Agenda of Council - Tuesday, 12 December 2023

Council

12 December 2023

Council

MINUTES

Minutes of an ordinary meeting of the Dunedin City Council held in the Council Chamber, Dunedin Public Art Gallery, The Octagon, Dunedin on Tuesday 05 December 2023, commencing at 10.00 am

PRESENT

Mayor	Mayor Jules Radich
Deputy Mayor	Cr Cherry Lucas
Members	Cr Bill Acklin	Cr Sophie Barker
	Cr David Benson-Pope	Cr Christine Garey
	Cr Kevin Gilbert	Cr Carmen Houlahan
	Cr Marie Laufiso	Cr Mandy Mayhem
	Cr Jim O'Malley	Cr Lee Vandervis
	Cr Steve Walker	Cr Brent Weatherall
	Cr Andrew Whiley via audio visual link

IN ATTENDANCE

Sandy Graham (Chief Executive Officer), Robert West (General Manager Corporate and Quality), Claire Austin (General Manager Customer and Regulatory), David Ward (Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Development), John Christie (Manager Enterprise Dunedin), Leanne Mash (Communications and City Marketing Manager), and Nicola Morand ((Manahautū (General Manager Māori, Partnerships and Policy)(Acting)), (Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Development), Jonathan Rowe (Programme Manager, South Dunedin Future), Josh Von Pein (Programme Manager – Mayor Projects), Glen Hazelton (Project Director, Central City Plan), Sharon Bodeker (Special Projects Manager), Dr Anna Johnson (City Development Manager) and Emma Christmas (Senior Planner)

Governance Support Officer Lynne Adamson

OPENING KARAKIA

The Mayor opened the meeting with a Karakia.

1 Public Forum

Benjamin Paterson – International Flights

Benjamin Paterson spoke about the survey he conducted for the reinstatement of international flights into Dunedin Airport. He had received 22,000 responses with the most popular destinations being Brisbane, Gold Coast, Melbourne and Sydney. Benjamin sought Council support for his initiative.

Ben responded to questions and advised that he had a trip to Auckland planned for late January where he planned to meet with airline representatives to speak on his survey.

Bevan Meddings – the Exchange

Mr Meddings spoke on the need for an upgrade to the Exchange area. He provided information on the buildings he owned and spoke of the significance of other buildings and accommodation in the area which drew visitors to the Exchange.

He urged Councillors to visit, assess the area and include an upgrade in future works for the city. Mr Meddings responded to questions.

2 APOLOGIES

There were apologies from Crs Jim O’Malley and Marie Laufiso for absence and Cr Andrew Whiley for lateness.

Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Steve Walker):

That the Council:

Accepts the apologies from Crs Jim O’Malley and Marie Laufiso for absence and Cr Andrew Whiley for lateness.

Motion carried (CNL/2023/289)

3 CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA

Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Mandy Mayhem):

That the Council:

Confirms the agenda with the following alterations:

That Item 9 – Housing Capacity Assessment Update 2023 and other supporting research to inform the draft Future Development Strategy be taken before Item 8 – Future Development Strategy: Adopting the draft for consultation

That Item C2 of the Supplementary Agenda – Proposed Governance Approach to Strategies, Plans and Programmes of Work be withdrawn from the Agenda.

That Item 12 – LGNZ – Special General Meeting has an additional paper which had been circulated.

Motion carried (CNL/2023/290)

4 Declarations of interest

Members were reminded of the need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arose between their role as an elected representative and any private or other external interest they might have.

Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Cherry Lucas):

That the Council:

a) Notes the Elected Members' Interest Register; and

b) Confirms the proposed management plan for Elected Members' Interests.

c) Notes the proposed management plan for the Executive Leadership Team’s Interests.

Motion carried (CNL/2023/291)

5 Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 Ordinary Council meeting - 28 November 2023

Moved (Cr Cherry Lucas/Cr Kevin Gilbert):

That the Council:

a) Confirms the public part of the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on 28 November 2023 as a correct record.

Motion carried (CNL/2023/292)

Reports

6 South Dunedin Future - Risk Assessment & Adaptation Approaches
	A report from Māori, Partnerships & Police provided an update on the South Dunedin Future programme, which included findings from the risk identification stage, to seek endorsement of a longlist of generic adaptation approaches. It sought approval to engage the community on those topics.
	The Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Development (David Ward); Manahautū (General Manager Māori Partnerships and Policy (Acting) (Nicola Morand); and Programme Manager, South Dunedin Future (Jonathan Rowe) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
	Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Christine Garey): That the Council: a) Notes the background of the South Dunedin Future programme and work undertaken since the previous update report to the Strategy, Planning and Engagement Committee on 14 August 2023. *Risk Assessment* b) Notes the risk assessment workstream of the South Dunedin Future programme will be undertaken in three stages: (i) risk identification; (ii) risk exposure and vulnerability assessment; and (iii) detailed risk assessment. c) Notes the attached Risk Identification Report for South Dunedin, which constitutes the first stage of risk assessment workstream, and has been prepared by the ‘Kia Rōpine’ consultant team (WSP, BECA and Tonkin & Taylor). d) Notes the Risk Identification Report has undergone technical peer review by Jacobs New Zealand Ltd and Royal HaskoningDHV, and that there remain peer review feedback items to resolve in the next stage of the risk assessment workstream. e) Notes work has commenced on the second stage of the risk assessment workstream, confirming the risk assessment methodology, which will be completed by mid-2024 and reported back to Councils. *Adaptation Approaches* f) Notes the adaptation approaches workstream of the South Dunedin Future programme will be undertaken in five stages: (i) domestic and international good practice report; (ii) longlist of generic adaptation approaches; (iii) spatial longlist of adaptation approaches; (iv) spatial shortlist of adaptation approaches; and (v) preferred approaches. g) Notes the attached Domestic and international good practice report, which constitutes the first stage of the adaptation approaches workstream, and has been prepared by the ‘Kia Rōpine’ consultant team (WSP, BECA and Tonkin & Taylor). h) Notes the attached Longlist of generic adaptation approaches – Context summary report and Factsheets, which constitute the second stage of the adaptation approaches workstream, and have been prepared by the ‘Kia Rōpine’ consultant team (WSP, BECA and Tonkin & Taylor). i) Notes that the Domestic and international good practice report, and the Longlist of generic adaptation approaches – Context summary report and Factsheets, have undergone technical peer review by Jacobs New Zealand Ltd, supported by Royal HaskoningDHV and Bell Adapt Ltd. j) Endorses the attached Longlist of generic adaptation approaches – Context summary report and Factsheets for the purposes of community engagement. *Community Engagement* k) Notes the next stage of the risk assessment workstream includes seeking community input into identification and confirmation of relevant risks for South Dunedin. l) Notes the next stage in the adaptation approaches workstream is to engage with partners, stakeholders and affected communities on the longlist of generic adaptation approaches. m) Approves the SDF programme team undertaking engagement with partners, stakeholders and affected communities on the basis of the approaches identified in the Longlist of generic adaptation approaches – Context Summary Report and Factsheets, which will inform development of subsequent adaptation approaches work. Division The Council voted by division For: Crs Bill Acklin, Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Christine Garey, Kevin Gilbert, Carmen Houlahan, Cherry Lucas, Mandy Mayhem, Steve Walker, Brent Weatherall and Mayor Jules Radich (11). Against: Cr Lee Vandervis (1). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 11 votes to 1 Motion carried (CNL/2023/293)

Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Steve Walker):

That the Council:

Adjourns the meeting for 5 minutes.

Motion carried

The meeting adjourned at 11.18 am and reconvened at 11.33 am.

Cr Andrew Whiley entered the meeting at 11.33 am.

7 Developing a Climate Change Adaptation Plan for Dunedin City
	A report from Māori, Partnerships & Policy canvased key considerations and options for the development of a climate change adaptation plan for Dunedin and to seek direction from Council about which option(s) should be explored further.
	The Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Development (David Ward); Manahautū (General Manager Māori Partnerships and Policy (Acting) (Nicola Morand); and Programme Manager, South Dunedin Future (Jonathan Rowe) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Kevin Gilbert) That the Council: Adjourns the meeting for 40 minutes Motion carried The meeting adjourned at 12.09 pm and reconvened at 12.51 pm
	Moved (Cr Sophie Barker/Cr Christine Garey): That the Council: a) Endorses further work to scope development of a Dunedin adaptation plan based on the following three options: i) Option One (Comprehensive/Core Adaptation Function) – Establishing a dedicated adaptation planning resource within DCC with responsibility for developing (i) a high-level, city-wide adaptation plan for Dunedin; (ii) a series of lower-level plans covering specific domains or smaller geographic areas in greater detail (as required); and (iii) managing existing adaptation planning work. ii) Option Two (Comprehensive/Programme) – Establishing a dedicated programme to develop (i) a high-level city-wide adaptation plan for Dunedin and (ii) a series of lower-level plans covering specific domains or smaller geographic areas in greater detail (as required). iii) Option Three (Limited/Project) – Establishing a dedicated project to develop a high-level city-wide adaptation plan for Dunedin. b) Notes that the costed options will be provided for Council in time for consideration as part of the deliberations for the 10 year plan in May 2024. c) Notes that as part of the development of the options there will be workshops with Councillors, engagement with mana whenua and other key stakeholders. Division The Council voted by division For: Crs Bill Acklin, Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Christine Garey, Kevin Gilbert, Carmen Houlahan, Cherry Lucas, Mandy Mayhem, Steve Walker, Brent Weatherall, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Jules Radich (12). Against: Cr Lee Vandervis (1). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 12 votes to 1 Motion carried (CNL/2023/294)

Cr Carmen Houlahan left the meeting at 1.05 pm and returned at 1.08 pm.

9 Housing Capacity Assessment Update 2023 and other supporting research to inform the draft Future Development Strategy
	A report from City Development advised that the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) required the Dunedin City Council (DCC) and the Otago Regional Council (ORC) to jointly prepare a Future Development Strategy (FDS) for Dunedin by mid-2024. The FDS was being prepared by DCC and ORC in partnership with mana whenua.
	The Chief Executive Officer (Sandy Graham); Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Development (David Ward), City Development Manager (Dr Anna Johnson) and Senior Planner (Emma Christmas) provided an update and spoke to the report. Formative Director (Rodney Yeoman) attended via audio visual link. Council acknowledged and recognised all the work Nathan Stocker (former Team Leader Research and Monitoring) had completed in this field.
	Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Kevin Gilbert): That the Council: a) Notes the Housing Capacity Assessment update 2023. b) Notes the draft Dunedin business land research report and Dunedin Retail Trends and Land Use Study. c) Notes the housing bottom lines which will be inserted into Dunedin’s District Plan (2GP). Motion carried (CNL/2023/295)

8 Future Development Strategy: Adopting the draft for consultation

A report from City Development noted that the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) required the Dunedin City Council (DCC) and Otago Regional Council (ORC) to jointly prepare a Future Development Strategy (FDS) for Dunedin by mid-2024. The FDS was being prepared by DCC and ORC in partnership with mana whenua.

The Chief Executive Officer (Sandy Graham); Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Development (David Ward), City Development Manager (Dr Anna Johnson) and Senior Planner (Emma Christmas) spoke to the report and responded to questions.

Dr Johnson introduced the Future Development Strategy and explained the relationship with the 10 year plan.

Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Steve Walker):

That the Council:

Pursuant to the provisions of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, exclude the public from the following part of the proceedings of this meeting 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

C2 Future Development Strategy Attachment Report

S7(2)(j)

The withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage.

S48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

Motion carried (CNL/2023/296)

The meeting moved into confidential at 1.24 pm and resumed in public at 1.35 pm.

Moved (Cr Cherry Lucas/Cr Kevin Gilbert):

That the Council:

a) Adopts the draft Dunedin Future Development Strategy, Statement of Proposal and Submission Form for public consultation under section 83 of the LGA 2002, starting on 31 January 2024.

b) Notes the FDS Technical Report.

c) Resolves under section 48(1)(a)(i) and section 7(2)(j) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 to withhold the draft FDS, Statement of Proposal, Submission Form and FDS Technical Report, which have been provided, until 31 January 2024 to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage.

d) Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer (or delegate) the power to correct or authorise the correction of, typographical errors or to make minor amendments to the content of draft FDS or its accompanying supporting documents.

Motion carried (CNL/2023/297) with Cr Lee Vandervis recording his abstention

10 Central City Plan Update and Business Case Development for future stages
	A report from the Project Management Office presented revised cost estimates from those prepared in 2017 for the above ground transport and amenity works for the Central City Plan. The report sought Council consideration to what level of above ground amenity works should be undertaken on the Bath Street component of the Central City Plan. It also presented high level cost estimates for the Octagon.
	The General Manager Corporate and Quality (Robert West), Programme Manager – Major Projects (Josh Von Pein) and Project Director, Central City Plan (Glen Hazelton) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Kevin Gilbert): That the Council: Adjourns the meeting for 5 minutes. Motion carried The meeting adjourned at 2.19 pm and reconvened at 2.28 pm.
	Moved (Cr David Benson-Pope/Cr Christine Garey): That the Council: a) Approves a budget of $2.63m for a high level upgrade for above ground amenity on Bath Street. b) Notes that this was an increase in budget of $1.13m. Division The Council voted by division For: Crs David Benson-Pope, Christine Garey, Mandy Mayhem, Steve Walker (4). Against: Crs Bill Acklin, Sophie Barker, Kevin Gilbert, Carmen Houlahan, Cherry Lucas, Lee Vandervis, Brent Weatherall Andrew Whiley and Mayor Jules Radich (9) Abstained: Nil The division was declared LOST by 9 votes to 4
	Moved (Cr David Benson-Pope/Cr Christine Garey): That the Council: c) Notes that a business case for the remainder of the CCP projects would be prepared in the 2024/2025 year. d) Notes the business case would be used as a basis to review the Central City Plan. Division The Council voted by division For: Crs Bill Acklin, Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Christine Garey, Kevin Gilbert, Carmen Houlahan, Cherry Lucas, Mandy Mayhem, Lee Vandervis, Steve Walker, Brent Weatherall, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Jules Radich (13). Against: Nil Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 13 votes to 0 Motion carried (CNL/2023/298)
	Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Bill Acklin): That the Council: a) Confirms a moderate level upgrade for above ground amenity on Bath Street b) Notes that $1.5m was already included within existing budgets. Division The Council voted by division For: Crs Bill Acklin, Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Christine Garey, Kevin Gilbert, Carmen Houlahan, Cherry Lucas, Brent Weatherall, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Jules Radich (10). Against: Crs Mandy Mayhem, Lee Vandervis and Steve Walker (3). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 10 votes to 3 Motion carried (CNL/2023/299)

Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Steve Walker):

That the Council:

Adjourns the meeting for 5 minutes.

Motion carried

The meeting adjourned at 3.18 pm and reconvened at 3.31 pm.

11 Letter of Expectation for Dunedin City Holdings Limited and Group
	A report from Civic provided a draft Letter of Expectation for the Dunedin City Holdings Limited Board for consideration.
	The Chief Executive Officer (Sandy Graham) and Special Projects Manager (Sharon Bodeker) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
	Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Cherry Lucas): That the Council: a) Approves the draft Letter of Expectation to the Board of Dunedin City Holdings Limited on behalf of the Council as Shareholder. b) Authorises the Mayor to sign the Letter of Expectation on behalf of the Council as Shareholder. Motion carried (CNL/2023/300) with Cr Lee Vandervis recording his vote against

12 LGNZ - Special General Meeting
	A report from Corporate Policy sought a Council decision on how it wished to vote on the proposed resolution at the upcoming Local Government New Zealand Special General Meeting to endorse The Future by Local Government – A consensus outcome paper.
	The Chief Executive Officer (Sandy Graham) and Special Projects Manager (Sharon Bodeker) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Kevin Gilbert): That the Council: Extends the meeting beyond 6 hours. Motion carried
	Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Cherry Lucas): That the Council: a) Build a new system of government that’s fit for purpose. Motion carried (CNL/2023/301) with Cr Lee Vandervis recording his abstention
	Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Cherry Lucas): That the Council: b) Rebalance the country’s tax take between central and local government Motion carried (CNL/2023/302) with Cr Lee Vandervis recording his abstention
	Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Cherry Lucas): That the Council: c) Create strong, more authentic relationships between local government and iwi, hapū and Māori. Motion carried (CNL/2023/303) with Cr Lee Vandervis recording his abstention
	Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Cherry Lucas): That the Council: d) Align central, regional and local government priorities. Motion carried (CNL/2023/304) with Cr Lee Vandervis recording his abstention
	Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Cherry Lucas): That the Council: e) Strengthen local democracy and leadership Motion carried (CNL/2023/305) with Cr Lee Vandervis recording his abstention
2 Proposed Governance Approach to Strategies, Plans and Programmes of Work
	This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr Steve Walker):

That the Council:

Pursuant to the provisions of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, exclude the public from the following part of the proceedings of this meeting 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 Ordinary Council meeting - 28 November 2023 - 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 Infrastructure Related Purchase

S7(2)(g)

The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege.

S7(2)(i)

The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

S48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

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

Motion carried (CNL/2023/306)

The meeting moved into confidential at 4.22 pm. and concluded at 4.47 pm.

..............................................

MAYOR

Council

12 December 2023

Reports

10 Year Plan 2024-34 - Review of the Significance and Engagement Policy

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report updates Council on the review of the Significance and Engagement Policy (the Policy) undertaken as part of the 10 Year Plan 2024-34 process and requests approval of the proposed changes. The revised Policy is provided as Attachment A. A version showing tracked changes in the document is provided as Attachment B.

2 Every local Council in Aotearoa New Zealand is required to have a Significance and Engagement Policy under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

3 Council is responsible for making decisions on behalf of the city, and for engaging with the community on significant decisions. The role of the Policy is to guide Council on assessing what, when and how significant decisions are made.

4 The review of the Policy has found that it is largely fit for purpose. Some improvements were identified, and these are detailed in this report.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the revised Significance and Engagement Policy.

b) Notes that the revised Significance and Engagement Policy will be included as a supporting document during the 10 Year Plan consultation.

BACKGROUND

5 The Policy is required by Section 76AA of the LGA. It must set out:

· The general approach the council takes to determining the significance of an issue, a matter or decision.

· The criteria and procedures used for determining significance.

· What the community can expect in terms of consultation and engagement on matters with different degrees of significance.

· The list of assets considered by the Council to be strategic assets.

6 Section 5 of the LGA provides the following definition of strategic assets:

strategic asset, in relation to the assets held by a local authority, means an asset or group of assets that the local authority needs to retain if the local authority is to maintain the local authority’s capacity to achieve or promote any outcome that the local authority determines to be important to the current or future well-being of the community; and includes—

(a) any asset or group of assets listed in accordance with section 76AA(3) by the local authority; and

(b) any land or building owned by the local authority and required to maintain the local authority’s capacity to provide affordable housing as part of its social policy; and

(c) any equity securities held by the local authority in—

(i) a port company within the meaning of the Port Companies Act 1988:

(ii) an airport company within the meaning of the Airport Authorities Act 1966.

7 The DCC’s current Policy was first adopted on 24 November 2014, and last reviewed in 2021 for the 10 year plan 2021-2031.

8 The last review of the Policy included minor amendments to provide further clarity for staff implementing the Policy, as well as one minor change from the previous strategic assets list – listed in Schedule 2 of the Policy: from ‘Fortune Theatre’ to ‘231 Stuart Street (formerly the Fortune Theatre)’ to reflect the change in usage of this asset.

9 In the last review, the Dunedin City Council’s (DCC) Māori Participation Working Party recommended elevating the principle of Māori engagement in the list of principles included in the Policy, as well as endorsing revised wording in the current Policy.

10 The current Policy includes criteria to determine ‘significance’ in relation to a strategic decision.

11 The current Policy outlines a brief description of strategic assets, which are Council-owned assets or groups of assets that are considered strategically important for the wellbeing of residents and in achieving strategic priorities for the city.

12 The current list of Council-owned strategic assets varies from individual assets such as Moana Pool, to groups of assets such as the transportation network. If the Council wanted to make any changes to the ownership or control of the strategic assets, Council would at the least, engage with the community using the consultative procedures outlined in the policy.

13 The council must consult when amending the Policy unless it considers on reasonable grounds that it has sufficient information about community interests and preferences to enable the purpose of the policy to be achieved.

DISCUSSION

14 The current Policy has been reviewed and is still considered fit for purpose as it provides a framework for assessing the significance of decisions, and an outline of engagement approaches in line with the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) spectrum of public participation.

15 From a legal perspective, the DCC’s current Policy meets the requirements of section 76AA of the LGA.

16 However, after DCC staff researched and reviewed other Significance and Engagement policies in Aotearoa New Zealand, the following changes in form and structure are proposed:

Introduction and principles

17 The DCC’s strategic framework includes two strategic principles; the Treaty of Waitangi and sustainability which are not reflected in the current Policy.

18 It is proposed to strengthen the Policy by introducing a reference to the recently adopted Zero Carbon Plan and Te Taki Haruru - The Māori Strategic Framework

19 To clarify the engagement principles and underline their influence on all engagement activities, it is proposed to move the principles of engagement to the beginning of the Policy and to reorganise them in five overarching principles as follows, with a new principle addressing sustainability:

· Principle 1: Engage effectively and openly with community.

· Principle 2: Ensure appropriate delivery of engagement.

· Principle 3: Make provision for Māori to actively and effectively contribute to decision-making processes.

· Principle 4: Consider the views, interests, needs and opinions expressed during engagement and report on their influence on the final decision.

· Principle 5 (new): Consider the needs of future generations.

Māori Engagement

20 It is proposed to include a specific paragraph referencing Te Taki Haruru – The Māori Strategic Framework and its complementary frameworks Tū Hono (Māori Engagement Framework) and Tū Kotahi (Cultural Capability Framework). This addition will promote alignment between the Policy and the new frameworks which implement the DCC’s commitment to the Treaty of Waitangi.

Determining when to engage

21 It is proposed to revise the flowchart for deciding how to engage by including additional guidance for staff for the overall assessment of the significance of a decision, to better guide the implementation of the Policy.

Strategic assets list

22 Apart from the legally required assets, detailed below, it is a decision for Council as to what assets or groups of assets Council needs to retain.

23 In reviewing the current Strategic Assets list for the DCC, the rationale for why some assets have been included, or not, is based on two broad indicators as outlined in the Policy:

· Achievement and promotion of the current and future well-being of the community.

· Achievement and promotion of the priorities of the Strategic Framework.

24 Given the definition of strategic assets in Section 5 (b) and (c) of the LGA, the following cannot be deleted from the list of strategic Council-owned assets:

· Community Housing. It is important to note that this inclusion does not mean that the sale of an individual community housing complex would necessarily be regarded as significant, but it does mean that the sale of a major part of DCC’s Community Housing stock would be a significant decision. The Policy currently states that where a strategic asset is a network or has many components, decisions can be made on individual components within the network without it being regarded as significant, unless that component substantially affects the level of service provided to the community.

· Shares in Dunedin International Airport Limited.

25 Three changes to the current strategic assets list are proposed:

· Removal of the Fortune Theatre, in preparation for the sale of the asset.

· Change ‘Moana Pool’ to ‘Aquatic Facilities’.

· Change ‘Landfills’ to ‘Waste Management Facilities’.

OPTIONS

Option One – Recommended Option – Approves the revised Significance and Engagement Policy

26 The Council approves the revised Policy, with any additional amendments, for inclusion in the draft 10 year plan 2024-34.

Advantages

· Fulfils the DCC commitment to review the Policy once every three years.

· Strengthens the aspirational dimension and alignment of the Policy with the DCC’s Strategic Framework, while keeping its current characteristics.

· Provides an updated list of strategic assets aligned with the DCC’s activities.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages.

Option Two – Status Quo – Does not approve the revised Significance and Engagement Policy

27 The Council does not approve the revised Policy, as attached, for inclusion in the draft 10 year plan 2024-34, and the current Policy is included in the draft 10 year plan 2024-34.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages

Disadvantages

· Does not fulfil the DCC commitment to review the Policy once every three years.

· Missed opportunity to strengthen the aspirational dimension and alignment with DCC’s strategic framework.

· Maintain a list of Strategic assets inconsistent with DCC’s activities.

NEXT STEPS

28 If approved by Council, the revised Policy will be included as a supporting document in the draft 10 year plan 2024-34.

29 If the revised Policy is not approved, the current Policy developed for the 10 year plan 2021-31 will be included as a supporting document in the draft 10 year Plan 2024-34.

Signatories

Author:	Jasmin Lamorie - Senior Corporate Planner
Authoriser:	Jeanette Wikaira - General Manager Arts, Culture and Recreation

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	draft Revised Significance and Engagement Policy - 10 year plan 2024-34	26
⇩b	draft Revised Significance and Engagement Policy 10 year plan 2024-34 TRACKED CHANGES VERSION	35

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

This decision adheres with Section 76AA of the Local Government Act 2002, which requires local authorities to have a Significance and Engagement Policy, and .

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 Significance and Engagement Policy applies to aspects of the DCC’s Strategic Framework, Te Taki Haruru (the Māori Strategic Framework) and the DCC’s Zero Carbon Plan.

Māori Impact Statement

The revised Significance and Engagement Policy aligns with Te Taki Haruru – the Māori Strategic Framework and to the DCC commitment to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The DCC’s Māori Partnerships team has been consulted with in the development of the revised policy.

Sustainability

The revised Significance and Engagement Policy references the DCC commitment toward sustainability, the Zero Carbon Plan. Zero Carbon staff have been consulted with in the development of the revised policy.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The Significance and Engagement Policy will be included in the Long Term Plan (10 year Plan) 2024-34.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

Significance

The revised Significance and Engagement Policy will be included as a supporting document in the draft 10 year Plan 2024-34 that will undergo public consultation in 2024.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

The DCC’s Communication and Marketing, Corporate Policy, Māori Partnerships, South Dunedin Future, Legal, and Zero Carbon teams have been involved in the development of the revised Significance and Engagement Policy.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

The DCC’s in-house Legal team has been consulted on the revised Significance and Engagement Policy. There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There is no conflict of interest.

Community Boards

Community Boards areas will be included in the public consultation on the draft 10 year Plan 2024-34.

Council

12 December 2023

10 Year Plan 2024-34 - Community Outcomes

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval of the community outcomes for developing the 10 year plan 2024-34 (the Plan), and consulting with the community.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves, community outcomes, for the purposes of developing the 10 year plan 2024-34, and consulting with the community.

BACKGROUND

2 The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requires all local authorities to develop a 10 year plan. Section 93(6) of the LGA provides that the purpose of the Plan is to:

a) describe the Council’s activities;

b) describe the community outcomes for Dunedin;

c) provide integrated decision-making and co-ordination of resources;

d) provide a long-term focus for the decisions and activities of the Council; and

e) provide a basis for accountability of the local authority to the community.

3 Schedule 10 of the LGA specifies the minimum information and content that must be included in the Plan as follows:

· Community outcomes;

· Groups of activities (including capital expenditure, levels of service and funding impact statements);

· Statement on any variations between proposals outlined in the Plan and our assessment of water and sanitary services, and waste management and minimisation plans;

· Council controlled organisations (including activities provided and key performance targets);

· Statement on the development of Māori capacity to contribute to decision making processes;

· Financial Strategy;

· Infrastructure Strategy;

· Revenue and Financing Policy;

· Significance and Engagement Policy;

· Forecast financial statements (including balancing of budget, rating information and reserve funds); and

· Significant forecasting assumptions.

4 Council is also required under section 93(B) of the LGA to develop a Consultation Document, to provide an effective base for public participation in the Council’s decision making processes relating to the content of the Plan.

5 The final Plan and Consultation Document must contain a report from the Auditor General.

DISCUSSION

6 Local Authorities are required to have specified community outcomes under the LGA. Section 5 of the LGA defines Community outcomes as:

Community outcomes means the outcomes that a local authority aims to achieve in order to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of its district or region in the present and for the future.

7 Long term plans must describe the community outcomes which Local Authorities are seeking to achieve through their planning. Schedule 10 (1) of the LGA provides:

A long-term plan must, to the extent determined appropriate by the local authority, describe the community outcomes for the local authority’s district or region.

8 The DCC currently has eight community outcomes which are described in the 10 year plan 2021-31, as shown in Attachment A. These outcomes are linked to the eight core strategies in Dunedin’s Strategic Framework, and each outcome is supported by the priorities contained within the core strategies.

9 In 2019 the Government reinstated the four aspects of community wellbeing – social, economic, environmental and cultural – into the LGA. As the existing community outcomes are aligned with the Strategic Framework, they already cover the four aspects of community wellbeing.

10 The 10 year plan strategic workstream reviewed the community outcomes of other Councils and found there were variations. Some Council’s had fewer outcomes that were focussed at a high level and others linked directly to the four wellbeings, some councils had outcomes which were more aligned with strategies or delivery of services.

11 Alternative options for revising the DCC’s community outcomes were considered by the 10 year plan strategic workstream. However, as the Strategic Refresh project is continuing to progress and the DCC’s existing strategic framework remains in place, it is recommended that, for consistency, the existing community outcomes continue to be utilised in the development of the 10 year plan 2024-2034.

12 No options for this report are presented. The recommendation is that Council approves the existing eight Community Outcomes for development of, and inclusion in, the draft 10 year plan 2024-2034 for the following reasons:

a) It is a requirement within the LGA that Council describes the community outcomes for Dunedin within the 10 year plan.

b) The existing outcomes align with current strategies.

NEXT STEPS

13 Once approved, the community outcomes will form part of the supporting documentation to be included in, and used to support the development of the draft 10 year plan.

Signatories

Author:	Jasmin Lamorie - Senior Corporate Planner
Authoriser:	Jeanette Wikaira - General Manager Arts, Culture and Recreation

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Attachment A: Community Outcomes 10 year plan 2024-34	49

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, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of the Dunedin communities, taking 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 10 year plan contributes to all of the objectives and priorities of the strategic framework as it describes the Council’s activities, the community outcomes, and provides a long term focus for decision making and coordination of the Council’s resources, as well as a basis for community accountability.

Māori Impact Statement

The adoption of the Te Taki Haruru - Māori Strategic Framework signals Council’s commitment to mana whenua and to its obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi. Mana whenua and Māori will have an opportunity to engage with the 10 year plan consultation process through a series of hui.

Sustainability

As part of the 10 year plan, several pieces of work are underway to give effect to Council’s commitment to sustainability, including work on developing the City Portrait, the Zero Carbon policy and the adoption of Te Taki Haruru - Māori Strategic Framework.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

This report supports development of the 10 year plan. The 10 year plan project includes specific workstreams that will review Council’s financial and infrastructure strategies to ensure they are appropriate for the future.

Financial considerations

Financial considerations (including financial sustainability) will be key considerations in the development of the 10 year plan.

Significance

The 10 year plan will include community engagement and public consultation.

Engagement – external

The 10 year plan presents an opportunity for Council to engage fully with the community across a range of issues.

Engagement - internal

Staff from across council are involved in the development of the 10 year plan.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are legal, reputational, financial and strategic risks if the 10 year plan is not well executed, or the public do not trust that the Council is showing good governance, prudent strategic and operational leadership.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Community Boards will be engaged and consulted with as part of the 10 year plan.

Council

12 December 2023

Coastal Plan Update

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The purpose of the present report is to provide an update on the St Clair – St Kilda coastal plan (Whakahekerau – Rakiātea Rautaki Tai).

2 This report provides information on the modelling programme developed to support the Coastal Plan. This modelling programme is developed in parallel with a monitoring programme (used to validate the model outputs). Combined, these two programmes constitute a technical assessment which aims to assess the performance of the Coastal Plan’s pathways (engineering options) in mitigating erosion, providing the science-based evidence necessary for resource consent application, engineering design development and implementation.

3 The estimated completion date of this technical assessment is August 2025.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes the St Clair – St Kilda Coastal Plan Update report.

BACKGROUND

4 In February 2022, in response to sea level rise and increasing storminess induced by climate change, the DCC adopted a Coastal Management Plan (CMP) for the coastal embayment of St Clair – St Kilda. The coastal embayment extends over 4 km between St Clair headland and Lawyers Head.

5 Currently, DCC has a range of coastal management and engineering approaches for the three sections of this coastline: St Clair, Middle and St Kilda Beaches. However, ongoing erosion issues have been observed at different levels.

6 The dune system along this stretch of coastline acts as a natural barrier protecting low-lying areas of South Dunedin from flooding.

7 An information gap analysis revealed that additional technical information on nearshore hydrodynamics/morphodynamics and storm impact was required to ensure the successful implementation of the coastal plan.

8 The present modelling programme aims to fill these information gaps to facilitate obtaining resource consent and ensure that the optimal coastal management approach is implemented at St Clair – St Kilda.

DISCUSSION

9 The key objectives of the modelling programme are to:

a) Establish a baseline analysis of future shoreline evolution under present and future environmental conditions (accounting for relative sea level and storminess) under the “do-nothing” scenario (no maintenance of coastal structures) and the status quo (reactive maintenance on coastal structure). This baseline analysis will allow us to identify the most vulnerable sections of the St Clair – St Kilda coastal embayment to establish an alongshore risk profile. This alongshore risk profile will allow us to establish a staged implementation of the Coastal Plan, prioritising high-risk areas.

b) Assess the performance and lifespan of the 11 pathways (e.g. groynes, sand nourishment, off-shore structures, etc.) presented in the coastal plan in mitigating erosion. This assessment will allow us to identify which pathways are the most suitable for erosion mitigation and cost-effective under present and future environmental conditions.

c) Define the failure conditions of coastal structures under extreme conditions (storm clusters) and future environmental conditions (accounting for relative sea level and storminess). This assessment will allow us to establish emergency response protocols for extreme events and environmental triggers (e.g. sand level, beach width, dune slope), informing the need to switch management strategies/pathways in response to long-term environmental changes. This information is required to implement the Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathway (DAPP) approach recommended by the Ministry for the Environment to mitigate the impact of climate change in coastal areas.

d) Use a multi-criteria analysis based on the social, environmental, and economic impacts of each pathway presented in the Coastal Plan to define the optimal combination of pathways for erosion mitigation.

10 This technical assessment will lower the risk of negative environmental, social, and economic impact of the coastal plan by pre-testing options and filtering out those unfit for purpose.

11 The estimated completion date of the modelling programme is August 2025, and the timeframe for key deliverables is as follows:

Deliverables and milestones	Timeframe
Coastal Plan Assessment
Individual assessment of pathway performance in mitigating erosion	March 2025
Dune failure condition and environmental trigger definition
Dune Failure Assessment Report	November 2024
Environmental Trigger Definition Report	June 2025
Summary of Optimal Combination of Pathways
Recommendation report on optimal combination of pathways based on multicriteria analysis	August 2025

Implications for other adaptation and environmental programs

12 The outcomes of the modelling programme will have implications for the South Dunedin Future (SDF) programme, notably regarding the definition of the optimal management strategy (Programme led by DCC and ORC). Applying an optimal management strategy for erosion will provide a lead time for the SDF adaptation work programme.

13 The technical assessment strategy developed through this modelling programme to identify the optimal approach to erosion mitigation could be implemented in other areas presenting high erosion risk along Dunedin’s coastline. These areas will be highlighted by the Coastal Hazard Screening programme in progress (programme led by DCC and ORC).

Alignment with Mana Whenua and community values

14 Mana Whenua and local communities have actively participated in developing the Coastal Plan.

15 Further engagement with Mana Whenua and the community will be required during the refinement of the pathway designs.

Implication for the annual and long-term plan

16 Based on the delivery timeline of the modelling programme, the consent, design, and implementation costs of the selected pathways will likely impact the 2026-2036 Long-term Plans.

OPTIONS

17 As this is a report for noting there are no options for consideration.

NEXT STEPS

18 Staff will continue developing the monitoring programme used to support the modelling work.

19 Staff will continue maintaining coastal structures.

Signatories

Author:

Ben Hogan - Transport Delivery Manager

Raphael Krier-Mariani - Coastal Specialist

Authoriser:

David Ward - Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Development

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, 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 Coastal Plan project contributes to key elements of Council’s Strategic Framework.

Māori Impact Statement

Ōtākou Rūnaka has been involved in the process of Coastal Plan development. In alignment with te tiriti o Waitangi, Mana whenua will continue involvement with the determination of implementation pathways.

Sustainability

The recommended option will assist in planning for the effects of climate change, improving the sustainability of coastal management practises at Ocean Beach. Furthermore, management options explored within the dynamic adaptive management framework may provide opportunities for more sustainable management of the recreational and amenity aspects of Ocean Beach.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The adaptation preferences generated through the recommended approach would be considered in the 2026-2036 LTP.

Financial considerations

This work is budgeted for in the 2023 to 2025 annual plans.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

It is recognised that the success of the engagement process will largely determine the degree of public buy-in to the recommended approach.

DCC Staff meet with the St Clair Action Group (SCAG) and the Otago Regional Council (ORC). Neither of these groups has expressed opinions contrary to the recommended option of this report.

Engagement – internal

Engagement - internal

Internal engagement to this point has primarily been centred around the South Dunedin Futures Group and workstreams in the climate change adaptation space.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

In making a decision to take action, public health and safety risks are likely to be mitigated over the long-term. Council’s legal obligation to manage the hazardous fill materials at this coast will also be addressed through the recommended option.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

St Clair – St Kilda Beach is of interest to the wider community, including those areas covered by

Community Boards.

Council

12 December 2023

Kettle Park Landfill Investigations Update

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the Kettle Park coastal landfill short term engineering options to mitigate the risk of exposure to contaminant at the seaward dune face at Kettle park (east of Moana Rua Road).

2 The volume and concentration of landfill material in the dune system is larger than anticipated, and the landfill material (approx. 33,430m³) is at risk of being exposed from erosion under the present and future sea level conditions given predicted Sea Level Rise (SLR) and storminess associated with weather patterns (particularly the presently observed El Niño Southern Oscillation).

3 Short-term engineering options for immediate risk mitigation are required while long-term remediation options are being refined.

4 The preferred short-term engineering option consists of mitigating the risk of exposure using geotextile bags for high-risk areas (cost estimated to reach up to $5m) while continuing to develop a long-term risk elimination/mitigation strategy.

5 The long-term options for the Kettle Park landfill are being developed and must be compared with a greater suite of options. These options are reliant on coastal modelling work, currently in progress.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves an overspend of up to $5m to complete immediate works to mitigate the risk of landfill discharge by using geotextile bags for high risk areas, while the long-term remediation strategy for the Kettle Park landfill is being refined.

BACKGROUND

6 Indications of the presence of a coastal landfill were first indicated in a 2011 technical report aimed at testing materials exposed in the dune face for contaminants. This initial report concluded that the nature of contaminants of the material exposed was from landfill material.

7 In 2020, further investigations were commissioned by the DCC staff to assess the potential impact of the exposed landfill materials on Human health. The investigation concluded that the concentration of contaminants in the materials exposed in the seaward dune face did not exceed standards for Human Health safety. However, asbestos was identified in the exposed material, indicating a potential presence of larger volumes of asbestos and contaminants behind the dunes.

8 The first investigation of Kettle Park Coastal Landfill content and extent was undertaken by DCC and presented to the Council in May 2023. However, this investigation did not extend to the eroding dunes fronting the landfill. Thus, the Council decided to extend the investigation to the dune system.

9 The DCC staff commissioned further investigations. The key results of this latest investigation are summarised below.

DISCUSSION

10 Stage 1 of the investigation indicates that:

a. There are waste materials within the dune system containing elevated concentrations of metals (exceeding class A and local landfills screening criterion as well as environmental guidelines for sediment quality) and asbestos (exceeding commercial/industrial land use or NZ Asbestos in Soil "all site uses" criteria).

b. The landfill material layer in the dune system reaches up to 5m in thickness and 8m in depth to the East of Moana Rua Road. This landfill material is only meters away from being exposed at the seaward dune face (estimated 4m to 7m from the dune face). The total estimated volume of landfill material in the 15m wide dune system ranges between 22,000 m³ and 63,800 m³.

c. Presently, the landfill material is covered by soil /sand and is only sporadically exposed, which is unlikely to present a significant risk to the public and the environment. However, if significant volumes of landfill waste become exposed following erosion events, the risk to the public and the environment will be greater.

11 Stage 2 of the investigation indicates that:

a. Under present environmental conditions (storm and sea level), the erosion potential at Kettle Park can reach up to 24 m based on the combination of observed erosion potential during storm clusters and the projected effects of sea level rise. This value increases with the projected sea level rise under the range of moderate emission scenarios considered by DCC.

b. The total amount of waste material potentially at-risk ranges between 33,430 m³ (presently) and 176,630 m³ (in 100 years).

12 Stage 3 of the investigation considered the applicability of the short-term option presented in the Coastal Plan (Whakahekerau – Rakiātea Rautaki Tai) to mitigate and eliminate the risk of landfill exposure from erosion.

a. Short-term risk mitigation option: A dune toe stabilisation option consisting of implementing geobags on a maximum alongshore distance of 1.5 km in front of Kettle Park to stabilise the dune toe is being considered. The existing consent RM13.428.01 allows the DCC to occupy the above-mentioned area with geobags and reno mattresses until July 2034. The rough cost estimate to implement this option for the entire length of Kettle Park is $6M. However, phase 1 of the investigation indicates that landfill material volumes decrease west of Moana Rua Road. Thus, $5M is considered sufficient to prioritise high-risk areas.

13 Collectively, the optimal approach would consist of mitigating the immediate risk of exposure using geotextile bags while developing long-term risk elimination/mitigation strategies.

14 The options from the Coastal Plan focusing on intervening in the foreshore and nearshore (e.g. sand nourishment, groynes, offshore structures) are also being considered. However, it must be noted that options consisting of intervening in the foreshore (the beach) and the nearshore (surf zone) can reduce the risk of erosion but will not contribute to eliminating the landfill material at risk.

Implications for other adaptation and environmental programs

15 The erosion risk described in this study will have implications for the South Dunedin Future program, notably regarding the weakening of the western extremity of the dune system protecting the low-lying ground near Forbury Park from coastal inundation (Program led by DCC and ORC).

16 The risk of contaminant discharge within the coastal environment will have implications for the Ōrau marine reserve, which is expected to be implemented in mid-2024 (Program led by the Department of Conservation, DOC).

Alignment with Mana Whenua and community values

17 Mana Whenua and local communities have actively participated in developing the Coastal Plan, from which the high-level risk elimination strategies presented above have been extracted.

18 Further engagement with Mana Whenua and the community will be required during the refinement of the design of the risk management options presented in this investigation.

Implication for the annual and long-term plan

19 The costs of the risk mitigation options considered above will likely impact the Annual and Long Term Plans.

OPTIONS

20 Immediate works are needed to mitigate the risk of landfill exposure from erosion associated with the El Nino Southern Oscillation, therefore there are no options.

NEXT STEPS

21 Implement a dune toe stabilisation option to reduce the risk of landfill exposure from winter storms.

22 Develop a remediation strategy in collaboration with ORC and Mana Whenua.

Signatories

Author:

Ben Hogan - Transport Delivery Manager

Raphael Krier-Mariani - Coastal Specialist

Authoriser:

Jeanine Benson - Group Manager Transport

David Ward - Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Development

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, 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 presented reports on Kettle Park Landfill investigation and remediationCoastal Plan project contributes to key elements of Council's Strategic Framework.

Māori Impact Statement

Ōtākou Rūnaka have been involved in the process of Coastal Plan development. While mana whenua

has not contributed to this investigation, they will continue involvement with the determination of

implementation pathways. In alignment with te tiriti o Waitangi, staff will engage with mana whenua (through Aukaha) to refine remediation designs for the dune system, considering the implications for the coastal environment.

Sustainability

There will be economic, social and environmental impacts and considerations as a result of these

findings. Kettle Park landfill remediation will likely have implications in terms of sustainability. The social, environmental, and economic impacts will be considered during the refinement of long-term remediation options.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There will be financial and strategic impacts as a result of these findings. The cost (to be confirmed) associated with mitigating the present risk of contaminant discharge will have to be considered in the annual plan and the 2024-2034 Long-Term Plan. The staff anticipate that the risk mitigation costs at Kettle Park, located at Middles Beach, will likely result in the need for a staged implementation of the Coastal Plan for areas presenting lower risk to the environment (Saint Clair and Saint Kilda beaches).

Financial considerations

Financial impacts are discussed in the report.

Significance

The Council's decision following this report's findings is likely to have a 'High' overall significance based on the importance to Dunedin; community interest; consistency with existing policy and strategy; and impact on Council's finances, capacity and capability

Engagement – external

We engaged with the Otago Regional Council to identify sources of funding for landfill remediation.

Engagement - internal

Internal engagement has been undertaken with key stakeholders including Waste Management, Parks and Recreation, City Development, House Legal counsel and South Dunedin Future staff.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

The May 2023 investigation report described the potential risks of the contaminated material on human health and the environment, classifying these risks as low under the present reactive management strategy. The present report indicates that the risk profile for Human Health and the environment will most likely increase if proactive mitigation approaches are not implemented based on the fact that landfill material is closer to the dune face and erosion risk is greater than anticipated.

Reputational and environmental risks have been identified regarding landfill discharge in the coastal environment, notably considering the upcoming implementation of the Ōrau marine reserve.

A legal risk has been identified as DCC is legally responsible for any containment discharge into the environment from the Kettle Park landfill.

The mitigation of these risks will depend on the implantation of an efficient coastal management strategy, including a short-term risk mitigation strategy and long-term remedial of the landfill.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Kettle Park and St Clair Beach are of interest to the wider community, including those areas covered by Community Boards.

Council

12 December 2023

Ōtepoti Dunedin Heritage Action Plan

Department: City Development

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report asks Council to adopt the draft Ōtepoti Dunedin Heritage Action Plan 2023 (HAP) (Attachment A) and the HAP Implementation Plan (Attachment B).

2 A Council resolution on 22 February 2023 asked staff to develop a Heritage Action Plan. The proposed HAP sets out the background and methodology for the work and proposes eight outcomes for future work. A HAP Implementation Plan, which sets out actions to support the outcomes, has also been prepared. The HAP will replace the 2007 Heritage Strategy.

3 The plan and associated actions were developed from workshops held by the Heritage Action Plan Advisory Group (HAPAG) that was established to provide input into the HAP and a community and heritage building owner survey. Mana whenua consultancy Aukaha, also provided advice on the content and actions proposed for the HAP Implementation Plan.

4 The HAP builds on the previous work of the 2007 Heritage Strategy and the Dunedin Heritage Fund. The community benefits of adopting the HAP include: a planned strategic approach to DCC’s work to conserve Dunedin’s built heritage; focused actions that will help meet the challenges of working with Dunedin’s built heritage; and working alongside heritage advocates, developers, and heritage building owners to further contribute to Dunedin’s cultural and economic wellbeing.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Adopts the Ōtepoti Dunedin Heritage Action Plan 2023

b) Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer the power to correct typographical errors or to make minor amendments to the content of the Ōtepoti Dunedin Heritage Action Plan

c) Notes the Ōtepoti Dunedin Heritage Implementation Plan 2023

d) Notes that next steps in the production and implementation of the Ōtepoti Dunedin Heritage Implementation Plan 2023 include:

i) a further report seeking direction from Council on the range and scope of the Ōtepoti Dunedin HAP 2023, as part of the 10 Year Plan 2024-34 considerations.

ii) giving effect to the Ōtepoti Dunedin HAP 2023

BACKGROUND

RMA Provisions

5 Protecting historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development is identified as a matter of national importance under Section 6(f) of the Resource Management Act 1991. Dunedin’s District Plan is required to give effect to this provision. The 2GP includes a schedule of 784 heritage buildings, 50 structures, ~~and~~ 41 sites, and 19 heritage precincts containing a further 925 character contributing buildings, which are managed by the heritage provisions of the plan.

Existing Heritage Strategy

6 Council’s existing Heritage Strategy (August 2007) sets out the vision and goals for sustainable management of Dunedin’s heritage. It provides a framework to guide the Council’s future work with property owners and other organisations.

7 One outcome of the Heritage Strategy was the 2010 Heritage Buildings Economic Re-Use Steering Group (HBERSG). The group was formed to investigate the barriers to, and opportunities for, the re-use of commercial heritage buildings in Dunedin. This steering group contributed to the revitalisation of the Warehouse Precinct; however, it is no longer active.

8 The 2007 Heritage Strategy was prepared prior to the 2017 changes to the earthquake prone building regulations in the Building Act 2004, the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 that disestablished local branch committees, and the 2010 revisions to the NZ ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites) Charter.

Dunedin Heritage Fund

9 The Dunedin Heritage Fund (DHF) was established in 1993 with the purpose of encouraging the retention, repair, preservation, and maintenance of historic places (buildings, structures, and sites) in Dunedin. The DHF is funded and administered by the DCC and managed by the Dunedin Heritage Fund Committee which has membership from DCC, Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga (HNZPT) and the Southern Heritage Trust (SHT). Council provides an annual grant to the Fund of $680,700. In the 2022-2023 year, requests for funding totalled over $2.2 million.

Council resolution to develop a Heritage Action Plan

10 At the 22 February 2023 Council Annual Planning Meeting, Council passed a resolution requiring staff to develop a Heritage Action Plan in time for the ten-year plan in January 2024.

Moved (Cr Sophie Barker/Cr Kevin Gilbert):

That the Council:

a) Approves the draft 2023/24 operating budget for the Community and

Planning Group.

b) Approves the draft 2023/24 fees and charges schedules for the Community

and Planning Group.

c) Ask staff to develop a Heritage Action Plan (in time for the ten-year plan in

January 2024).

Motion carried (CNL/2023/035)

11 On 19 June 2023, SPEC approved the Terms of Reference for the HAPAG, noting the proposed programme, establishment and membership of an advisory group, and workshop focus areas (Appendix C). The purpose of advisory group was to provide advice on the development of a Heritage Action Plan.

Moved (Cr Sophie Barker/Cr David Benson-Pope):

That the Committee:

a) Approves the Heritage Action Plan Advisory Group Terms of Reference.

b) Notes the proposed programme and workshop focus areas.

Motion carried (SPECC/2023/022)

12 The primary focus of the HAP builds on DCC’s earlier heritage strategy for the built environment comprising of both publicly and privately owned places. The intention of the HAP is to also support the work of mana whenua to care for their significant places, and the stories of these places and how these might be more visible in the built environment.

DISCUSSION

13 The following discussion sets out the process by which the HAP 2023 was developed.

Heritage Action Plan Advisory Group Workshops

14 The 22 February 2023 Council resolution gave rise to an examination of known and emerging risks affecting the historic built environment, and a review of the way Council manages its own assets and statutory functions. It also allowed DCC to consider how Council works with the community to support building owners to look after their own historic buildings.

15 The HAPAG members comprised three elected members, key stakeholders (Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga, Southern Heritage Trust), and community members. To represent the built heritage community, expressions of interest were sought from those with experience with heritage buildings, including developers/owners, contractors, heritage consultants and architects.

16 Staff reviewed the goals and actions of the 2007 Heritage Strategy and of the HBERSG. Staff then identified key challenges and opportunities for built heritage to be discussed in a series of four workshops.

17 The advisory group discussed the workshop topics in detail and the following key themes emerged under various discussion topics: application of the Building Act; seismic upgrading, improving heritage information, the complexity of processes, and financial incentives and disincentives.

Community Survey

18 To canvas the views of the wider Dunedin community a survey was undertaken. The survey received 182 responses, including 76 from owners of heritage buildings. A summary of the survey responses is appended to the HAP.

Engagement with Aukaha on behalf of Mana Whenua

19 Heritage Advisors met with Aukaha as representatives of mana whenua to understand their aspirations for the HAP. Aukaha provided advice on the content and actions proposed for the HAP Implementation Plan.

Councillor Workshop

20 A councillor workshop was held 26 October 2023. Staff provided an overview of the work to date and sought feedback on ideas proposed for the HAP.

Key issues and Challenges affecting Built Heritage

21 Key issues, and challenges affecting built heritage were identified during the development of the HAP. These issues, listed below, and potential approaches are discussed in detail in the HAP.

· Demolition of historic buildings

· Neglected Buildings

· Compliance with Seismic Requirements

· Unsympathetic Development

· Financial Tools

· Building Act 2004

· Complexity of Regulatory Requirements

· Identifying, Assessing and Protecting Heritage Buildings

· Making Information Accessible

· Trades & Professionals

· DCC as a Property Owner

Heritage Action Plan Outcomes

22 In developing the Ōtepoti Dunedin HAP, DCC has identified eight outcomes that respond to the key issues and challenges identified by the advisory group, survey respondents, and Aukaha. Proposed work to support the eight outcomes, listed below, are detailed in the HAP

· Outcome One: More heritage places are adapted for re-use, conserved, upgraded to comply with code requirements

· Outcome Two: Earthquake prone heritage buildings are strengthened rather than demolished

· Outcome Three: Demolition by neglect is reduced

· Outcome Four: More heritage places with significant heritage values are identified and protected by the 2GP

· Outcome Five: Ōtepoti Dunedin’s heritage places are understood, valued, and promoted

· Outcome Six: Vacant sites in heritage precincts are developed with sympathetic and high-quality new buildings, including supporting mana whenua in making visible indigenous design and stories in the built environment

· Outcome Seven: The DCC consistently demonstrates a best practice and balanced approach to looking after its own heritage places

· Outcome Eight: Ōtepoti Dunedin builds a strong and resilient body of trained and experienced heritage trades and professionals.

Heritage Action Plan – Implementation Plan

23 The implementation plan proposes thirty-five actions to support the outcomes. Actions have been planned over a three-year period. The implementation plan outlines where additional resource will be required to deliver these actions within the prescribed timeframe.

OPTIONS

Option One – Adopt the Ōtepoti Dunedin HAP 2023, which would replace the 2007 Heritage Strategy

24 Under this option, Council adopts the Ōtepoti Dunedin HAP 2023, notes the Heritage Implementation Plan and staff undertake the work outlined in the next steps below.

Advantages

· Opportunity to improve the community’s understanding of Council’s role in protecting heritage and identify and protect more places for future generations.

· Opportunity to demonstrate a ‘wrap around’ approach to heritage buildings and provide practical support to owners of earthquake prone buildings.

· Opportunity to focus staff work, funding incentives, and track progress around buildings subject to demolition by neglect.

· Council seen to encourage sympathetic upgrading and reuse of heritage buildings and development of vacant/ underutilised sites.

· Opportunity to generate potentially higher rates revenue from increased rating differentials on vacant buildings and sites.

· Opportunity to encourage redevelopment of heritage buildings and the potential for increase rates revenue resulting from higher value buildings.

· Opportunity for the heritage community to advocate for change to legislation that affects built heritage.

· Opportunity to encourage traditional trades and heritage professionals to work in Dunedin to provide better support for building owners.

Disadvantages

· Potential loss of revenue when financial incentive tools are developed.

· Some building owners will oppose heritage protection of their buildings.

· The ongoing advisory group, with a focus on lobbying and/or responding to consultation processes, may require significant work.

Option Two – Adopt the Ōtepoti Dunedin HAP 2023 with changes

Under this option, Council adopts the Ōtepoti Dunedin HAP 2023 with changes.