict of Interest

There are no identified conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The Waikouaiti Coast Community Board has had representation at the Truby King Recreation Reserve Committee meetings regarding this review and have been represented at staff working group meetings throughout the initial plan drafting phase.

Planning and Environment Committee

22 September 2020

PDF Creator

Planning and Environment Committee

22 September 2020

DCC Logo

Statement of Proposal

Proposed Draft Truby King Reserve Management Plan 2020

Introduction

The Dunedin City Council (DCC) is seeking submissions on its draft proposed Truby King Management Plan (the plan).

This Statement of Proposal sets out background information, what is being proposed, reasons for the plan, how submissions on the proposal may be made and how long the consultation period will run for.

The plan outlines the ways the DCC is proposing to improve the reserve (see attachment A, the draft proposed plan).

The DCC considers the plan is the best way to manage the reserve. It has been reviewing its management plans for all its reserves and Truby King is the first reserve to be reviewed.

Management plans are a requirement under the Reserves Act 1977 to ensure proper management for reserves and they need to be continuously reviewed.

The DCC’s previous Truby King Management Plan 1998 is now out of date (see attachment B). The new plan’s aim is to better honour the site’s cultural, historical and botanical attributes to help it receive the care and attention it requires (see attachment A). We would like your views on this.

Background

The Truby King Reserve in Seacliff is a nationally recognised place of historical, botanical and cultural significance. The 16 hectare reserve is part of the former Seacliff Asylum grounds and was named after the asylum’s medical superintendent, Sir Frederick Truby King. It is listed as a category 1 historic place with Heritage NZ.

The reserve includes grassed lawn, remnants of stone structures, a forest with unique trees, spectacular views across Blueskin Bay and a network of paths, an orchard, picnic area, tennis court and cricket ground.

What we are proposing

In the draft plan, we are proposing several improvements to the reserve. These include ways to improve recreational and educational opportunities for walkers, historical enthusiasts and the wider Dunedin community. Ideas include opening-up view shafts and better managing trees and paths through the forest to benefit reserve users. We also want to honour the reserve’s national historical and cultural importance through preservation projects and information boards to tell its story.

Have your say

We would like to know what you think about the plan. Your views are an important part of the review and will help shape the final document. The submissions period is from Monday 5 October 2020 and will close at 4pm on Tuesday 8 December 2020.

If you would like to speak at the Council Hearing, please indicate in your submission your intention to speak.

How to give feedback

Fill in the feedback form here

Or feedback forms can be:

· Emailed to parksconsulting@dcc.govt.nz

· Posted to Truby King Reserve Submissions

Parks and Recreation Department
Dunedin City Council
PO Box 5045
Dunedin 9054.

Attention: A Reid.

· Delivered to a DCC service centre or library.

For any queries, please email parksconsulting@dcc.govt.nz

What happens next?

· The submissions period is from Monday 5 October and will close at 4pm on Tuesday 08 December 2020.

· February 2021 - Council Hearing (if required, date to be decided), and consideration of all submissions.

· By April 2021 – Adoption of a final plan.

Please note: Your name and submission will be made public as part of the DCC’s decision-making process. This information will be included in papers available to the public and the media but will only be used for the Truby King Reserve Management Plan consultation.

Late submissions may not be accepted.

Thank you for your submission.

Documents

Appendix A Draft Truby King Reserve Management Plan 2020.

Appendix B Truby King Reserve Management Plan 1998.

Planning and Environment Committee

22 September 2020

Review of Truby King Reserve Management Plan

Submissions close at 4pm on Tuesday, 8 December 2020

Late submissions may not be accepted.

Name:

Organisation (if appropriate):

Address:

Phone:

Email:

You may answer as many or as few questions as you wish.

1. Do you support our suggested changes to the Truby King Reserve Management Plan?

Y/N

2. Please tell us what you agree/disagree with and why.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. Do you have any other comments about our proposed changes to the Truby King Reserve Management Plan?

4. Do you have any suggestions for improving the reserve?

I/we wish to be heard by the Hearings Committee in support of this submission

Y/N

If you wish to speak, you will be contacted with a speaking time as soon as possible after submissions close. (Note: You may be able to present your views by audio or audio-visual link).

Signed: _____________________________________

Date: _____________________________________

Please note that the proposed Truby King Reserve Management Plan can be viewed at www.dunedin.govt.nz/consultation. Copies of the report and information are also available for viewing at the DCC Customer Service Centre, Ground Floor, Civic Centre and at Dunedin Public Libraries.

Email to: parksconsulting@dcc.govt.nz

Send to: Truby King Reserve Submissions

Parks and Recreation Department

Dunedin City Council

PO Box 5045

Dunedin 9054

Attention: A Reid

In person: Deliver to a DCC service centre or library.

Your submission must be received at the Dunedin City Council by 4pm on Tuesday, 8 December 2020.

Thank you for your feedback.

Planning and Environment Committee

22 September 2020

Update on Variation 2 to the 2GP

Department: Community and Planning and City Development

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report updates the Committee on the notification date for Variation 2 to the 2GP. Variation 2 identifies targeted actions to address the shortfall in housing capacity over the medium term (10 years).

2 While it was originally intended that Variation 2 be notified in August 2020, the notification date needed to be moved out. This is due to delays as a result of the Covid 19 lockdown; the rate of progress on 2GP appeals that need to be resolved prior to notification; and a desire to avoid the submission period coinciding with the Christmas / New Year period.

3 The revised notification date of Variation 2 is 3 February 2020. This will ensure that the submissions period for Variation 2 still closes ahead of the consultation on the 10 year plan.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Committee:

a) Notes that the notification date of Variation 2 to the 2GP will be 3 February 2021.

BACKGROUND

4 The Planning and Environment Committee initiated Variation 2 on 12 February 2019. The purpose of Variation 2 is to identify targeted actions to address the shortfall in housing capacity over the medium term (10 years), to meet DCC’s obligations under the National Policy Statement for Urban Development.

5 The project is being led by City Development and is being progressed in close collaboration with the infrastructure teams. This work has involved infrastructure modelling and the development of the infrastructure programme to support growth, which will be included in the Infrastructure Strategy and the 10 year Plan.

6 The project has been informed by updated population projections, research on housing preferences, and community engagement through a web-based survey.

7 The Variation will include new areas of greenfield zoning, new areas of medium density zoning and policy and rule changes that allow some additional development in existing residential areas. These include the following options, which are currently being assessed:

a) enabling duplexes in the General Residential 1 Zone;

b) removal of restrictions around tenancy of family flats;

c) reducing the minimum site size in the General Residential 1 zone;

d) increasing the flexibility of development, for example by allowing an averaging of minimum sites sizes; and

e) enabling the use of communal wastewater detention systems in areas with wastewater network constraints in certain circumstances.

8 City Development updated the Council on its wider growth planning work, including Variation 2, on 24 February 2020. In that report staff advised that public notification would likely occur in August 2020.

DISCUSSION

9 Significant work has progressed on Variation 2 and staff are now at the stage of final zoning options evaluation, with drafting and s32 assessment also well progressed. The next steps include:

a) engaging with landowners of the potential new greenfield sites, to allow more detailed site assessment;

b) ongoing consultation with 3 Waters and Transportation departments on both new zoning and rule and policy changes;

c) engagement with an informal developer/surveyor focus group on some of the proposed rule changes;

d) finalising drafting; and

e) completion of the cost benefit analysis required under section 32 of the RMA.

10 The proposed notification date has been revised and is now 3 February 2021. This date has been chosen to ensure that the submissions period for Variation 2 still closes ahead of the consultation on the 10 year plan. Notification is delayed due to the following reasons:

a) delays as a result of the Covid 19 lockdown that affected staff resourcing and also the timing and requirements for other aspects of the work programme;

b) the rate of progress on 2GP appeals that need to be resolved prior to notification; and

c) not wanting to put the notification date too close to the end of the year as this is a time when many planning professionals and others may find it difficult to engage in a submission process.

2GP appeal resolution

11 There are approximately 30 appeals on decisions on the 2GP which relate to wanting to rezone land under the 2GP. There are also appeals on the strategic framework that sets the criteria for rezoning land. Agreement has been reached with two appellants and consent memos are sitting with the Court for approval. Re-assessment of DCC’s position on the remaining appeals (and discussions with appellants as part of that) is proceeding in parallel with Variation 2 and is well progressed but not yet finalised.

12 It is important that informal discussion and/or mediation on these appeals is concluded and that any agreements that can be reached are lodged with, and approved by the Court via consent order, prior to the notification of Variation 2. This is because if these matters remain outstanding, and they are considered to overlap with matters being considered in Variation 2, the RMA provides that the appeals automatically become treated as appeals on Variation 2. This means they are put on hold until Variation 2 ‘catches up’ and then the Court deals with the appeals on the 2GP and Variation 2 at once.

13 This would significantly delay these appeals getting resolved and would lengthen the process for Variation 2 as well. Both of which would have the effect of delaying new housing capacity becoming available.

14 It should also be noted that the Court has determined that the appeals on strategic provisions must be resolved, and approved by the Court, before it will consider any appeals to rezone land.

15 The appeals on the strategic provisions relevant to residential zoning are currently being mediated (mediation commenced in August and continues into October). If agreements can be reached, relevant consent memorandum (recording agreements) and supporting planning affidavits (including revised s32AA assessments) will be forwarded to the Court for approval.

16 The Court has total authority around the appeal process and timeframes. Generally, the Court approves these agreements, and issues consent orders which reflect them, if there is adequate supporting evidence and agreements do not overlap with outstanding appeals, however, the Court can choose not to approve agreements or to put the matter on hold pending other appeal processes.

OPTIONS

17 There are no options as this is an update report.

NEXT STEPS

18 A report discussing notification of Variation 2 and outlining the main changes to the 2GP will be presented to the Committee in November 2020.

Signatories

Author:

Emma Christmas - Policy Planner

Anna Johnson - City Development Manager

Authoriser:

Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning

Robert West - Acting General Manager City 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.

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	☐	☐	☒

Variation 2 is being undertaken in line with the strategic framework established by the strategies indicated above.

Māori Impact Statement

No known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

While the notification date has no known implications for sustainability, the principle of sustainable development underpins the Spatial Plan and the 2GP.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

Notification in early February will avoid conflict with consultation being undertaken on the LTP.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

No external engagement was undertaken on the decision to revise the notification date.

Engagement - internal

The decision to revise the notification date was undertaken after consultation with the Chair of Planning and Environment and Chair of Infrastructure Services Committees and Robert West representing ELT.

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.

Author:	Lauren McDonald - Governance Support Officer
Authoriser:	Clare Sullivan - Team Leader Civic

	Title	Page
⇩a	P&E Committee Public Open Action List	91
⇩b	P&E Committee Public completed Action Lists	92