|
|
Infrastructure Services
9 May 2022
|
Funding options for the 3 Waters Strategic
Work Programme
Department: Executive Leadership Team
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 In July 2020, the Council approved
development of a proactive and comprehensive response to three waters reform.
Staff have developed a plan and budget to give effect to the Council’s
decision. The result – the 3 Waters Strategic Work Programme (the Programme)
– is summarised in Attachment A.
2 Events following the July 2020 Council
decision have delayed the implementation of the Programme. These events include
the Waikouaiti, Hawksbury Village and Karitāne lead response, Covid-19,
responding to Government reform information requests, and implementing $15.84m
of additional projects through Government reform stimulus funding.
3 Since July 2020 there have also been
developments in the Government’s three waters reform programme. These
include the establishment of Taumata Arowai (the new drinking water regulator),
the decision to mandate council participation in the formation of new three
waters service delivery entities, and the provision of a financial support
package (Better Off funding).
4 Development of the Programme identified
that, regardless of the outcome of the Government’s three waters service
delivery reform, further investment is required in three waters. This
investment is needed to ensure Dunedin has well considered investment plans for
infrastructure and services that accommodate growth and climate change,
levels of service are maintained, and workforce and regulatory risks facing the
DCC are proactively managed.
5 This report asks the Committee to consider
the new information available and decide whether (or not) to recommend
that Council fully implement the Programme.
|
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Committee recommends that Council:
a) Approves the 3 Waters Strategic Work Programme
funded through Government
funding;
b) Notes that staff will bring a further report to Council
with a plan for consultation on the remainder of the Better Off Funding
package.
|
|
|
BACKGROUND
6 At
the non-public Council meeting on 28 July 2020, the Council resolved:
That
the Council:
a. Approves
Option 1 as the basis for development of detailed three waters
reform transition work programme to the end of 2021.
b. Notes
that the proposed three waters reform transition programme (Option
1) could be funded through Government Three Waters Reform funding and/or
borrowing to minimise impact on the annual plan and 10 year plan budgets.
c. Supports,
in principle, any funding bid(s) related to development and delivery of the
proposed three waters reform transition work programme (Option 1).
d. Notes
that any funding offered through the Government’s three waters
service delivery reform programme would be contingent upon the Dunedin City
Council opting in to that reform programme.
e. Delegates
the General Manager Infrastructure the authority to advise, in
confidence, the DIA (or other agencies) of anything related to this matter that
may be beneficial to Council’s decision.
Motion carried (CNL/2020/097)
7 The
report to the 28 July 2020 Council
meeting is included as Attachment B.
8 Option 1 from the 28 July 2020 Council meeting was to
develop a comprehensive transition work programme. The Option 1 programme
aimed to position DCC as a water entity with robust long-term investment plans,
enhanced asset management practices and secure capital and operational delivery
mechanisms. This would minimise transition risk through service delivery
reform.
9 Since
that time, the 3 Waters Group has developed the Programme during the period
July 2020-March 2022, in addition to delivering ‘business as usual’
operations. A number of selected strategic initiatives from the Programme have
been progressed, including system planning, growth planning, water safety
planning, changes to the network maintenance contract and implementing a new
network renewals contract.
10 In
parallel, the 3 Waters Group has facilitated DCC interaction with, and
responses to, the Government’s three waters reform Programme,
including:
a) entering
into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Crown and developing a delivery
plan for the $15.84m stimulus funding package made available to the DCC in
late-2020
b) responding
to a substantial Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) Request for Information
in late-2020/early-2021
c) providing
feedback to Parliament, Taumata Arowai and the Ministry for the Environment on
regulatory changes, and to the Government on three waters service delivery
reform proposals
d) delivering
the additional $15.84m expenditure programme funded by the Government’s
2020 stimulus funding package.
11 Responding
to the Government reform programme, combined with a general increase in regulatory
requirements, responses to Covid-19 and the detection of elevated lead results
in the Waikouaiti water supply, have contributed to delays in finalising the
Programme and commencing its implementation.
DISCUSSION
12 Since
the Council’s July 2020 decision, the Government has provided new
information on its proposed three waters reforms. A summary of new reform
information and an overview of the Programme are provided in the sections
below.
13 While
the Government’s reform proposals continue to evolve, the underlying
rationale for implementing the Programme remains.
14 A
second decision is now required, in light of the new information available, on whether
(or not) to fully implement the Programme.
Three waters reform: new
information
15 Mandatory
reform: in 2021, the Government decided that local government participation
in three waters service delivery reforms will be mandatory. If the proposal
goes ahead as currently planned, all council three waters assets and service
delivery functions will be transferred to the new entities and that council
long-term plans for the 2024-34 will not include three
waters.
16 Four
entities: in 2021, the Government committed to establishing four public
multi-regional water services entities to deliver New Zealand’s three
waters services from 1 July 2024. Dunedin is included in Entity D, which
includes the Canterbury, West Coast, Otago and Southland regions. The proposed
boundaries of Entity D align with the Ngāi Tahu Takiwā
17 Council
debt: if the three waters service delivery reforms go ahead, the Government
has indicated that council debt related to three waters assets would transfer
to the new entities. However, there is currently limited information available
about how debt transfer would occur and the criteria that would be
applied.
18 Draft
establishing legislation for new entities: in late-2021, the Government
published an exposure draft of the legislation that would establish the four
new water services entities (the Water Services Entities Bill). A working group
reported back regarding on the exposure draft and the Minister of Local
Government has recently confirmed the Government will accept 44 of the
group’s 47 recommendations. The Government expects a revised Bill to be
introduced to Parliament and subsequently enacted by the end of 2022. The
exposure draft of the Bill includes provisions for the Department of Internal
Affairs (DIA) to confirm local government three waters decisions during the
establishment period (which could begin in late-2022, if the Bill is enacted as
per the Government’s intended timeframes).
19 National
Transition Unit and associated work programme established: in late-2021,
the Government established the National Transition Unit (NTU) to execute the
Government’s decisions on three waters reforms. To date, the NTU has
asked councils to complete several requests for information (RFI) needed to
inform NTU workstreams. DCC staff completed a ‘People and
Workforce’ RFI in March 2022 and a response to a ‘Data and
Digital’ RFI is currently in progress. Three further RFIs are to follow.
Local Establishment Entities (LEE) and Local Transition Teams (LTT) are
currently being established to progress critical transition activities. Local
Working Groups (in conjunction with the NTU and relevant LEE) will develop
asset management plans for each new entity ready for public consultation by
June 2023. NTU activities are likely to require significant input from
council staff during the transition period. In addition, the NTU has indicated
it may second council staff into roles within the NTU / LEE / LTT.
20 The
Government has also recently announced two sources of funding additional
funding which are discussed in detail later in the report.
Overview of 3 Waters
Strategic Work Programme
21 The
Programme covers the period until 30 June 2024 and aims to execute the
direction set by the Council in July 2020.
22 The
Programme is made up of 16 workstreams. Attachment E contains a list of
the workstreams and further detail on each.
23 The
Programme would accelerate (from 4 years to 2 years) the delivery of future
investment plans for Dunedin’s three waters infrastructure and
services. The investment plans would be based on the best available
evidence and informed by partnership with mana whenua and engagement with key
stakeholders. This would include:
a) better
aligning land use planning and infrastructure planning to accommodate growth,
in accordance with the requirements of the National Policy Statement for Urban
Development 2020
b) responding
to upcoming changes in regulation
c) measures
to transition three waters infrastructure to a low emissions future;
and
d) accounting
for climate change to ensure Dunedin’s three waters infrastructure is
resilient into the future.
24 The
preparation of evidence-based future investment plans is expected to benefit
Dunedin regardless of the outcome of three waters service delivery reforms
because:
a) if
the three waters service delivery reforms go ahead as proposed, providing a new
water entity with long-term investment plans is expected to increase the
likelihood a new water entity prioritises investing in Dunedin’s three
waters infrastructure and services post-reform
b) failure
to provide robust plans may mean Dunedin’s investment needs are not
recognised, or are deprioritised, by the new entity
c) if three
waters service delivery functions remain with the DCC long-term, the future
investment plans would form the basis of the three waters sections of the 10
Year Plan 2024-34 and infrastructure strategy.
25 The
Programme includes initiatives to improve the 3 Waters Group’s approach
to working with Treaty partners, which is needed to meet the DCC’s Treaty
of Waitangi obligations and integrate Te Mana o te Wai into
delivery of three waters services.
26 The
Programme would also deliver improvements in asset management and risk
management processes to support:
a) maintaining
levels of service
b) protecting
public health and the environment
d) reducing
risks to drinking water quality to a more acceptable level
e) reducing
the likelihood of regulatory non-compliance (and corresponding unplanned
expenditure to respond to enforcement action).
27 The
Programme includes initiatives to develop Dunedin’s 3 Waters
workforce. Retaining and recruiting quality staff is critical to
delivering three waters services for the community.
28 In
developing the Programme, the NTU’s work plans were considered to ensure
that there is no overlap or wasted effort from DCC resources. The
3 Waters Group would continue to adapt the Programme as needed if further
information or changes are proposed by the NTU and/or through the service
delivery reform process.
Programme funding and costs
29 In
its July 2020 meeting, Council (CNL/2020/097) noted that the proposed three
waters reform transition programme could be funded through Government Three
Waters Reform funding and/or borrowing to minimise impact on the annual plan
and 10 year plan budgets.
30 Since
that time, the Government has announced two possible sources of additional
funding – Transition funding and Better Off funding.
31 The
Transition funding is to support Council’s in their transition to the new
model of service delivery. The Government has indicated that $296m is
available, but at this stage, there are no details on what the criteria are to
access that funding. Staff are continuing to liaise with officials and will
attempt to secure a share of this funding once there is certainty about what
the money can be used for.
32 Because
of the uncertainty, implementation of the Programme has not been based on the
availability of transition funding. However, should the criteria enable
transition funding to be used, staff will bring a further report to Council
with options.
33 Better
Off Funding has also been announced by the Government. Information about the
Better Off Support Package is detailed in Attachments C and D. Broadly, the
package provides support for Councils as they transition to their new roles
post reform.
34 The
Better Off funding is able to be applied to a wide range of initiatives that
meet all or some of the following criteria:
a) supporting
communities to transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy
b) delivery
of infrastructure and/or services that enable housing development and growth
c) delivery
of infrastructure and/or services that support local place-making and
improvements in community wellbeing.
35 Funding
has been allocated to each Council based on a nationally consistent formula and
is available in two tranches. The DCC allocation is $11.54m for Tranche 1
followed by $34.63 in Tranche 2 for a total of $46.17m.
36 Funding
applications for Tranche 1 must be submitted by September 2022 with funding
available for drawdown from 1 July 2022.
37 Following
initial discussions with DIA staff, the Programme appears to qualify for
funding under Better Off funding. This is an option for funding the Programme
and is presented below.
38 Council
also noted in 2020, the potential to use borrowing to fund the programme. While
this is an option, there is still no clarity from the
Government about how debt will be apportioned when the assets transfer to the
new entity. Further, approximately $4m of the annual funding required for
the Programme is operating expenditure and the debt
funding OPEX is not considered best practice. This means that if debt were
used to fund the programme, there is no certainty that the debt would transfer
with the assets. On that basis, staff do not consider this a good option. It is
however presented for consideration in the options section below.
39 Implementation
of the Programme would require an annual uplift in the 3 Waters Group’s
annual operating budgets of $4.4m per year in 2022/23 and 2023/24. The budget
includes funding for 15 extra FTE required to deliver the
work.
40 The
uplift in annual operating budgets also includes an allowance for additional
investment required to meet new monitoring requirements under the drinking
water quality assurance rules and standards expected to come into force in
mid-2022.
41 If
Better Off funding is used to fund the programme, $37m would remain for other
projects and initiatives. Staff intend preparing a paper for Council on options
for the remainder of this funding in advance of the next Annual Plan to enable
consultation with the community on the use of the remaining funds.
OPTIONS
42 Three
options are presented for the Committee to consider:
a) Option 1:
deliver the 3 Waters Strategic Work Programme funded through Government funding
(recommended option)
b) Option 2:
deliver the 3 Waters Strategic Work Programme funded through debt
c) Option
3: status quo – operate within existing budgets and do not implement the
Programme.
Option One – deliver the 3 Waters Strategic Work
Programme funded through government funding (recommended option)
43 Under
this option, the 3 Waters Group would implement the Programme. This would be funded
using Government Better Off funding and possibly transition funding.
44 The
3 Waters Group would continue to deliver the capital programme set out in the
10 Year Plan 2021-31.
Advantages
· DCC would
accelerate its programme to be a water entity providing affordable, resilient
and quality three waters services that embed the principles of Te Mana o te Wai.
· With
well-considered investment plans there will be improved probability that
Dunedin three waters infrastructure is funded and delivered by the new entity.
· Improvements
to performance monitoring and reporting and risk frameworks will reduce DCC
compliance risks.
· Funding
is allowed for new monitoring requirements that are expected to come into force
in mid-2022 under the new drinking water quality assurance rules and standards.
· Measures
to better attract, retain and recruit staff will be developed.
· There
will be no impact on rates.
Disadvantages
· Less
Government Better Off funding is available for other Council initiatives.
· Government
funding is likely to require additional reporting requirements and conditions
on its use, which would reduce the flexibility to modify the Programme if
needed.
Option Two – deliver the 3 Waters Strategic Work
Programme funded through debt
45 Under
this option, the 3 Waters Group would implement the Programme. This would be funded
using debt. This option is not recommended by staff.
46 The
3 Waters Group would also continue to deliver the capital programme set out in
the 10 Year Plan 2021-31.
Advantages
· All
the Government Better Off funding is available for other Council
initiatives.
· DCC
would accelerate its programme to be a water entity providing affordable,
resilient and quality three waters services that embed the principles of Te
Mana o te Wai.
· With
well-considered investment plans, there will be improved probability that
Dunedin three waters infrastructure is funded and delivered by the new entity.
· Improvements
to performance monitoring and reporting and risk frameworks will reduce DCC compliance
risks.
· Funding
is allowed for new monitoring requirements that is expected to come into force
in mid-2022 under the new drinking water quality assurance rules and standards.
· Measures
to better attract, retain and recruit staff will be developed.
Disadvantages
· There
will be ongoing costs to service this debt.
· With
uncertainty over how debt will transfer to the new water entity, there is a
possibility of a stranded debt of up to $8.8m.
· Debt
funding OPEX is not considered good practice.
Option
Three – status quo – operate within existing budgets
47 Under
option 3, the 3 Waters Group would continue operating under existing
budgets.
48 The
3 Waters Group would endeavour to progress selected strategic initiatives where
possible, but this will be constrained.
49 The
3 Waters Group would continue to deliver the capital programme set out in the
10 Year Plan 2021-31. However, some future projects may need to be delayed as
investment planning work included in the Programme will be delayed.
Advantages
· There
will be no impact on rates.
· All
the Government Better Off funding is available for other Council initiatives.
Disadvantages
· Increased
risk of regulatory non-compliance due to less resources to manage responses
to regulatory change (e.g. carrying out additional drinking water monitoring as
likely required under the new drinking water quality assurance rules and
standards).
· A
reduced likelihood of delivering the full capital programme outlined in the 10
Year Plan as the investment planning workstream that informs the capital
programme will be delayed.
· Well
considered investment plans will not be completed in time for the 1 July 2024
transition, or the 10 Year Plan 2024-34.
NEXT STEPS
50 If
Option 1 is recommended:
a) the
decision will be confirmed by Council as part of the Annual Plan deliberations
b) staff
will work with the NTU and mana whenua to make applications to the Better Off
fund for the Programme
c) the
3 Waters Group will undertake an organisational change process in mid-2022 to
recruit the new FTE required to deliver the Programme
d) the
budgets for 2022/23 will be updated to include the additional annual stimulus
funding revenue and operating expenditure.
51 If
Option 2 is recommended:
a) the
decision will be confirmed by Council as part of the Annual Plan deliberations
b) the
3 Waters Group will undertake an organisational change process in early-2022 to
recruit the new FTE required to deliver the Programme
c) the
budgets for 2022/23 will be updated to include the additional operating
expenditure and debt.
52 If
Option 3 is approved, staff will continue to progress the highest priority
strategic initiatives from the Programme that can be accommodated within
existing budgets.
53 Staff
will prepare a paper for Council on options for the Better Off funding in
advance of the next Annual Plan to enable consultation with the community.
Signatories
|
Author:
|
Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure and
Development
|
|
Authoriser:
|
Sandy Graham - Chief Executive Officer
|
Attachments
|
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
⇩a
|
Attachment A -
Strategic Work Programme - one page summary
|
45
|
|
⇩b
|
Attachment B - 2020
0728 Council non-public (3W Reform Work Programme)
|
46
|
|
⇩c
|
Attachment C - Better
Off funding summary
|
69
|
|
⇩d
|
Attachment D - Better
Off Funding Support Package Guidance
|
70
|
|
⇩e
|
Attachment E -
Strategic Work Programme - workstream summary
|
89
|
|
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.
|
|
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 report has been prepared with reference to a number
of Dunedin’s strategic framework documents.
|
|
Māori Impact
Statement
A consistent guiding principle for the Government throughout the three
waters regulatory and service delivery reforms has been to ensure that the
Treaty of Waitangi and Te Mana o te Wai are
referenced appropriately within the legislative framework. The 3 Waters
Strategic Work Programme includes work to improve engagement with mana whenua
on matters relating to DCC Three Waters Services.
Working in partnership with mana whenua
on the long term investment planning workstream has been started.
|
|
Sustainability
The 3 Waters Strategic Work Programme aims to enhance the
long-term economic and environmental sustainability of Dunedin’s three
waters infrastructure and services.
|
|
LTP/Annual Plan /
Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy
Work from the investment planning, growth planning and
asset management planning workstreams would form the basis of a future asset
management plan and infrastructure strategy. Option 1 and 2 aims to
accelerate a number of workstreams allowed for in the 10 Year Plan
2021-2031.
|
|
Financial
considerations
Financial considerations for each option are detailed in the
body of the report.
|
|
Significance
This decision is considered low in terms of the
Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Staff have considered if
the use of a portion of the Better Off funding triggers significance and
having reviewed the DIA guidance, do not believe that it does.
|
|
Engagement –
external
Staff have been working with mana whenua on the long-term
investment planning workstream.
|
|
Engagement -
internal
The 3 Waters Group has engaged widely across the DCC on
the development of the proposed 3 Waters Strategic Work Programme, including
with the Executive Leadership Team, Finance, Human Resources, Legal,
Corporate Policy, Procurement, Business Information Services and City
Planning.
|
|
Risks: Legal /
Health and Safety etc.
The recommended option and Option 2 include initiatives
designed to reduce public health, environmental, regulatory and workforce
risk, including risks to workforce health, safety and wellbeing. Option
3 does not address regulatory risks.
|
|
Conflict of Interest
There are no known conflicts of interest.
|
|
Community Boards
Three Waters Reform is of interest to all
parts of the city, including those areas covered by Community Boards.
|
|
|
Infrastructure Services
9 May 2022
|
Submission on Otago Regional Council Annual
Plan 2022/23
Department: Corporate Policy and Executive Leadership Team
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 This
report seeks approval for a Dunedin City Council (DCC) submission (Attachment
A) to the Otago Regional Council’s (ORC) 2022/23 Annual Plan consultation
(Attachment B).
1 This
report details the priorities in the ORC’s 2022/23 Annual Plan, and the
proposed changes to its Long-Term Plan 2021/31 required to accommodate these.
The DCC submission supports the proposed changes, and the preferred option is
that the Committee approve the submission, with any amendments.
|
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Committee:
a) Approves the DCC submission, with any
amendments, to the Otago Regional Council 2022/23 Annual Plan consultation.
b) Authorises the Mayor or his delegate to speak to
the DCC submission at the hearings.
c) Authorises the Chief Executive to make any minor
editorial changes to the submission.
|
BACKGROUND
2 The
ORC sought feedback on their 2022/23 Annual Plan consultation document by 6 May
2021. On request, the DCC was granted an extension to submit its response by 12
May 2021.
3 In
2022/23, the ORC is seeking to make the following adjustments to its
priorities, within what was agreed for its Long-Term Plan 2021/31:
· Additional
work, funded through external grants, including the ‘Jobs for
Nature’ programme, the Mt Pleasant/ Te Haka Pupu River restoration
project, and the Wallabies Pest Control Management programme.
· Additional
staffing for Emergency Management activity.
· Iwi
liaison staff capacity in the Governance and Engagement activity.
· A
requirement to reclassify natural hazards LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging)
work programme expenditure from capital to operational expenditure.
· Reprioritising
existing expenditure tagged to developing the Land and Water Plan to complete
an economic assessment of Otago’s natural fresh water.
discussion
4 The
DCC submission was prepared with input from City Planning, Transport and
Corporate Policy.
5 The
DCC submission on the ORC annual plan covers the key areas the ORC is seeking
feedback on (Biodiversity and Biosecurity, Safety and Resilience, Governance
and Engagement, Regulatory).
6 The
DCC submission expresses support for the proposed changes to the ORC’s
Annual Plan 2022/23 and notes its commitment to collaboration where possible
between the DCC and ORC for the benefit of Dunedin, its residents, and
ratepayers.
OPTIONS
Option
One – Recommended Option – Approve the DCC submission, with any
amendments, on the ORC’s 2022/23 Annual Plan consultation
7 Approve
the DCC submission, with any amendments, on the ORC’s 2022/23 Annual Plan
consultation.
Advantages
· Opportunity
to show support and highlight pathways for collaboration with the ORC, one of
the DCC’s main strategic partners.
· Provide
feedback on topics relevant to the DCC’s strategic and operational work.
Disadvantages
· There
are no identified disadvantages for this option.
Option
Two – Do not approve the submission
8 Do
not approve the DCC submission on the ORC’s 2022/23 Annual Plan
consultation.
Advantages
· There
are no identified advantages for this option.
Disadvantages
· Missed
opportunity to show support and highlight pathways for collaboration with the
ORC.
NEXT STEPS
9 If
the Committee approves the DCC submission on the ORC 2022/23
Annual Plan it will be sent to the ORC.
10 Submissions
on the ORC 2022/23 Annual Plan close on May 6 2022, however the DCC has been
granted an extension.
11 If
the Committee does not approve the DCC submission, no further action is
required.
Signatories
|
Author:
|
Gina Huakau - Corporate Policy Manager
Jeanette Wikaira - Manahautū (General Manager
Māori Partnerships and Policy)
|
|
Authoriser:
|
Sandy Graham - Chief Executive Officer
|
Attachments
|
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
⇩a
|
Draft DCC Submission on
Otago Regional Council Proposed Annual Plan 2022/23
|
96
|
|
⇩b
|
Otago Regional Council
Proposed Annual Plan 2022/23
|
133
|
|
SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS
|
|
Fit with purpose
of Local Government
This decision promotes the social,
economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present
and for the future.
|
|
Fit with strategic
framework
|
|
Contributes
|
Detracts
|
Not applicable
|
|
Social Wellbeing Strategy
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Economic Development Strategy
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Environment Strategy
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Arts and Culture Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
3 Waters Strategy
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Spatial Plan
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Integrated Transport Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Parks and Recreation Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Other strategic projects/policies/plans
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
The draft submission has been developed in line with the
DCC’s strategic priorities.
|
|
Māori Impact Statement
ORC’s proposed Annual Plan 2022/23 reiterates its
commitment to “Partnership with Kāi Tahu and Iwi liaison” as
detailed in the Long-Term Plan 2021/31. The proposed Annual Plan
maintains the level of capacity associated with council’s activity to
date, albeit with a 1 full time equivalent increase associated with capacity
to support partnership with Kāi Tahu, Iwi liaison and strategic
stakeholders.
Given the timeframe constraints for submission feedback,
DCC staff have been unable to consult with mana whenua and mātāwaka
on the impacts that may result from a decision to approve the DCC submission.
|
|
Sustainability
The DCC submission supports sustainability goals in
relation to biodiversity, biosecurity, and fresh water.
|
|
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 DCC
submission.
|
|
Financial
considerations
There are no known financial implications resulting from a
decision to approve the DCC submission.
|
|
Significance
The decision is considered to be of low significance when
assessed against the Significance and Engagement Policy.
|
|
Engagement –
external
There was no external engagement on this report.
|
|
Engagement -
internal
Staff from City Planning, Transport and Corporate Policy
had input into the draft submission.
|
|
Risks: Legal /
Health and Safety etc.
There are no known risks.
|
|
Conflict of
Interest
There are no known conflicts of interest.
|
|
Community Boards
Community Boards are likely to be interested in the
proposed changes to ORC’s Annual Plan 2022/23. Biodiversity and
Biosecurity, Safety and Resilience, Governance and Engagement and Regulatory
are areas of interest to all parts of the city, including those areas covered
by Community Boards.
|
|
|
Infrastructure Services
9 May 2022
|
Naming of private way
Department: Transport
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 This
report seeks the approval of road names for a private way at a new development
located at 102 Factory Road, Mosgiel. The road names
proposed by the developer comply with the DCC Road Naming Policy.
|
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Committee:
a) Names a private way off 102 Factory Road, Mosgiel, as ‘Mackie Mews’.
|
BACKGROUND
2 The
DCC Road Naming Policy provides the framework for timely and consistent naming
of roads that reflect the identity of the local community. For reference, the
DCC Road Naming Policy and Procedure can be accessed on the DCC website at www.dunedin.govt.nz/road-naming.
3 The
Road Naming Policy requires staff to consult with Community Boards where road
names are proposed for Community Board areas. The Road Naming Policy notes that
the role of a Community Board is to support community consultation.
Community Boards do not have a decision-making role and can only support or not
support proposals.
4 The
Mosgiel Taieri Community Board has been informed that the names ‘Mackie
Mews’ and ‘Mandeno Mews’ have been selected from the Road
Naming Register and has raised no objections.
DISCUSSION
Summary of proposed road
names
5 The
table presented below provides a summary of the road names proposed by the
property developer, and their compliance with the Road Naming Policy.
Additional details, including a full assessment for each proposed road name and
map of the new road are provided in attachments A to C.
6 The
Road Naming Policy places less weight on the appropriateness criteria with
respect to private ways.
|
Location of Road
|
Proposed Road Name
|
Road Naming Policy
|
Alternative Road Name
|
Road Naming Policy
|
Recommended Road name
|
|
Private way, off Factory road Mosgiel.
|
Mackie Mews
|
Complies
|
Mandeno Mews
|
Complies
|
Mackie Mews
|
Private Way-102 Factory Road, Mosgiel
7 The
developer of the land located at 102 Factory Road, Mosgiel has proposed
‘Mackie Mews’ as the preferred option and ‘Mandeno
Mews’ as the alternative road name.
8 ‘Mackie
Mews’ refers to John Mackie (1910-2011), who was born in Dunedin and
trained at the School of Mines in the 1930's. After graduation, he worked in
Malaysia (then Malaya) and spent three years as a Prisoner of War in a Japanese
camp. Returning to Dunedin in 1947, he lectured in surveying at the School of
Mines and following its closure in 1963, he became the head of the National
School of Surveying until 1976. He was president of the New Zealand Institute
of Surveyors from 1977 until 1979. John Mackie was nationally and
internationally renowned for his pioneering work in surveying.
9 ‘Mandeno
Mews’ refers to Henry Mandeno, (1879-1973),
who was a modernist Architect. Born in Te Awamutu, he was educated in
Auckland before moving to Dunedin. While working as a builder he undertook
night classes in architectural draughtsmanship. After working for Mason and
Wales, he set up his own practice in 1911. His first major commission was King
Edward Technical College. In 1914 his design was chosen for the new Town Hall,
however WW1 intervened and when the new Town Hall was eventually built in the
late 1920s, the design had changed significantly. His other buildings include
Santa Sabina Convent, the Central Fire Station and Speights Brewery. His last
major work was the main block at Wakari Hospital in 1957.
10 The
two names proposed, ‘Mackie Mews’ and ‘Mandeno Mews’ were
chosen from the list of pre-approved names from the Dunedin City
Council’s Road Name Register and are therefore considered to meet the
appropriateness criteria of the Road Naming Policy. (See assessment forms and
map of the development as attachments A, B and C respectively).
11 The
Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board has been updated that the developer has selected
names from the Road Name Register.
OPTIONS
Option
One – Recommended Option. The Committee approves naming of the one
private way off Factory Road as ‘Mackie Mews’
Advantages
· The
road will be named, and landowners gain a street address allowing them to
progress with building and access to services.
Disadvantages
· There
are no significant disadvantages identified with this option.
Option
Two – Alternative Option. The Committee approves naming of the one
private way off Factory Road as ‘Mandeno Mews’
Advantages
· The road will be named, and landowners gain a street
address allowing them to progress with building and access to services.
Disadvantages
· There are no significant disadvantages identified with this
option.
Option Three
–The Committee rejects the proposed names.
Advantages
· There
are no advantages identified with this option.
Disadvantages
· The
Roads will not have a name until a new option is presented and this will
inconvenience new or potential new property owners within the subdivisions.
NEXT STEPS
12 If
the new road names are approved, staff will process the required documentation
and advise the developers and Land Information New Zealand of the new road
names.
Signatories
|
Author:
|
Paula Barragan - Policy Analyst - Transport Regulation
|
|
Authoriser:
|
Jeanine Benson - Group Manager Transport
Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure and
Development
|
Attachments
|
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
⇩a
|
102 Factory
Road-Assessment for Mackie Mews
|
175
|
|
⇩b
|
102 Factory
Road-Assessment for Mandeno Mews
|
177
|
|
⇩c
|
102 Factory Road-Map
SUB-2020-188
|
179
|
|
SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS
|
|
Fit with purpose
of Local Government
This
decision supports the social, environmental, and cultural well-being of
communities in the present and for the future.
|
|
Fit with strategic
framework
|
|
Contributes
|
Detracts
|
Not applicable
|
|
Social Wellbeing Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Economic Development Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Environment Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Arts and Culture Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
3 Waters Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Spatial Plan
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Integrated Transport Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Parks and Recreation Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
☒
|
|
Other strategic projects/policies/plans
|
☒
|
☐
|
☐
|
This
is an administrative function.
|
|
Māori Impact
Statement
Staff are investigating options to add Māori names to the
Road Name Register in a way that is meaningful for mana whenua. A
report to the committee is expected in mid-2022.
|
|
Sustainability
There
are no known implications for sustainability.
|
|
LTP/Annual Plan /
Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy
There
are no implications.
|
|
Financial
considerations
There
are no financial implications as the costs of installing the road signs will
be charged to the developers.
|
|
Significance
The
significance of this decision is considered low in terms of the
Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
|
|
Engagement –
external
There
has been engagement with the developer.
|
|
Engagement -
internal
There
has been internal engagement with Business Information Services and Digital
Services.
|
|
Risks: Legal /
Health and Safety etc.
There
are no known risks.
|
|
Conflict of
Interest
There
are no known conflicts of interest.
|
|
Community Boards
The Mosgiel Taieri Community Board has been informed that
the names ‘Mackie Mews’ and ‘Mandeno Mews’, have been
selected from the Road Name Register and has raised no objections.
|
