Agenda of Infrastructure Services Committee

Infrastructure Services Committee

18 February 2025

Infrastructure Services Committee

MINUTES

Minutes of an ordinary meeting of the Infrastructure Services Committee held in the Council Chamber, Dunedin Public Art Gallery, The Octagon on Tuesday 15 October 2024, commencing at 10.00 am

PRESENT

Chairperson	Cr Jim O'Malley
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Brent Weatherall
Members	Cr Sophie Barker	Cr David Benson-Pope
	Cr Christine Garey	Cr Kevin Gilbert
	Cr Carmen Houlahan	Cr Marie Laufiso
	Cr Cherry Lucas	Cr Mandy Mayhem
	Ms Marlene McDonald	Mayor Jules Radich
	Cr Lee Vandervis	Cr Steve Walker
	Cr Andrew Whiley

IN ATTENDANCE

Scott MacLean (General Manager Climate and City Growth), David Ward (General Manager 3 Waters and Transition), Robert West (General Manager Corporate Services), Carolyn Allan (Chief Financial Officer), Josh von Pein (Programme Manager), Glen Hazelton (Project Director – Central City Plan), Jeanine Benson (Group Manager Transport), Simon Speirs (Team Leader Transport Regulation), Helen Chapman (Senior Transport Planner), John McAndrew (Acting Group Manager 3 Waters), Jarod Oliver (Planning Manager 3 Waters), Christian German (Capital Delivery Manager Property), David Arlidge (Manager Property) and Clare Sullivan (Manager Governance)

Governance Support Officer Rebecca Murray

1 karakia timatanga

Ms Marlene McDonald opened the meeting with a Karakia Timatanga.

2 Public Forum

2.1 Water Fluoridation

Bruce Spittle addressed the meeting regarding water fluoridation and responded to questions.

2.2 Water Fluoridation

Russel McLean addressed the meeting regarding water fluoridation and responded to questions.

2.3 Erosion

Carmel Spencer spoke and distributed information on behalf of the Harington Point residents on erosion. Ms Spencer responded to questions.

3 Apologies
	An apology was received from Cr Bill Acklin and apologies for lateness from Mayor Jules Radich and Ms Donna Matahaere-Atariki.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Brent Weatherall): That the Committee: Accepts the apology from Cr Bill Acklin and the apologies for lateness from Mayor Jules Radich and Ms Donna Matahaere-Atariki. Motion carried (ISC/2024/053)

4 Confirmation of agenda

Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Brent Weatherall):

That the Committee:

Confirms the agenda without addition or alteration.

Motion carried (ISC/2024/054)

5 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 (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Brent Weatherall):

That the Committee:

a) Notes the Elected or Independent Members' Interest Register; and

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

Motion carried (ISC/2024/055)

6 Confirmation of Minutes

6.1 Infrastructure Services Committee meeting - 17 September 2024

Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Brent Weatherall):

That the Committee:

Confirms the public part of the minutes of the Infrastructure Services Committee meeting held on 17 September 2024 as a correct record with a minor amendment.

Motion carried (ISC/2024/056)

Part A Reports

7 Actions from Resolutions of Infrastructure Services Committee Meetings
	A report from Civic provided an update on the implementation of resolutions made at Infrastructure Services Committee meetings. General Manager Climate and City Growth (Scott MacLean) and Group Manager Transport (Jeanine Benson) responded to questions.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Cherry Lucas): That the Committee: Notes the Open Actions from resolutions of Infrastructure Services Committee meetings. Motion carried (ISC/2024/057)

8 Infrastructure Services Committee Forward Work Programme
	A report from Civic provided an update on the Infrastructure Services Committee forward work programme. General Manager Climate and City Growth (Scott MacLean), General Manager 3 Waters and Transition (David Ward), General Manager Corporate Services (Robert West), Group Manager Transport (Jeanine Benson) and Team Leader Transport Regulation Management (Simon Spiers) responded to questions.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Steve Walker): That the Committee: Notes the Infrastructure Services Committee forward work programme. Motion carried (ISC/2024/058)

9 Retail Quarter Upgrade - Update Report
	A report provided an update on the Retail Quarter Upgrade project and discussed how the project had tracked relative to its budget and timeframes. The Project Director – Central City Plan (Glen Hazelton), Chief Financial Officer (Carolyn Allan), Programme Manager (Josh von Pein), General Manager Corporate Services (Robert West), General Manager Climate and City Growth (Scott MacLean) and Team Leader Transport Regulation Management (Simon Spiers) responded to questions. Cr Carmen Houlahan left the meeting at 10.59 am and returned to the meeting at 11.02 am. Cr Christine Garey left the meeting at 11.23 am and returned to the meeting at 11.26 am.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Marie Laufiso): That the Committee: Adjourns the meeting for five minutes. Motion carried

	The meeting adjourned at 11.58 am and reconvened at 12.05 pm.

	Cr David Benson-Pope left the meeting at 11.58 am.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Mandy Mayhem): That the Committee: Adjourns the meeting for two minutes. Motion carried

	The meeting adjourned at 12.10 pm and reconvened at 12.12 pm.

	Cr Lee Vandervis left the meeting at 12.17 pm.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Cherry Lucas): That the Committee: Notes the Retail Quarter Upgrade – Update Report. Motion carried (ISC/2024/059)

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Mandy Mayhem): That the Committee: Adjourns the meeting for 30 minutes. Motion carried

	The meeting adjourned at 12.30 pm and reconvened at 1.02 pm

	Cr Steve Walker left the meeting at 12.30 pm.

10 Update on the outcome of the National Land Transport Funding (NLTP)
	A report presented the outcomes of the midterm review of the 2021-2031 Otago Southland Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) review and the 2024-27 National Land Transport Programme (NLTP). Senior Transport Planner (Helen Chapman) and Group Manager Transport (Jeanine Benson) responded to questions. Cr Carmen Houlahan entered the meeting at 1.06 pm.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Brent Weatherall): That the Committee: Notes the update on the outcome of the National Land Transport Programme funding. Motion carried (ISC/2024/060)

11 Naming of one public road and one private right of way
	A report sought approval of two road names for one public road and one private right of way in Wakari. The Team Leader Transport Regulation Management (Simon Spiers) responded to questions.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Christine Garey): That the Committee: a) Approves the naming of the public road located at 67 Wakari Road as ‘Tapley Close’. b) Approves the naming of the private way located at 67 Wakari Road as ‘McFarlane Lane’ Motion carried (ISC/2024/061)

12 Proposed parking changes - Hearings Committee September 2024 recommendations
	A report presented recommendations from the Hearings Committee meeting held on 13 September 2024 on proposed changes and corrections to parking restrictions. Cr Steve Walker entered the meeting at 2.17 pm. Cr Cherry Lucas and Team Leader Transport Regulation Management (Simon Spiers) responded to questions.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Cherry Lucas): That the Committee: a) Adopts the proposed changes to parking and traffic restrictions shown in the September 2024 update of the Dunedin City Council's traffic and parking restrictions database Webmap - General Parking Changes - September 2024 b) Notes that Committee has considered feedback from consultation on the proposed changes to parking restrictions. c) Notes that all parking restrictions previously approved by Council remain unchanged. Motion carried (ISC/2024/062)

13 3 Waters Activity Report for the period ending 30 September 2024
	A report provided an update on 3 Waters activities for the period ending 30 September 2024. Planning Manager 3 Waters (Jared Oliver), Acting Group Manager 3 Waters (John MacAndrew) and General Manager 3 Waters and Transition (David Ward) responded to questions. Cr Carmen Houlahan left the meeting at 2.32 pm and returned to the meeting at 2.34 pm. Cr Sophie Barker left the meeting at 2.56 pm and returned to the meeting at 3.03 pm.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Christine Garey): That the Committee: Notes the 3 Waters Activity Report for the Period Ending 30 September 2024. Motion carried (ISC/2024/063)

14 Property Services and Parking Operations Activity Report for the Period Ending 30 September 2024
	A report provided an update on Property Services and Parking Operations activities for the period ending 30 September 2024. The General Manager Corporate Services (Robert West), Manager Property (David Arlidge), and Capital Delivery Manager Property (Christian German) responded to questions.

	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Kevin Gilbert): That the Committee: Notes the Property Services and Parking Operations Activity Report for the Period Ending 30 September 2024. Motion carried (ISC/2024/064)

15 Items for Consideration by the Chair

Items considered by the Chair:

Cr Sophie Barker:

Requests the 3 Waters Strategy review to be included in the Infrastructure Services Committee Forward Work Programme.

Requests staff prepare a report for George Street Outcomes Report Backs to be included in the Infrastructure Services Committee Forward Work Programme for early 2025 calendar.

Requests staff prepare a report for Surrey Street Diversion Project Update Report to be included in the Infrastructure Services Committee Forward Work Programme.

Cr Jim O’Malley:

Requests staff prepare an interim report for the Caversham Tunnel Project regarding the removal of external party assets from the tunnel to be included in the Infrastructure Services Committee Forward Work Programme.

Cr Cherry Lucas

Requests staff continue discussions on best practice reporting to the Committee on Major Projects updates.

Resolution to Exclude the Public

Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Mandy Mayhem):

That the Committee:

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 Infrastructure Services Committee meeting - 17 September 2024 - 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.	.
C2 Confidential Actions from Resolutions of Infrastructure Services Committee Meetings	S7(2)(a) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.
C3 Confidential Infrastructure Services Committee Forward Work Programme	S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

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 (ISC/2024/065)

The meeting went into non-public at 3.40 pm and then concluded at 3.42 pm

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

CHAIRPERSON

Infrastructure Services Committee

18 February 2025

Waste and Environmental Solutions activity report for the six month period ending 31 December 2024

Department: Waste and Environmental Solutions

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The purpose of this report is to provide an update on Waste and Environmental Solutions activities for the six-month period ending 31 December 2024.

2 This report also recommends the Committee appoint a Hearings Panel for the Draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) Hearings Process.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Committee:

a) Notes the Waste and Environmental Solutions activity report for the six-month period ending 31 December 2024.

b) Appoints a Hearings Panel for the WMMP Hearings Process.

BACKGROUND

3 The Waste and Environmental Solutions activity provides for effective refuse and recyclables collection, resource recovery, and refuse disposal in a way that protects public health and minimises impact on the environment.

4 The Waste and Environmental Solutions activity includes:

· Planning and policy functions in line with Part Four of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008: “Responsibilities of territorial authorities in relation to waste management and minimisation”

· Administration of Waste Minimisation Grants: Small Project Grants, Community Project/Initiative Grant, and Waste Minimisation Innovation and Development (Commercial) Grant

· Kerbside collection of waste and recycling for most urban and city residents and small businesses

· Disposal Facilities (landfill and transfer station) for waste and a Resource Recovery Park (recycling and reuse store) are provided at Council’s Green Island site. The Waikouaiti site has both a transfer station for waste disposal and recycling facilities. Middlemarch has a transfer station and a community hosted recycling drop-off centre. Waste collected at the community transfer stations is then transferred to Green Island Landfill for disposal. Recycling is sent to the Material Recovery Centre for sorting and transportation to recycling markets.

· Public place recycling infrastructure and servicing is provided on the streets in the CBD and Tertiary Precinct, and several satellite locations in the district.

· Monitoring the state of the Council’s one proposed, one active, and five closed landfills in accordance with the conditions of consents.

· Monitoring the usage, capacity, and condition of public place waste and recycling infrastructure, CAA cardboard collection services, and kerbside collection services.

· Education programmes promoting “rethinking, reducing, reusing, and recycling” practices.

· Education, auditing, and enforcement activities aimed at increasing the quality or quantity of recovered materials.

DISCUSSION

5 Level of Service – Refuse collection and kerbside recycling meet customer expectations.

a) The Residents Opinion Survey data for the first six months of 24/25 indicates that the target for customer satisfaction is currently being met. Satisfaction with kerbside recycling is 79%; however, satisfaction with kerbside rubbish collection is 61%. This gives an average satisfaction level of 70%.

6 Level of Service – Waste minimisation targets are met.

a) The waste minimisation target for municipal solid waste (being a maximum of 638kg / per person, per annum by 2030) has been consistently achieved being below the maximum target of 638kg / per person, per annum since 2019. The data for the first six months of 24/25 indicates the target will be achieved this financial year.

b) The data for the first six months of 24/25 indicates the target for municipal solid waste disposed to landfill and incineration will not be met. The future establishment of the Green Island Resource Recovery Park facilities is expected to significantly reduce the solid waste disposed to landfill.

c) The waste minimisation target for diversion of recyclable or reusable materials is not being met. The future establishment of the Green Island Resource Recovery Park facilities is expected to significantly increase the diversion of recyclable or reusable materials.

7 Other areas of work:

a) Review of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan - The first draft of the amended WMMP has been completed and approved for public consultation.

b) Councillor workshops and meetings were held on the 1 August, 8 October, and 9 October 2024 that sought feedback on the draft Plan.

c) The draft Plan was presented to Council on the 30^th of October and was approved for public consultation. Consultation will be a Special Consultative Procedure, followed by a hearings process, with the final draft being presented for adoption in mid-2025.

d) On the 29 of January 2025, Council approved the public consultation period to be carried out from 30 January – 28 of February 2025 (CNL/2025/020). A Hearing Panel is required with Hearings scheduled for the first week of April 2025. Subsequently, this report seeks appointment of a Hearings Panel.

e) Review of Litter Compliance Policy – The Litter Compliance Policy (2021) has been reviewed. The new Policy was approved by ISCOM for public notification on 30 July 2024. It was publicly notified on 10 August 2024, and was subsequently presented to Council on 24 of September 2024 where the reviewed policy was adopted.

f) Waste Minimisation Grants – The September 2024 Waste Minimisation Community Grants closed for applications on 27 September 2024. The grant received eight applications. The total requested amount was $35,422.62. The outcomes of this funding round were decided in the November 2024 Grants Sub-Committee Meeting. Eight applicants received a share of $30,000.00. No applications were declined (refer Attachment A).

g) The September 2024 Waste Minimisation Commercial Grants closed for applications on 27 September 2024. The grant received seven applications. The total requested amount was $110,877.37. The outcomes of this funding round were decided in the November 2024 Grants Sub-Committee Meeting. Six applicants received a share of $70,000. The remaining one application was declined (refer Attachment A).

h) The Waste Minimisation Small Project Grant applications received four applications. The total requested amount was $1,940.00. These small grant applications were approved by the Grants Sub-Committee Chair and noted by the Grants Sub-Committee at the November 2024 meeting (refer Attachment A).

i) Further to Waste Minimisation contestable grants, the waste levy also annually provides grants or funds approved under financial delegation to some proven programmes for non-contested Community Service Agreements. (refer Attachment A).

j) Waste Futures Project – New kerbside services were introduced on 1 July 2024. This also included a comprehensive communications campaign and improvements to the customer services website and smart-phone application.

k) Construction of the organic waste receival building at Green Island was completed on 17 June 2024. Food and garden waste collected under the new kerbside collection system, and any green waste dropped off by the public at Green Island, is consolidated and shredded within the enclosed organics building and then loaded onto trucks to be transported for composting off-site at the Enviro NZ plant in Timaru.

l) The resource consents required for the construction and operation of the Green Island Resource Recovery Park (RRP) facilities were granted by the Otago Regional Council in December 2024, and the appeals period ended in mid-January 2025 without any appeals being lodged. Final consents have now been received.

m) A new composting operation for food and garden waste will be established at Green Island as part of the wider RRP development during 2024/25 – 2026/27. Procurement of processing equipment for both the composting and recycling sorting facilities has advanced to final negotiations with preferred suppliers, and we expect the contracts to be awarded in February. It is expected that design, build, and shipping of equipment to Green Island will take approximately 12 – 15 months. Once the RRP is operational, both organic waste and mixed recycling collections will be processed at the Green Island facilities and the transport of material to Timaru will cease.

n) Kerbside collection and processing – During the six-month period July – December 2024 the new kerbside collection system has collected and processed:

o 5,762.9 tonnes of general solid waste

o 2,294.3 tonnes of mixed recycling

o 1,472.1 tonnes of glass

o 7,618.3 tonnes of food and garden waste

o) Contamination rates for food and garden waste collections remain low; however, contamination rates in mixed recycling collections are high, mainly due to simple mistakes. For example, dirty recyclable material, e.g., plastic meat trays with meat residue that should be rinsed off before recycling, soft plastic product bags/packaging that can be collected and dropped off to a participating soft plastics supermarket or retailers, and food waste which should be placed in the provided food waste bins. This contamination will continue to be the focus of ongoing education campaigns and kerbside bin inspections.

p) Smooth Hill Landfill – Council consulted on funding for the development of Smooth Hill as part of the 2021 – 2031 10‑Year Plan. Construction was initially scheduled to start in the 2024-25 year and be completed in 2027; however, the conditions of consent for Smooth Hill require at least three years of baseline environmental monitoring prior to commencement of construction. Because of this requirement, construction on the new landfill is expected to start in the 2026-27 year, with projected completion in 2029-30. The baseline environmental monitoring is currently underway.

q) Green Island Landfill and Transfer Station Management – The consents for Green Island Landfill were due to expire in October 2023; however, Smooth Hill Landfill will not be ready to accept waste until 2029-30 (contingent on completion of baseline monitoring, detailed design, management plans, and construction).

r) Staff have evaluated several alternative options to ensure the City’s waste disposal demands can be met. This has led to the selection of an option which continues the filling of the southwestern area of Green Island landfill within the existing 38ha footprint and perimeter bund (subject to resource consent). The selected option is expected to extend the projected life of the landfill to between 2029 – 2031. Applications for the necessary resource consents have been submitted, publicly notified, and a hearing is scheduled for 18 and 19 March 2025.

OPTIONS

8 As this is an update report there are no options.

NEXT STEPS

9 Staff will continue the baseline environmental monitoring as required by the Smooth Hill resource consents, alongside continued engagement with the local community via the Smooth Hill Community Liaison Group and the Independent Peer Review Panel.

10 Staff will continue the resource consent process for the Green Island landfill, alongside the detailed design and procurement process for development of the new Resource Recovery Park facilities.

11 Staff will engage in the public consultation process for the amended Waste Minimisation and Management Plan.

12 A hearings period will be arranged to be held in the first week of April 2025 for the review of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

Signatories

Author:	Chris Henderson - Group Manager Waste and Environmental Solutions
Authoriser:	Scott MacLean - General Manager, Climate and City Growth

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	WMMP Grants Summary January 2025	47

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision promotes the 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	☐	☐	✔
Future Development Strategy	☐	☐	✔
Integrated Transport Strategy	☐	☐	✔
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☐	☐	✔
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	✔	☐	☐

The Waste and Environmental Solutions activity supports the outcomes of a number of strategies.

Māori Impact Statement

DCC will continue to partner with Mana whenua in key Waste Futures projects.

Sustainability

The Waste and Environmental Solutions activity contributes positively to the environmental interests of the community through refuse and recycling collection at the kerbside and public places, educating and promoting environmentally sustainable behaviour and managing landfill and transfer station facilities.

Zero carbon

The Waste and Environmental Solutions activities support a decrease in city emissions.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The Waste and Environmental Solutions activity is included in the Long-Term Plan.

Financial considerations

The updates reported are within existing operating and capital budgets.

Significance

This report is considered low in terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

As this is an update report no external engagement has been undertaken.

Engagement - internal

As this is an update report no internal engagement has been undertaken.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

As this is an update report there are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Any specific issues are discussed with the appropriate Community Board.

Infrastructure Services Committee

18 February 2025

Transport Activity Report for the Period Ending 31 December 2024

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The purpose of this report is to provide an update on Transport activities for the period ending 31 December 2024.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Committee:

a) Notes the Transport activity report for the period ending 31 December 2024.

BACKGROUND

2 The Transport activity report covers planning, construction, maintenance, and upgrading of Dunedin’s roads and footpaths.

3 The Transport activity includes:

· Maintenance of Transport corridors (footpaths, roads, cycleways), streetlights and traffic signals.

· Renewals of footpaths, roads, bridges, seawalls and traffic signals.

· Road safety education.

· Planning for major capital projects.

· Regulation (not enforcement) of parking, and speed limits.

· Asset Management of transport related assets.

· Managing and obtaining co-funding from NZTA Waka Kotahi.

DISCUSSION

Customer service

4 The current target Level of Service measure for responding to service requests within 5 days is 90%. Response times are currently sitting at 93% for the July to December 2024 reporting period. This is an improvement on last year.

A graph of a service request

Description automatically generated

Figure 1: Percentage of service requests responded to within 5 working days

Update from last report period (next steps)

5 Staff have reviewed upcoming renewals programmes for opportunities to improve network accessibility and safety. Where possible, drop kerbs will be added to renewals programmes. It should be noted, however, that co-funding rules are very explicit in that renewal’s capital must not be used for safety or mode choice enhancements.

6 Staff continue to work with the Tunnels Trust on Stage 1 of the Tunnels Trail. A procurement process for a construction contractor is underway. Discussions with KiwiRail continue but at this point, there is no safe access to the rail corridor and no agreement to access KiwiRail land.

7 Staff are in the process of assessing tenders for Licence Plate Recognition (LPR). Static wayfinding (for some carparks) is currently being rolled out.

8 Staff have continued maintaining the geobags (sand sausages), assessing weather patterns and undertaking inspections as required. There has been no significant storm activity that has created a need for remedial work on the geobags. Staff are now turning their attention to a winter maintenance regime for geobags (winter storms have a much more significant impact on the maintenance of the geobags).

Renewals programme

9 4,000m of kerb and channel renewals in Mornington, Dunedin Central, Mosgiel and North East Valley were completed in the July to December 2024 reporting period.

10 33,925m² of footpath resurfacing was completed in the July to December 2024 reporting period.

11 213,546m² of chipseal and 16,686m² of asphalt reseals were completed between October and December 2024.

12 No rehabs were completed this reporting period. The renewals and rehabilitation season has commenced.

13 At the period ending 31^st December 2024, 40% of renewals had been completed for the year.

Shaping Future Dunedin Transport

14 NZTA Waka Kotahi will be presenting to Council the outcomes of their findings into SH1 business case on 25^th February 2025.

15 Planning has been completed for Harbour Arterial, Albany Street (Central City Pedestrian and Cycling) and the Mosgiel Park and Ride.

Flood work update

16 The response to the October rain event 2024 is ongoing with over 550 sites requiring various levels of remediation.

17 In December 2024, an application for $7.82M was made to NZTA Waka Kotahi for emergency works co-funding. The application is split into two parts, the first is for short term remediation ($3.2M), and the second is for long term recovery ($4.59M). The majority of the work will be co-funded at a Funding Assistance Rate (FAR) of 51%. Any work that exceeds 10% of our annual maintenance, operations and renewals budget has a FAR of 71%.

18 Short term remediation is largely complete with the majority of physical works completed by Fulton Hogan through the DCC’s road maintenance contract. Assessment of large or complex sites as part of the long term recovery is still going through the optioneering and design phase.

19 Prioritising the restoration of sites has been made on the basis of restoring levels of service and supporting community events.

Berms

20 Staff have started looking at how other council’s manage planting requests on berms. Of the six councils identified so far, five allow planting on berms but with very strict rules. Initial risks identified with allowing berm plantings are as follows:

- Resource needs with managing applications, compliance requirements, dealing with complaints, arbitration between neighbours and change of householder(s).

- Vegetation compromising services underneath berms (over time), such as laterals.

Staff will provide a paper to Council on this subject at the 30^th April 2025 Council meeting.

Caversham Tunnel update

21 Staff are preparing a schedule to determine the tasks that need to be undertaken to enable the Caversham Tunnel to be ready ahead of the completion of the Tunnels Trail project. Discussions with the utility providers are continuing.

Cycle counts

22 There are seven sites which have had cycle count data since 2021. They are Anzac Avenue, Cumberland Street, Great King Street, North Road, The Cove, Victoria Road and the Water of Leith. The graphs below illustrate the combined trends across those seven sites over the past four years.

Figure 2: Cycle Counts 2021/22 – 2024/25 (Please note these are financial years)

Figure 3: Cycle Counts 2021/22 - 2024/25 (Please note these are financial years)

OPTIONS

23 As this is an update report there are no options.

NEXT STEPS

24 Staff will continue working on the berms paper for Council consideration in April 2025.

25 Staff will continue rolling out the renewals work programme.

26 Staff will continue working through the planning and design elements of the boardwalk construction at Portobello.

27 Staff have developed a memo to determine next steps on the speed management process which will be discussed with the Chair on Infrastructure in the coming weeks.

Signatories

Author:

Ashleigh Jarvis - Business Performance Co-ordinator

Simon Smith - Asset and Funding Manager

Authoriser:

Jeanine Benson - Group Manager Transport

Scott MacLean - General Manager, Climate and City Growth

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This report promotes the social, economic and environmental wellbeing 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 Transport activity supports the outcomes of a number of strategies.

Māori Impact Statement

Mana whenua will continue to be involved in various Transport projects.

Sustainability

The Transport activity is included in the 9 Year Plan.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

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

Financial considerations

The updates reported are within existing operating and capital budgets.

Significance

The report is considered low in terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

As this is an update report no external engagement has been undertaken.

Engagement - internal

As this is an update report, no internal engagement has been undertaken.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Any specific issues are discussed with the appropriate Community Board.

Infrastructure Services Committee

18 February 2025

Naming of one private way in Green Island

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks the approval of one private right of way in Green Island.

2 The proposed new road names (for the private way) as proposed by the developer are:

· ‘McKenzie Drive’ as the preferred name, and ‘Bluestone Ridge’ as the alternate name for the subdivision located at 150 Green Island Bush Road, Green Island.

‘McKenzie Drive’ does not comply with the Road Naming Policy however it is the developer’s preferred option, supported by the Saddle Hill Community Board, and could still be approved by the Committee. The alternate option, ‘Bluestone Ridge’ is compliant with the Road Naming Policy and is supported by staff, however it is not the developers preferred option.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Committee:

a) Approves the naming of the private way located at 150 Green Island Bush Road as ‘McKenzie Drive’ or ‘Bluestone Ridge’.

BACKGROUND

3 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

4 A ‘legal road’ is any road legally vested in the council for the purpose of a road.

5 A ‘private way’ is a privately owned driveway, lane, or access way which serves as access from private properties to a public road.

6 The subdivision located at 150 Green Island Bush Road Green Island is within the Saddle Hill Community Board area. The proposed names were presented to the Community Board at their meeting on 14 November 2024. The Board moved that they:

a) Supports the naming of the private way located at 150 Green Island Bush Road as ‘McKenzie Drive’.

DISCUSSION

7 The table presented below provides the road name proposed for this subdivision. Additional details including a full assessment for the proposed road name and a map of the new private way are provided in Attachments A, B and C.

8 It should be noted that the Road Naming Policy places less weight on the appropriateness criteria with respect to private ways.

Summary of proposed road names

Development details

Location of road

Proposed road name

Alternative road name

Recommended road name

SUB-2023-128

150 Green Island Bush Road, Green Island

Private way off Green Island Bush Road

McKenzie Drive

Bluestone Ridge

‘McKenzie Drive’ does not fully comply with the Road Naming Policy but is the developer’s preferred option and supported by the Saddle Hill Community Board

‘Bluestone Ridge’ fully complies with the Road Naming Policy but is not the developers’ preferred option

9 The developer has proposed ‘McKenzie Drive’ as the preferred option as a potential name for the private way accessed from Green Island Bush Road. As an alternative name, they have proposed ‘Bluestone Ridge’. It is noted that neither of the proposed names are selected from the road naming register.

10 The preferred name ‘McKenzie Drive’ is not compliant with the DCC Road Naming policy as it references the landowner’s last name. This therefore breaches Section 4.5 which states: ‘Road names must not be anagrams, amalgamations or derivatives of people's names…’

11 Staff requested the developer propose a different naming option, but the developer advised that they wish to proceed with this name. Staff note, that although the preferred option does not fully comply with the policy, the name ‘McKenzie Drive’ is easily identifiable and otherwise appropriate for the area.

12 The alternate name ‘Bluestone Ridge’ is compliant with the DCC Road Naming policy and holds geographical significance as it references the olivine basalt stone known as Bluestone that is quarried in the surrounding area.

OPTIONS

Option One – Recommended Option - The Committee supports the alternate name proposed as ‘Bluestone Ridge’ for the new private way to be named at 150 Green Island Bush Road.

Advantages

· The roads will be named, and sections of landowners gain a street address allowing them to progress with building and access to services.

· The use of personal names (McKenzie) are avoided.

Disadvantages

· There are no disadvantages identified with this option.

Option Two – Alternative Option – The Committee supports the preferred option proposed as ‘McKenzie Drive’

Advantages

· The road will be named and landowners gain a street address allowing them to progress with building and access to services.

Disadvantages

· Approving this option does not deter future developers from using personal names.

Option Three – Status Quo – The Committee does not support either option proposed as ‘McKenzie Drive’ and ‘Bluestone Ridge’

Advantages

· There are no advantages identified with this option.

Disadvantages

· The roads will not have a name until new options are presented. This may inconvenience new or potential new property owners within the subdivision.

NEXT STEPS

13 If the new road names are approved, staff will process the required documentation, and advise the developer and Land Information New Zealand of the new road names.

Signatories

Author:

Daniel Fitzpatrick - Graduate Engineer/Planner

Authoriser:

Jeanine Benson - Group Manager Transport

Scott MacLean - General Manager, Climate and City Growth

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Attachment A - Road name assessment for 'McKenzie Drive'	65
⇩b	Attachment B - Road name assessment for 'Bluestone Ridge'	66
⇩c	Attachment C - 150 Green Island Bush Road development plans	67

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	☐	☐	✔
Future Development Strategy	☐	☐	✔
Integrated Transport Strategy	✔	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☐	☐	✔
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	✔	☐	☐

This is an administrative function.

Māori Impact Statement

Staff are working through the road naming register to incorporate names that are meaningful for mana whenua.

Sustainability

There are no implications for the 1 year plan.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications for the 1 year plan.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There are no implications regarding external engagement.

Engagement - internal

There has been engagement within the Transport Group and Business Information Services.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflict of interests.

Community Boards

The site is situated within the Saddle Hill Community Board. Support from the Community Board was sought at their meeting of 14 November 2024. At the meeting, the Community Board moved: That the Board:

a) Supports the naming of the private way located at 150 Green Island Bush Road as ‘McKenzie Drive’.

Infrastructure Services Committee

18 February 2025

Naming of one private way in Long Beach

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks the for the naming of one private right of way in Long Beach.

2 The new road names (for the private way) as proposed by the developer are:

· ‘Settlers Lane’ as the preferred name, and ‘Knowles Lane’ as the alternate name for the subdivision located at 25 Driver Street, Long Beach.

‘Settlers Lane’ does not comply with the Road Naming Policy however is the developer’s preferred option. The alternate option, ‘Knowles Lane’ does comply with the Road Naming Policy but is not the developers preferred option.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Committee:

a) Supports the naming of the private way located at 25 Driver Street as ‘Settlers Lane’ or ‘Knowles Lane’.

BACKGROUND

4 A ‘legal road’ is any road legally vested in the council for the purpose of a road.

5 A ‘private way’ is a privately owned driveway, lane, or access way which serves as access from private properties to a public road.

6 The subdivision is located at 25 Driver Street is within the West Harbour Community Board area. The proposed names were presented to the Community Board at their meeting on the 5February 2025. The Board moved that they:

a) Support the naming of the private way located at 25 Driver Street as Knowles Lane

DISCUSSION

8 It should be noted that the Road Naming Policy places less weight on the appropriateness criteria with respect to private ways.

9 Summary of proposed road names

Development details

Location of road

Proposed road name

Alternative road name

Recommended road name

SUB-2023-111

25 Driver Street, Long Beach

Private way off Driver Street

Settlers Lane

Knowles Lane

‘Settlers Lane’ does not comply with the Road Naming Policy however it is the developer’s preferred option.

‘Knowles Lane’ fully complies with the Road Naming Policy but is not the developers’ preferred option

10 The developer has proposed ‘Settlers Lane’ as the preferred option as a potential name for the private way accessed from Driver Street. As an alternative name, they have proposed ‘Knowles Lane’. It is noted that neither of the proposed names are selected from the road naming register.

11 The developer has proposed ‘Settlers Lane’ “as many of the first European settlers in the area still have strong family connections in the area, The name ‘Settlers’ here celebrates the notion that once families move there, many stay within the community.”

12 The preferred name ‘Settlers Lane’ is not compliant with the Road Naming Policy as it breaches Rule 4.3 of the Road Naming Policy regarding to “offensive names”. The development is located the area known as Wharewerawera (Long Beach). It has been recorded in 1880 by Rāwiri Te Maire, a leading advocate for the Kāi Tahu land claims as “Ko Wharewerawera he pā tuna inaka hoki me wai tāhere kōkō hoki he taka kōrari hoki" - translating to “Wharewerawera is also a place for tuna fish, and also for sardines, and also for korari fish”. Therefore, this area has a recorded history of Kāi Tahu occupation and the use of a name referring to settlers can be interpreted as disregarding takata whenua who were there prior to the arrival of Pākehā settlers.

13 Selection of a Road Name, under the Policy, notes the appropriateness of the name must be considered. The preferred name, ‘Settlers Lane’, while fitting some of the criteria (i.e., a historical event), it overrides points c. and d. by disregarding the previous and original settlement of takata whenua. The alternative name, ‘Knowles Lane’, allows for recognition of longstanding whānau of the area, without diminishing the mana of takata whenua. This approach has been supported by the Dunedin City Council Māori Partnerships team.

14 ‘Knowles Lane’ complies with the Road Naming Policy but is not the developers preferred option. The developer has proposed this name in reference to Elizabeth (Molly) Knowles (nee: Welsh), who was the first resident to construct a crib along Beach Street pre-1925.

OPTIONS

Option One – Recommended Option – The Committee supports the alternate name proposed as ‘Knowles Lane’ as the name for the new private way

Impact assessment

15 There are no impacts identified with this option.

Debt

· No debt funding is required for this option.

Rates

· There are no impacts on rates.

Zero carbon

· There will be no changes to either the city-wide or DCC’s emissions profile.

Advantages

· The roads will be named, and sections of landowners gain a street address allowing them to progress with building and access to services.

· The use of potentially offensive terminology is avoided.

Disadvantages

· There are no disadvantages identified with this option.

Option Two – Alternative Option – The Committee supports the preferred name proposed as ‘Settlers Lane’ as the name for the new private way

Impact assessment

16 There are no impacts identified with this option.

Debt

· No debt funding is required for this option.

Rates

· There are no impacts on rates.

Zero carbon

· There will be no changes to either the city-wide or DCC’s emissions profile.

Advantages

· The road will be named, and landowners gain a street address allowing them to progress with building and access to services.

Disadvantages

· Approving the use of this name could be considered offensive.

Option Three – Status Quo – The Committee does not support either of the options proposed as ‘Settlers Lane’ or ‘Knowles Lane’ for the new private way

Impact assessment

17 There are no impacts identified with this option.

Debt

· No debt funding is required for this option.

Rates

· There are no impacts on rates.

Zero carbon

· There will be no changes to either the city-wide or DCC’s emissions profile.

Advantages

· There are no advantages identified with this option.

Disadvantages

· The roads will not have a name until new options are presented. This may inconvenience new or potential new property owners within the subdivision.

NEXT STEPS

18 If the new road names are approved, staff will process the required documentation, and advise the developer and Land Information New Zealand of the new road names.

Signatories

Author:

Daniel Fitzpatrick - Graduate Engineer/Planner

Abbey Chamberlain - Senior Transport Planner

Authoriser:

Jeanine Benson - Group Manager Transport

Scott MacLean - General Manager, Climate and City Growth

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Attachment A - Proposed road name assessment 'Settlers Lane'	75
⇩b	Attachment B - Proposed road name assessment 'Knowles Lane'	76
⇩c	Attachment C - SUB-2023-111 - site plan	77

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

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

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

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

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

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

Fit with strategic framework

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

This is an administrative function.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known identified impacts for Māori.

Sustainability

There are no implications for sustainability.

Zero carbon

There are no changes to Dunedin’s emissions profile.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications for the 1-year plan.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

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 developers.

Engagement - internal

There has been engagement within the Transport Group, Māori partnerships and Business Information 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 site is situated within the West Harbour Community Board. Support from the Community Board was sought at their meeting of 5 February 2025. At the meeting, the Community Board moved: That the Board:

a) Supports the naming of the private way located at 25 Driver Street as Knowles Lane’.

Infrastructure Services Committee

18 February 2025

Proposed parking changes

Department: Transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report presents recommendations of the Hearings Committee meeting (Attachment C - Minutes of Hearings Committee meeting), held on 3 February 2025 on proposed changes and corrections to parking restrictions.

2 The Hearings Committee (the Committee) recommends that all proposed changes and corrections to parking restrictions to the GIS database as presented on 3 February 2025, be approved.

3 If approved by the Infrastructure Services Committee, the changes recommended by the Hearings Committee, will be included into the GIS database and become part of the Dunedin City Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2010.

4 The proposed changes in parking and traffic restrictions are presented in two sections:

a) general minor parking changes which include requests from residents, changes made to enhance safety or amenity, and suggestions from officers. These changes include:

i. the potential to create approximately 28 new on-street parks along Russell Street by adding angled parking

ii. changing four unrestricted parking spaces along Union Street to P120 following a request from the owner of two nearby businesses and to align with surrounding restrictions

iii. changing five unrestricted parking spaces along Kaikorai Valley Road to P60 following the request from the manager of a nearby business and to align with surrounding restrictions.

iv. the establishment and restriction of five additional parks along Rankeilor Street

v. the establishment and restriction of approximately 34 car parks on the section of legal road referred to as ‘10 Queens Gardens’ fronting the new ACC building.

b) corrections to the bylaw database to ensure it matches existing marking and signage

5 Consultation has been undertaken separately for all the proposed changes discussed in this report.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Committee:

a) Adopts the proposed changes to parking and traffic restrictions shown in the February 2025 update of the Dunedin City Council's traffic and parking restrictions database: February Parking Changes 2025

b) Notes that the Hearings Committee has considered feedback from consultation on the proposed changes relating to changes and restrictions

c) Notes that all parking restrictions previously approved by the Council remain unchanged.

BACKGROUND

Traffic and parking controls

6 Traffic and parking controls contribute to the objectives of the Dunedin Integrated Transport Strategy 2013, by helping to achieve a safe, efficient, and accessible transport network.

7 Council maintains a Geographic Information System (GIS) map database of traffic and parking restrictions (the database) that reflects all on-street parking restrictions that are implemented with markings and/or signs.

8 Parking controls are made under the Traffic and Parking Bylaw. The Committee has the delegation to consider changes to parking controls and to make recommendations to Council that can approve traffic restrictions and parking controls.

Context for proposed changes

9 Council often receives requests from individuals and businesses to change parking restrictions. When considering these requests, officers assess a range of factors including safety concerns, commuters’ needs, commercial users’ needs, road width and topography, traffic flow, neighbouring on-street parking spaces, visibility concerns and crash statistics. If a proposed change is supported by officers, consultation is undertaken with affected residents, businesses, and property owners to demonstrate support for the requested change.

10 The proposed changes in parking and traffic restrictions are presented in two sections:

a) general changes – this section includes parking changes that arise from requests from the public and businesses to change parking restrictions and other general changes, safety and infrastructure changes

b) corrections to parking restrictions.

DISCUSSION

11 The proposed general parking changes are shown in February Parking Changes 2025 and are detailed in Attachment A – Minor General Parking Changes. The GIS layer includes a bookmark feature which links the numbered cases presented in the tables of Attachment A, to their specific location.

12 Summaries of consultation undertaken with affected parties, including owners, residents and businesses are presented in Attachment B.

General Minor Changes

Russell Street - Parking layout changes – TPC 48/2

13 The potential to add angled parking to Russell Street to offset the nearby loss in parking was first assessed when the roundabout was installed in 2021. Later that year a resident of Russell Street asked if the street could be converted to angled parking. In December 2023, approximately 23 car parks were removed from a nearby section of Queens Drive between City Road and Braid Road.

14 It is possible to adjust the parking layout along the southern side of Russell Street to angled parking rather than the existing parallel parking layout, providing an additional 28 car parks. The proposal has been designed by a Transport Safety Engineer, and reviewed by the Principal Transport Safety Engineer who has approved the project.

15 A Transport Safety Engineer has confirmed that the proposal does not create significant additional risk to the road environment. While increased vehicle numbers in an area can heighten the potential for conflict, Russell Street is not a through-route, and most drivers are familiar with the area, contributing to lower-than-posted speed limits.

16 The currently existing wide lanes and low traffic volumes can result in speeds higher than desirable. The introduction of angle parking is expected to narrow traffic lanes, which is a proven method for reducing vehicle speeds and subsequently lowering crash risk and severity. Literature indicates that roads with lower speeds do not typically experience an increase in injury-related crashes when on-street parking is present.

17 The parking in this area is expected to be low-turnover, as it is neither a high-traffic area nor a major transport corridor, minimising potential negative impacts from increased on-street parking and associated manoeuvres. To further mitigate potential safety concerns, additional line markings, including centre lines and adjustments near intersections, will be implemented to enhance road readability.

18 Similar changes implemented in the City Rise suburb, including 90-degree parking on Duncan Street and Elm Row, have not resulted in a decline in safety.

19 Russell Street is classified as a Local Road as per the 2GP Road Classification Hierarchy, with an average daily use of 576 trips as per MobileRoads estimates at June 2024. It is noted that the lower section of the street (between Canongate and Māori Road/Arthur Street, both of which are classified as Collector Roads) has an average daily use of 379 trips, while the central section (Māori Road/Arthur Street to Braid Road) has an average daily use of 551 trips. The upper section (Braid Road to York Place) has an average daily use of 800 trips.

20 Consultation on this change was undertaken in October 2024. Letters were sent to affected residents, property managers and property owners. The proposal was also published on the Dunedin City Council website and signs were installed in the area.

21 A summary of submissions received is included as Attachment B.

Union Street – Restriction changes – TPC 48/3

22 After several requests from a nearby business owner, officers propose to install P120 (two-hour, unpaid) restrictions to four parking spaces along the northern side of Union Street. The restriction of these spaces would align with the surrounding parking restrictions, as well as improving turnover and parking availability for visitors.

23 Consultation on this change was undertaken in late October 2024 through to early November 2024. Letters were sent to affected residents, property managers and property owners. The proposal was also published on the Dunedin City Council website and a sign was installed in the area.

24 A summary of submissions received are included as Attachment B.

Kaikorai Valley Road – Restriction changes - TPC 48/7

25 Due to requests from nearby business owners, officers propose to install P60 (one-hour, unpaid) restrictions to five parking spaces along the western side of Kaikorai Valley Road. The restriction of these spaces would align with the surrounding restrictions along Kaikorai Valley Road, as well as improving turnover and parking availability for visitors.

26 Consultation on this change was undertaken in November 2024. Letters were sent to affected residents, property managers and property owners. The proposal was also published on the Dunedin City Council website and a sign was installed in the area.

27 A summary of submissions received are included as Attachment B.

Rankeilor Street – Parking layout changes - TPC 48/8

28 As a result of ongoing developments along King Edward Street and Rankeilor Street, officers propose to create five new parking spaces along the western side of Rankeilor Street, consisting of one P5, three P30’s, an ‘Authorised Vehicles Only’. The addition of five new parking spaces will support the operation of businesses as well as provide short-term parking for those visiting the South Dunedin Library and Community Complex. The provision of an ‘authorised vehicles only’ has been requested by many of the businesses in the area to assist with the quick loading and unloading of goods.

29 It is noted that between the time of the Hearings Committee and ISCOM, the layout had to be adjusted to accommodate kerb cut-outs requested by project engineers. This does not change the total number of car parks but a P5 is changed to a P30 to maintain a consistent parking layout.

30 As part of this development, one P60 will be removed due to the addition of a drop kerb for the new South Dunedin Library and Community Complex to enable loading and unloading of deliveries.

31 Consultation on this change was undertaken in November 2024. Letters were sent to affected property managers and property owners. The proposal was also published on the Dunedin City Council website and a sign was installed in the area.

32 A summary of submissions received are included as Attachment B.

10 Queens Gardens – parking layout changes - TPC 48/9

33 A new ACC building has been built on the corner of High Street and Dowling Street. The car parking fronting the building is to be restricted to support visitors to the building and nearby businesses.

34 The line marking has been provisionally installed, with capacity for 34 car parks. Three of these will be restricted as mobility parking, and an additional three will be P5 to support pick up and drop off. The remaining 28 spaces will be paid P120 car parks.

35 The hourly fee for these parks will be set at the same rate of the “Outer Zone” parking areas (presently $1.50 per hour) from Monday to Saturday between the hours of 9am to 6pm. This will align with fees charged in the surrounding area. Information regarding the parking zones can be found here or on the Dunedin City Council parking services website.

36 Consultation on this change was undertaken in January 2025. The affected property owner was contacted and expressed support for the layout.

37 Officers will monitor the usage of the parking area and will provide The Committee with feedback regarding any changes recommended 12 months on from the formalisation of the car park.

38 A summary of submissions received are included as Attachment B.

Parking Counts

39 in total, it is proposed that there will be a net gain of 39 restricted and 27 unrestricted parking spaces across the city, resulting in a total of 66 additional car parks. Detail is provided in Table A - Parking Counts.

40 Changes to restriction type only (no loss in parking) are also shown in the table below.

Corrections to the bylaw database

41 Corrections of parking restrictions are detailed in Table B below. They do not change current parking restrictions but include corrections to the database that have been made to accurately reflect the actual parking restrictions.

OPTIONS

42 Two options are proposed for general parking changes. The recommended option (Option One) is to proceed with some or all of the proposed changes to the GIS database, and Option Two is maintaining the status quo.

Option One – Recommended Option

43 That the Committee approves the proposed changes to the traffic and parking controls database

Impact assessment

44 Overall, this option is likely to marginally increase city emissions, with no anticipated impact on DCC emissions.

Debt

· No debt funding is required for this option.

Rates

· There are no impacts on rates.

Zero carbon

45 Parking management has a material impact on travel choices, and through that, city transport emissions. Key considerations are as follows:

· Russell St: The proposed changes are likely to marginally increase city emissions. Provision of additional free parking encourages more people to commute by private vehicle and may incentivise residents to increase their rates of car ownership.

· 10 Queens Gardens: The proposed changes are unlikely to materially impact city emissions. The changes convert a former long-stay parking facility that incentivised commuting by private vehicle into short-term, paid visitor parking that meets an existing demand for parking in the area.

· Other proposed changes are unlikely to materially impact city emissions.

Advantages

· Improves safety, efficiency, and access on the transport network by:

- enabling property access by prohibiting obstructive parking, making existing parking controls clearer, and providing for access to new driveways

- providing an improved and enforceable framework of parking restrictions

- providing appropriate length of parking stay according to the surrounding land uses

· Contributes to achieving an integrated, affordable responsive, effective and safe transport network

Disadvantages

· Costs of installation

Option Two – Status Quo

46 Do nothing.

Impact assessment

47 There are no impacts identified with this option.

Debt

· No debt funding is required for this option.

Rates

· There are no impacts on rates.

Zero carbon

· There will be no changes to either the city-wide or DCC’s emissions profile.

Advantages

· Council resources can be allocated to other transport projects

Disadvantages

· Does not improve efficiency and access to the transport network

· Does not improve safety or reduce conflict points

· Does not contribute to the Integrated Transport Strategy goals

NEXT STEPS

48 If The Committee recommends the changes to traffic and parking controls, a report of the proposed changes will be brought before Council for approval.

49 If Council approves the restrictions, they will be implemented through appropriate signs and road markings and restrictions will be enforced under the Traffic and Parking Bylaw.

Signatories

Author:

Daniel Fitzpatrick - Graduate Engineer/Planner

Authoriser:

Jeanine Benson - Group Manager Transport

Scott MacLean - General Manager, Climate and City Growth

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Attachment A - General parking changes	89
⇩b	Attachment B - Minor General Parking Changes - Feedback Summary	92
⇩c	Attachment C - Minutes of the Hearings Committee 03/02/2025	95

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

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

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

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

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

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

Fit with strategic framework

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

Improvements to traffic and parking restrictions supports a safe, efficient and accessible transport network, and supports the social and economic wellbeing of Dunedin communities.

Māori Impact Statement

Mana whenua have expressed support for a safe and efficient transport network.

Sustainability

Parking control changes improve efficiency and access to the transport network, which contribute to sustainability goals.

Zero carbon

The proposed changes encompassed by Option 1 are likely to marginally increase city emissions. DCC emissions would not be affected.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications

Financial considerations

Costs for implementing the proposed changes are covered by existing budgets.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There has been engagement with affected parties, including residents, landowners and business owners adjacent to changes.

Engagement - internal

There has been engagement with Transport and Zero Carbon staff.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

Many of the proposed changes aim to improve safety of vulnerable users of the transport network.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications for Community Boards as part of this report.

Infrastructure Services Committee

18 February 2025

Submission: Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services

Department: 3 Waters

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks the Committee’s retrospective approval of a Dunedin City Council (DCC) submission to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) on the proposed Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services.

2 The DCC submission is attached to this report as Attachment A. The MBIE consultation document is attached as Attachment B.

3 Consultation opened in late-2024 and closed on 24 January 2025. There was insufficient time to obtain approval for a draft DCC submission from the Council or the Infrastructure Services Committee in advance of the 24 January 2025 deadline.

4 Councillors were provided with opportunities to participate in the development of the DCC submission in January 2025 via a workshop and email feedback. Councillor Jim O’Malley approved the DCC submission for lodging with MBIE on 24 January 2025 under his delegated authority as Chair of the Infrastructure Services Committee. Retrospective approval of the DCC submission by the Committee is now sought.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Committee:

a) Approves, retrospectively, the DCC submission to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment the Department of Internal Affairs on the proposed Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services.

BACKGROUND

5 The Local Government (Water Services) Bill is currently before Parliament and open for submissions. The Government expects the Bill to become law in mid-2025.

6 If enacted in its current form, the Local Government (Water Services) Bill would establish the Commerce Commission as the economic regulator for water services in New Zealand. The Bill would also provide for the Commerce Commission to introduce a levy to fund its economic regulation and consumer protection activities related to water services.

7 In late-2024/early-2025, MBIE consulted on a proposed levy to fund the Commerce Commission’s proposed activities in respect of water services from July 2025. MBIE sought feedback on the structure, design, apportionment and implementation of the levy.

8 In summary, the key features of the proposal were:

a) Levies on water services suppliers would fully fund the Commerce Commission’s new functions from 1 July 2025.

b) The levies would be based on a per-person charge using 2023 census data. Across the population of New Zealand, the annual cost would be $1.30 per person in the first two years (2025/26 and 2026/27).

c) The indicative estimate of the annual levy payable by the DCC would be $167,798 in the first two years (2025/26 and 2026/27).

d) The levies would be payable from 1 July 2025.

e) MBIE would monitor, evaluate and review the levy. The first review would be in 2027/28.

DISCUSSION

9 The DCC submission noted that the DCC would need to determine how to fund its share of the levy if introduced. It is likely the DCC would pass on the costs to consumers via rates and/or water charges. The DCC would need to consider rating options, including whether to use a general rate approach or a targeted rate approach. A targeted rate approach, for example, could enable to the DCC to collect the levy only from those ratepayers that are connected to DCC three waters services (and are thereby assumed to derive the benefits of the Commerce Commission’s regulatory activities).

10 The DCC submission recommended that:

a) MBIE considers submissions on the Local Government (Water Services) Bill alongside submissions on the proposed Commerce Commission levy to inform next steps;

b) MBIE provides a second opportunity for feedback on the levy proposal once any adjustments have been made as a result of this consultation and consultation on the Local Government (Water Services) Bill; and

c) MBIE delays introduction of the levy until 1 July 2026, to appropriately enable further work on developing and implementing the proposed levy to be informed by the outcomes of consultation.

OPTIONS

11 Not applicable.

NEXT STEPS

12 No further action is required if the Committee retrospectively approves the DCC submission.

13 If the Committee does not retrospectively approve the DCC submission, staff will advise MBIE to disregard the DCC submission.

Signatories

Author:	Scott Campbell - Regulation and Policy Team Leader
Authoriser:	John McAndrew - Acting Group Manager, 3 Waters

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	DCC submission to MBIE, 24 Jan 2025	103
⇩b	MBIE consultation document	105

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

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

Fit with strategic framework

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

The DCC submission was prepared in line with the goals and objectives of Dunedin’s strategic framework.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known specific impacts for Māori related to the DCC submission on the proposed Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services.

Sustainability

There are no known specific implications for sustainability related to the DCC submission on the proposed Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services.

Zero carbon

There are no known specific implications for zero carbon related to the DCC submission on the proposed Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no known specific implications for these plans and strategies related to the DCC submission on the proposed Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services.

Financial considerations

There are no known specific financial implications related to the DCC submission on the proposed Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services. Financial impacts for the DCC if the proposed levy is implemented are briefly addressed in the DCC submission and the body of this report.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

Staff from the 3 Waters Group were involved in the development of the DCC submission. The DCC Corporate Policy, Finance and Legal teams were informed about development of the DCC submission.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks directly related to the DCC submission on the proposed Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no known specific implications for Community Boards related to the DCC submission on the proposed Commerce Commission levy for the economic regulation of water services.

Infrastructure Services Committee

18 February 2025

Submission: Water Services Authority - Taumata Arowai levy for 2025-2028

Department: 3 Waters

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks the Committee’s retrospective approval of a Dunedin City Council (DCC) submission to the Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai (the Authority) on the Authority’s proposed levy for 2025-2028.

2 The DCC submission is attached to this report as Attachment A. The consultation document is attached as Attachment B.

4 Councillors were provided with opportunities to participate in the development of the DCC submission in January 2025 via a workshop and email feedback. Councillor Jim O’Malley approved the DCC submission for lodging with Authority on 24 January 2025 under his delegated authority as Chair of the Infrastructure Services Committee. Retrospective approval of the DCC submission by the Committee is now sought.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Committee:

a) Approves, retrospectively, the DCC submission on the proposed Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai levy for 2025-2028.

BACKGROUND

5 The Authority is the drinking water quality regulator for New Zealand. It also has an oversight and standard-setting role for environmental performance of public drinking water, wastewater and stormwater networks.

6 In late-2024/early-2025, the Authority consulted on a proposed levy to fund its water services regulatory activities from July 2025. To date, the Authority’s activities have been funded by the Crown. However, the Water Services Act 2021 provides for a levy to be introduced to fund the Authority’s work. The Authority sought feedback on the proposed structure, design, apportionment and implementation of the levy.

7 In summary, the key features of the proposal were:

a) Levies would be charged to territorial authorities and Council Controlled Organisations that deliver water services to fund the Authority to the value of $20.658 million in each of the years 2025/26, 2026/27 and 2027/28.

b) In addition to the levies, the Crown would contribute $4.642 million in funding to the Authority in each of the three years.

c) The levies would be separated by drinking water, wastewater and stormwater, but invoiced jointly.

d) The levies would be based on a per-person charge using 2023 census data. Across the population of the New Zealand, the annual cost would be $4.14 per person (excluding GST).

e) The annual levies payable to the Authority by the DCC would be $533,287.

f) The levies would be payable from 1 July 2025.

g) The Authority would monitor, evaluate and review the levy in an ongoing three-year cycle. The first review would be in 2027/28.

DISCUSSION

8 The DCC submission noted that the DCC would need to determine how to fund its share of a levy if introduced. It is likely the DCC would pass on the costs to consumers via rates and/or water charges. The DCC would need to consider rating options, including whether to use a general rate approach or a targeted rate approach. A targeted rate approach, for example, could enable to the DCC to collect the levy only from those ratepayers that are connected to DCC three waters services (and are thereby assumed to derive the benefits of the Authority’s regulatory activities).

9 The DCC submission recommended that:

a) The Authority delays introduction of the levy until 1 July 2026, to allow councils the time needed to assess options for incorporating the costs of the levy into operating budgets and rates, and to determine the most efficient system of administration;

b) The Authority further reviews the ratio of Crown contributions to funding regulators in other regulatory systems and assesses a phased approach to structure the levy from the 1 July 2026 start date;

c) That the Authority publishes the findings of its further reviews and assessments along with the summary of submissions and next steps on this consultation and provides a further opportunity for feedback on the levy proposal with this new information available.

OPTIONS

10 Not applicable.

NEXT STEPS

11 No further action is required if the Committee retrospectively approves the DCC submission.

12 If the Committee does not retrospectively approve the DCC submission, staff will advise the Authority to disregard the DCC submission.

Signatories

Author:	Scott Campbell - Regulation and Policy Team Leader
Authoriser:	John McAndrew - Acting Group Manager, 3 Waters

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	DCC submission to the Water Services Authority - Taumata Arowai, 24 Jan 2025	142
⇩b	Water Services Authority - Taumata Arowai consultation document	144

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

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

Fit with strategic framework

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

The DCC submission was prepared in line with the goals and objectives of Dunedin’s strategic framework.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known specific impacts for Māori related to the DCC submission on the proposed Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai levy for 2025-2028.

Sustainability

There are no known specific implications for sustainability related to the DCC submission on the proposed Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai levy for 2025-2028.

Zero carbon

There are no known specific implications for zero carbon related to the DCC submission on the proposed Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai levy for 2025-2028.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no known specific implications for these plans and strategies related to the DCC submission on the proposed Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai levy for 2025-2028.

Financial considerations

There are no known specific financial implications related to the DCC submission on the proposed Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai levy for 2025-2028. Financial impacts for the DCC if the proposed levy is implemented are briefly addressed in the DCC submission and the body of this report.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

Staff from the 3 Waters Group were involved in the development of the DCC submission. The DCC Corporate Policy, Finance and Legal teams were informed about development of the DCC submission.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks directly related to the DCC submission on the proposed Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai levy for 2025-2028.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no known specific implications for Community Boards related to the DCC submission on the proposed Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai levy for 2025-2028.

	Title	Page
A ⇩	Minutes of Infrastructure Services Committee meeting held on 15 October 2024	18

Author:	Rebecca Murray - Governance Support Officer
Authoriser:	Scott MacLean - General Manager, Climate and City Growth