Attachments of Hutt City Council

Attachment 1

Draft Wellington Region Natural Hazards Management Strategy February 2017

1 Introduction

1.1 Why develop a Natural Hazards Management Strategy?

The purpose of the Wellington Region Natural Hazards Management Strategy is to help create a region resilient to the impacts from natural hazard events through a focus on the reduction component of the 4 R’s (reduction, readiness, response, recovery) of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act It will provide a framework that will allow the partner councils in conjunction with key stakeholders and the community to develop consistent responses to the challenging natural hazards that we face including coastal erosion and inundation, sea level rise, earthquakes, landslides and storms.

Having robust and consistent natural hazard policy approaches in city, district and regional plans will help us to consistently and rigorously identify our hazards and employ a risk based approach that enables progressive risk reduction over time. The scope of this strategy includes ensuring that partners in the work:

· Share and use the same information and assumptions

· Achieve consistency in risk reduction, including through district planning, across the region

· Undertake research in a coordinated and agreed way

· Collaborate with each other, (eg, partner councils, lifeline utilities, key stakeholders)

The Wellington region’s local authorities will do this by:

· Focusing on the role of reduction in the 4Rs of natural hazard risk management.

· Providing a vision and objectives for how we as a region want to approach planning for natural hazard risk reduction.

· Recognising the importance of regional leadership,specifically, the role of Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) in coordinating funding and leading regionally consistent science and information to underpin integrated natural hazards planning and management.

· Recognising that local government has important roles in determining the acceptable level of risk, and in risk reduction through infrastructure planning and management, resource management planning and decision making, agency coordination, and knowledge building and management.

· Explaining the nature of the challenge, including setting out the region’s natural hazards context and the consequences of hazard events for the region’s communities.

· Advocating for central government to develop better resilience knowledge and standards and to fund nationally consistent science and information to underpin effective hazards planning and management.

· Setting out an implementation plan designed to achieve the objectives.

· Working with lifelines and network utility providers and stakeholders to better understand natural hazard risks and how these can be managed

· Aiming to achieve region-wide consistency in policy and planning regulations for managing risks from natural hazards.

· Prioritising the investigation of natural hazards and the preparation of policy responses for managing the risks from these using a risk based approach.

1.2 How the Strategy was developed

The development of the Strategy was initiated by the Regional Planning Managers Group and overseen by a Programme Advisory Group made of the planning managers from each partner council, representatives from the Wellington Region Emergency Management Office, Greater Wellington Regional Council flood protection department and Te Hunga Whiriwhiri. It has been jointly funded by the partner councils with the approval of the Chief Executives from each council and endorsed by the Coordinating Executive Group of the Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group. The Strategy has been developed through a series of workshops involving representatives of the partner councils, lifeline utilities, key stakeholders and a wider group of interested parties who have participated at different stages. The vision and objectives were first developed, along with a series of principles. These were made available for public review. Numerous actions to achieve the objectives were then developed through further engagement, and refined into:

· A concise set of actions and an implementation plan.

· An equally important set of “ways of working” which will help to inform and provide guidance to those engaged in the actions.

There is no quick and easy means of reducing the risk of natural hazards on a regional basis. Rather the Strategy will set the region’s communities on a pathway towards risk reduction. The pathways involve long-term continuous and targeted action on a regionally consistent basis, along with regular review of achievements and adjustments over time to meet new or changed natural hazard circumstances.

1.3 Structure of the Strategy

The strategy is set out in three sections, with an introduction and background, the action points and implementation plan and a series of appendices and supporting documentation.

· Summary (stand alone pull out)

· Purpose of the strategy

· Context

· Key issues

· Strategy

· Appendices (Supplementary Information – Methodology, Description of Natural Hazards in the Wellington Region, Legislative Framework, Good Practice)

· Supporting Reports (Stocktake, Consultation Report)

· Hyperlinks for an electronic version of the Strategy

2 Context

Local authorities, the Wellington Region Emergency Management Office (WREMO) and lifelines utilities of the Wellington Region^{^[1]} are collaborating to prepare a Wellington Region Natural Hazards Management Strategy (“the Strategy”). The Strategy is to be part of a Natural Hazards Programme seeking the integrated management of natural hazards to gain consistency and reduce duplication of effort across jurisdictional boundaries.

The aim of the draft strategy is to provide a coherent regional framework to inform planning documents, such as city, district and regional plans, long term plans and asset management plans. It is paired with an implementation and action plan providing coherent actions designed to carry out the objectives embodied in the strategy.

The strategy provides an opportunity to explain how we will work together with our partners (councils, WREMO, Wellington Engineering Lifelines Group) to address shared goals related to risk reduction. It allows us to:

· Set priorities for co-funded hazards research

· Undertake joint investment in hazard mitigation and reduction activities

· Develop consistent hazard planning approaches

· Cooperate in community engagement

The Strategy provides a strategic overview of natural hazards in the region and is the guiding regional framework for integrated and coordinated natural hazard management planning, covering both Long Term Plan and RMA plan responses. It will coordinate with the Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan prepared by WREMO.

The Wellington region has one of the most physically diverse environments in New Zealand. It is also one of the most populous regions and, consequently, communities are affected by a wide range of natural hazards. Natural events become hazardous when they adversely affect our lives and property, businesses and livelihoods and the environment and our natural resources.

The Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group undertook a comprehensive analysis of natural hazards and risk for the region in 2007 (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007)(Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007). This report, combined with the Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region^{^[2]} provides the background information on hazards and risks within the Wellington region (Greater Wellington Regional Council, 2013)(Greater Wellington Regional Council, 2013).

A summary of the natural hazards that occur in the region and the planning responses that have been developed to date is set out in the Stocktake Report^{^[3]}. The most significant natural hazards include earthquakes, coastal hazards (erosion and inundation), flooding and landslides. Other natural hazards such as drought, wind, snow and hail, and to a lesser extent wildfire and lightening also occur in the region.

2.1 The “4Rs”

The New Zealand integrated approach to disaster management is underpinned by the , 4Rs^{^[4]} Of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act (figure 1) . The 4Rs are defined as :

“Reduction: Identifying and analysing long-term risks to human life and property from hazards; taking steps to eliminate these risks if practicable, and, if not, reducing the magnitude of their impact and the likelihood of their occurring.

Readiness: Developing operational systems and capabilities before a civil defence emergency happens; including self-help and response programmes for the general public, and specific programmes for emergency services, lifeline utilities and other agencies.

Response: Actions taken immediately before, during or directly after a civil defence emergency to save lives and protect property, and to help communities recover.

Recovery: The coordinated efforts and processes to bring about the immediate, medium-term and long-term holistic regeneration of a community following a civil defence emergency.”

The Strategy focuses on the first R, Reduction.

Natural Hazards Diagram 310716.JPG

Figure 1: Conceptualisation of the "4Rs" in terms of the Strategic Approach to Natural Hazard Risk Management

Modified from “A Strategic and Practical Options for Integrating Flood Risk Management”, MWH and PS Consulting Ltd, MfE 2009

2.2 Who Does What?

2.2.1 Functions of Councils

The GWRC has statutory functions under section 30 of the Resource Management Act 1991^{^[5]} (RMA) which include the establishment, implementation and review of objectives, policies and methods to achieve integrated management of the natural and physical resources of the region. GWRC must also give effect to the RMA by controlling the use of land for the purpose of ..the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards. The region’s city and district councils have similar land use planning roles relating to the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards.

Under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), all local authorities, in performing their roles, must have regard to the contribution core services make to communities including the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards. Under the RMA^{^[6]}, there is also a requirement that local authorities must consider the preparation of appropriate combined documents whenever significant cross-boundary issues relating to the use, development or protection of natural and physical resources arise or are likely to arise.

Councils’ key resilience responsibility goes beyond the RMA and the LGA. The Civil Defence and Emergency Management Act 2002 (CDEM Act) requires community and infrastructure agencies to have an understanding of the potential hazards and vulnerabilities that they face and to take measures to manage those vulnerabilities to reduce the impacts of events. The Wellington, Porirua, Hutt and Upper Hutt city councils and the Greater Wellington Regional Council are classified in the CDEM Act as Lifeline Utilities for the supply of drinking water. The CDEM Act requires councils to ensure they are able to continue to function to the fullest possible extent following a hazard event; although this may be at a reduced level. Councils are required to plan, prepare for and respond to emergencies, working in conjunction with their regional emergency management office, in this instance the Wellington Regional Emergency Management Office (WREMO).

Given that natural hazards are not confined to local authority boundaries, the Strategy provides the opportunity for the Wellington region to develop a consistent regional approach to natural hazard management, and the avoidance and mitigation of exposure to natural hazard risk.

2.2.2 Programmes and Strategies

Internationally, effective natural hazards management has become a pressing need. A number of international initiatives have emerged in response, and these have been reflected through national, regional and local initiatives. The following are some of the currently most important:

Sendai Framework for Risk Reduction (2015-2030)

The Sendai Framework^{^[7]} is a 15-year, voluntary, non-binding agreement endorsed by the United Nations General assembly following the 2015 Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction . It recognizes that the State has the primary role to reduce disaster risk but that responsibility should be shared with other stakeholders including local government, the private sector and other stakeholders. It aims for the following outcome:

The substantial reduction of disaster risk and losses in lives, livelihoods and health and in the economic, physical, social, cultural and environmental assets of persons, businesses, communities and countries.

Four priorities for action are outlined in the framework. They are: understanding disaster risk; strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk; investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience; enhancing disaster preparedness for effective responses, and endeavouring to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction.

New Zealand is one of 187 UN member states to make a formal commitment to the Framework. Work is already underway on a national level to address risk reduction through^{^[8]}:

· reviewing and redeveloping the National Civil Defence and Emergency Management Strategy;

· amending the Resource Management Act;

· undertaking a review of the Building Act, specific to earthquake prone buildings; and

· developing a National Infrastructure Plan.

National Disaster Resilience Strategy

The Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management is reviewing the current National Civil Defence Emergency Management Strategy to demonstrate our commitment to the Sendai Framework and shift focus to ‘managing risk’ rather than ‘managing disasters’^{^[9]}.

Workshops in the various regions are considering where efforts could be better targeted to yield the greatest benefit across the four priority area outlined in the Framework.

Wellington Region Emergency Management Office: Community Resilience Strategy

The Community Resilience Strategy^{^[10]} prepared by the Wellington Region Emergency Management Office (WREMO) outlines how the WREMO team will engage with its diverse communities and apply a wide range of tools to help empower them to survive and thrive after an emergency event. It is broadly driven by three strategic objectives – build capacity, increase connectedness and foster cooperation.

WREMO comprises the nine councils of the Wellington Region. It has played a significant role in the preparation of the Wellington Natural Hazards Management Strategy.

Wellington Resilience Strategy

Wellington City’s membership of the Rockefeller Institute’s 100 Resilient Cities^{^[11]} (100RC) is centred around the development of a Resilience Strategy that draws on models, guidelines and resources developed by the 100RC to assist cities to better survive, and then grow, in the face of the shocks and stresses of the 21^st Century. Hutt City is developing a resilience strategy using the methodology developed and shared by Wellington City Council.

The recently release Preliminary Resilience Assessment (June 2016) represents Phase 1 of the project and defines the key areas of focus for Wellington to become a resilient city. Key ‘discovery areas’ are recovery from seismic shock; climate change and sea level rise; economic prosperity; and quality of life.

Climate Change Strategy

The Wellington Regional Council’s Climate Change Strategy (October 2015)^{^[12]} is an overarching document to align and coordinate climate change actions across GWRC’s responsibilities and operations. It aims to build on work programmes already underway, raise awareness of climate change drivers and impacts, and help coordinate regional effort through collaboration and partnerships. It also aims to strengthen information-sharing and integration across GWRC departments, between councils, with central government, and with the community.

2.3 What is Risk?

Natural Hazard risk is broadly defined as the combination of the probability of a natural hazard and the consequences that could occur from an event of a given likelihood and magnitude.

A framework for managing risk is outlined in AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009, Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines^{^[13]}A companion handbook has been prepared that provides guidance on implementing the risk management standard SA/SNZ HB 436:2013, Risk Management Guidelines – Companion to AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009. The standard outlines a risk based approach to risk management and is the direction promoted in the: “Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region” and in the GNS Science publication: “Risk Based Approach to Land-Use Planning”.

Other relevant guidance has been produced by Ministry for the Environment such as the soon to be updated: “Climate change effects and impacts assessment: A Guidance Manual For Local Government in New Zealand” 2008^{^[14]} which defines risk as:

“The chance of an ‘event’ being induced or significantly exacerbated by climate change, that event having an impact on something of value to the present and/or future community. Risk is measured in terms of consequence and likelihood.”

A risk-based approach takes account of the intended purpose of a use or development, the likelihood of natural hazard events occurring, the vulnerability and exposure of the site, use or development, the severity and consequences of potential hazard events and the costs and benefits of acting or not acting. A risk assessment needs to be commensurate with the size and scale of the use or development. The risk can be evaluated on a scale from low to high or acceptable to intolerable assessed on the basis of: (a) the scale, engineering design and intended life and use for the development, and (b) the likelihood, frequency and magnitude of natural hazard events that could potentially affect the site or development, and (c) the vulnerability and exposure of the development to natural hazards, and (d) the severity of any physical, social, economic and environmental consequences that could arise from natural hazard events affecting the site or development.

3 Key Issues

A stocktake was undertaken to better understand the information that the respective councils hold on natural hazards and hazard risks, and how these risks are currently managed. The stocktake provides an initial identification of key issues in relation to consistency in approach and application of good practice in hazard management and planning provisions used by different local authorities.

The key issues were grouped around:

· Information gathering

· Planning provisions

· Operational responses.

The issues are summarised in Table 3-1. This highlights both the need for and the potential benefits of integrated and consistent approaches across the various local government agencies.

Table 3‑1: Key Issues

INFORMATION GATHERING
Earthquakes · There is a marked variability of earthquake information mapped and available online through council GIS systems. · Council staff awareness of the existing information held by other agencies is limited.
Coastal Hazards · There is inconsistency in the ways that the councils identify and map coastal hazards. · There is little use of coastal hazard information internally within councils. · There is a lack of progress in preparing and adopting long term climate change adaptation plans. · Large variations in the knowledge of coastal hazards was found, and an increasing need to plan for the impacts of sea-level rise. · There are discrepancies between Council staff and local residents understanding about the reliability of the knowledge base and/or levels of risk acceptance.
Flooding · Improvements are needed in the mapping of residual flood risks (i.e. potential losses if flood protection is breached or overtopped). · Sea-level rise considerations are not yet adequately integrated into the mapping of flood risk in coastal areas. · Flooding hazards are generally well documented and mapped with greater regional consistency than other natural hazards.
General Comments · There is variability in approach and methodologies in managing the risks from natural hazard both within and between councils. It is not clear whether this variability is driven by specific contextual reasons a lack of co-ordination,or due to differing resource levels^{^[15]}. · There is limited justification of the hazard priorities that are focussed on within plans. It is not always clear how particular hazard priorities have been chosen. There is no systematic or strategic approach for determining what is important.

INFORMATION GATHERING

Earthquakes

· There is a marked variability of earthquake information mapped and available online through council GIS systems.

· Council staff awareness of the existing information held by other agencies is limited.

Coastal Hazards

· There is inconsistency in the ways that the councils identify and map coastal hazards.

· There is little use of coastal hazard information internally within councils.

· There is a lack of progress in preparing and adopting long term climate change adaptation plans.

· Large variations in the knowledge of coastal hazards was found, and an increasing need to plan for the impacts of sea-level rise.

· There are discrepancies between Council staff and local residents understanding about the reliability of the knowledge base and/or levels of risk acceptance.

Flooding

· Improvements are needed in the mapping of residual flood risks (i.e. potential losses if flood protection is breached or overtopped).

· Sea-level rise considerations are not yet adequately integrated into the mapping of flood risk in coastal areas.

· Flooding hazards are generally well documented and mapped with greater regional consistency than other natural hazards.

General Comments

· There is variability in approach and methodologies in managing the risks from natural hazard both within and between councils. It is not clear whether this variability is driven by specific contextual reasons a lack of co-ordination,or due to differing resource levels^{^[15]}.

· There is limited justification of the hazard priorities that are focussed on within plans. It is not always clear how particular hazard priorities have been chosen. There is no systematic or strategic approach for determining what is important.

PLANNING PROVISIONS
· There is a general lack of information and provisions relating to liquefaction hazard. · The information contained in city, district and regional plans and explanations of the basis for planning provisions for coastal hazards are limited. · There is a lack of information about provisions relating to flood hazards in city, district and regional plans. A common theme is for this information to relate to only certain water bodies, without explanation as to why this is the case. · While landslides are addressed in some district plans, this tends to be through earthworks provisions. Naturally occurring or historical landslide hazards are not provided for. · There is minimal recognition in city, district and regional plans of other hazards and of climate change issues. · There is limited progress towards the integration of a risk based planning approach and risk assessment in natural hazard provisions. (Some progress is evident in more recent updates, but there is little evidence of this element of good practice where there are older provisions). · The district plans also provide little explanation as to why their focus is on some natural hazards and not on others. · While cross boundary issues are acknowledged in plans, little direction is provided on how these issues should be addressed. · There is a lack of hazard specific provisions in the District Plans. Objectives, in particular, tend to be generic to all natural hazards and do not provide clearly identifiable or measurable outcome statements. · The policy and planning approaches in city, district and regional plans are often outdated, are not based on a clear risk based model and do not meet good practice tests. · Related to this, there is no clear evaluation involving community and stakeholder input about what levels of risk are considered acceptable. · There is a lack of coordination between resource management planning and the response and recovery plans of civil defence emergency management and/or lifeline utility providers
Monitoring · There is no systematic approach to monitoring impacts of hazards, risks or evaluating the effectiveness of policy approaches to risk reduction. · There are key gaps in the monitoring protocols associated with landslides and coastal erosion.
Information Management · There is a lack (in most councils) of a protocol relating to the review and updating of information. Some councils are taking an ad hoc approach, and seem to be reliant on external parties to provide updated information. · There is no indication that a coordinated approach is being taken by councils in relation to the management and updating of information. · In some instances councils are relying on older data and information, which does not meet current good practice expectations. · The quality of information and accessibility to information about natural hazards varies considerably. · The level of confidence/uncertainty in hazard information is not always explicitly recognised or discussed.
Climate Change · Councils have different approaches to, and levels of understanding of adaptive planning practices. · There is a need for clarification around the source(s) of climate change projections, the planning timeframes being used and how they are being applied by the different councils. · Councils, institutions and the general public have different ‘levels of understanding about climate change, This impacts on people’s understanding of climate change projections and scenarios, levels of risk acceptance and degree of planning required for managing potential future impacts.

PLANNING PROVISIONS

· There is a general lack of information and provisions relating to liquefaction hazard.

· The information contained in city, district and regional plans and explanations of the basis for planning provisions for coastal hazards are limited.

· There is a lack of information about provisions relating to flood hazards in city, district and regional plans. A common theme is for this information to relate to only certain water bodies, without explanation as to why this is the case.

· While landslides are addressed in some district plans, this tends to be through earthworks provisions. Naturally occurring or historical landslide hazards are not provided for.

· There is minimal recognition in city, district and regional plans of other hazards and of climate change issues.

· There is limited progress towards the integration of a risk based planning approach and risk assessment in natural hazard provisions. (Some progress is evident in more recent updates, but there is little evidence of this element of good practice where there are older provisions).

· The district plans also provide little explanation as to why their focus is on some natural hazards and not on others.

· While cross boundary issues are acknowledged in plans, little direction is provided on how these issues should be addressed.

· There is a lack of hazard specific provisions in the District Plans. Objectives, in particular, tend to be generic to all natural hazards and do not provide clearly identifiable or measurable outcome statements.

· The policy and planning approaches in city, district and regional plans are often outdated, are not based on a clear risk based model and do not meet good practice tests.

· Related to this, there is no clear evaluation involving community and stakeholder input about what levels of risk are considered acceptable.

· There is a lack of coordination between resource management planning and the response and recovery plans of civil defence emergency management and/or lifeline utility providers

OPERATIONAL RESPONSES

Monitoring

· There is no systematic approach to monitoring impacts of hazards, risks or evaluating the effectiveness of policy approaches to risk reduction.

· There are key gaps in the monitoring protocols associated with landslides and coastal erosion.

Information Management

· There is a lack (in most councils) of a protocol relating to the review and updating of information. Some councils are taking an ad hoc approach, and seem to be reliant on external parties to provide updated information.

· There is no indication that a coordinated approach is being taken by councils in relation to the management and updating of information.

· In some instances councils are relying on older data and information, which does not meet current good practice expectations.

· The quality of information and accessibility to information about natural hazards varies considerably.

· The level of confidence/uncertainty in hazard information is not always explicitly recognised or discussed.

Climate Change

· Councils have different approaches to, and levels of understanding of adaptive planning practices.

· There is a need for clarification around the source(s) of climate change projections, the planning timeframes being used and how they are being applied by the different councils.

· Councils, institutions and the general public have different ‘levels of understanding about climate change, This impacts on people’s understanding of climate change projections and scenarios, levels of risk acceptance and degree of planning required for managing potential future impacts.

4 Strategy

4.1 Vision Statement

The communities of the Wellington region work together to understand and reduce risks from natural hazards

“to survive and thrive in a dynamic world”

4.2 Objectives

1. Our natural hazards and risks are well understood. [Knowledge and Understanding]

2. Our planning takes a long term risk-based approach. [Planning]

3. Consistent approaches are applied to natural hazard risk reduction. [Consistency]

4. We have an agreed set of priorities to reduce the risks from natural hazards. [Prioritisation]

4.3 Principles

1. Use the best available hazards information/science.

2. Identify and agree what is best practice for natural hazards risk management and reduction.

3. Identify and address what inhibits good practice in natural hazards management.

4. Bring the community along on the journey

5. Build in regular monitoring and review programmes.

4.4 Actions

The following actions address the issues and set out steps to achieve the four objectives that have been identified.

Attachment 1

Draft Wellington Region Natural Hazards Management Strategy February 2017

ACTIONS TO MEET OBJECTIVES (Five Year Framework)		TIMING	WHO IS INVOLVED?		COST (H,M,L)	PRIORITY (H,M,L)
OBJECTIVE 1 Our natural hazards and risks are well understood (Knowledge and Understanding)
Working together as Councils
1.1	Strengthen the multi-council approach of working collaboratively and collectively. · Establish a natural hazards steering group which will be the custodian responsible for overseeing the implementation of the strategy. · Establish a technical advisory group to assist the Steering Group, where necessary, on the implementation of the strategy. · Develop and maintain a programme to continually evaluate the effectiveness of objectives and achievement of actions (incorporating performance measures).	Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1	Steering Group Programme Advisory Group Steering Group Steering Group		L L L	H H H			Inception
1.2	Develop and maintain a regionally consistent information base about natural hazards (and community exposure to them). Refer to Appendix B and build on this information. · Develop common terminology and definitions for natural hazard management. · Develop common/shared Information Management Protocols. · Establish a mechanism to regularly update and share the latest scientific information. · Monitor natural hazard trends in the region, including recording the occurrence of extreme events.	Years 1-5 Year 1 Year 1 Years 1-2 Years 1-5	Steering Group – assisted by Technical Advisory Group		M	H			Workstream: Research & Information
1.3	Develop, fund and co-ordinate agreed natural hazards research programmes. · Identify, programme and prioritise research.	Years 1-5	Steering Group, GWRC and Councils assisted by Technical Advisory Group		M		H			Workstream: Research & Information
Working with our Communities
1.4	Provide for ongoing community resilience through education and information about long-term risk reduction across a range of natural hazards.	Years 1-5	Steering Group, WREMO, Business, Professional, Services and Community Organisations		L			M		Workstream: Education
1.5	Encourage better understanding of hazards, risks and consequences by all stakeholders on an ongoing basis	Years 1-5	Councils, Community, Businesses		L		M
OUTCOMES: Councils and communities have a good understanding of the risks associated with natural hazards and will be in a position to make well informed decision. PERFORMANCE MEASURES: Community Surveys/Responses (using established practices); Use the Long Term Plan process to plan actions, with a link to funding and definitive timeline.

OBJECTIVE 2: Our planning takes a long term risk-based approach (Planning)
Working together as Councils
2.1	Summarise all risk based methodologies and agree on consistent approaches for applying the risk based approach to natural hazards planning.	Years 1-2	Steering Group, Technical Advisory Group, Lifelines Groups		L	H			Workstream: Planning
2.2	Ensure that the different timeframes over which natural hazards are likely to occur are recognised and provided for.	Years 1-2	Steering Group		L	H			Workstream: Planning
Working with our Communities
2.3	Raise awareness about community needs and educate about council and lifeline utility responsibilities for managing impacts from natural hazards (eg, in land use planning). · Prepare a community engagement plan and undertake regular consultation with communities. · Engage with partners and stakeholders to define acceptable levels of risk	Years 1-5		Steering Group WREMO Insurance industry	M	H			Workstream: Education
OUTCOMES: Councils and Communities understand and agree what is acceptable risk, and base land use and asset planning decisions on this agreement. PERFORMANCE MEASURES: Damage costs associated with natural hazard events; Demonstration of identification of and response to natural hazards in new developments and existing established areas (e.g. across contents of regional, district, and asset management plans)

OBJECTIVE 3: Consistent approaches are applied to natural hazard risk reduction (Consistency)
Working together as Councils
3.1	Develop regionally consistent and coordinated city, district and regional plan provisions, including agreed objectives, policies, rules and methods. · Prepare jointly across all councils in the region and obtain buy-in from communities at an early stage (single process, single cost, rather than repeated multiple times, with duplicated costs).	Years 1-5	Steering Group, Council Planners		M	H			Workstream: Planning
3.2	Cooperate on common issues depending on the nature of the hazard and possible hazards management policy approaches · Develop common natural hazard policy approaches, standards or management plans for assets and infrastructure across the region for partner councils, network or lifeline utilities. These should be cross-referenced to development planning. · Formulate principles for decision-making, construction and urban design guidelines for hard protection structures (e.g. seawalls). · Develop common approaches and standards for LIM reporting	Years 1-5	Steering Group, Council Planners		L	H
3.3	Develop joint funding proposals for Long Term Plans and Annual Plans where there are areas of common concern around natural hazard planning.	Years 1-5	Steering Group		L
Working together with our communities
3.4	Strengthen linkages between council planning practices,civil defence emergency management recovery plans and the resilience programmes of lifeline utility providers	Years 1-5	Steering Group, WREMO, Council Planners		L	M
OUTCOMES: Councils follow a consistent approach in implementing practices and planning principles. PERFORMANCE MEASURES: Measure against findings of the Stocktake and Issues Report, and evolving good practice.

OBJECTIVE 4: We have an agreed set of priorities to reduce the risk from natural hazards (Prioritisation)
Working together as Councils
4.1	Recognise existing capabilities and agreeing to a forward work programme. · Develop a set of criteria to determine priorities and identify “quick wins” (e.g. priorities to be aligned with national, regional and district plans). · Identify and apply the range of tools to inform decision-making on vulnerabilities and likely effectiveness of actions. · Develop a regional resource base to build capacity and up-skill staff and community representatives.	Years 1-2 Year 1 Years 1-2 Years 1-5	Steering Group		L L L M	M H H M			Workstream: Planning
4.2	Assess acceptable risk with partners and stakeholders and provide targeted planning guidance (to avoid, mitigate and/or remedy). · Prioritise actions at regional level but also recognise local conditions and differences in the nature and risk of hazards.	Years 1-5 Years 1-5	Steering Group – assisted by Technical Advisory Group		M M	H M			Workstream: Planning
Working with our Communities
4.3	Engage with partners and stakeholders in prioritisation of decisions.	Years 1-5	Councils, Iwi		L	H			Workstream: ALL
4.4	Work with reference groups and involve other methods of community input into prioritisation.	Years 1-5	Steering Group Community		M	M			Workstream: ALL
OUTCOMES: Councils and Communities work towards an agreed set of priorities that are reflected in the Regional Policy Statement and Regional and District Plans, Annual and Long Term Plans, and Asset Management Plans. PERFORMANCE MEASURES: Measure against findings of Stocktake and Issues report; Inclusion of actions in Long Term and Annual Plans; The number of actions or activities successfully implemented.

References

(n.d.).

Allan, S. (n.d.). Impacts of climate change on urban infrastructure and the built environment : A toolbox; Tool 1.4: Urban Environments and Climate Change - Statutory Context. Retrieved 2015, from NIWA: https://www.niwa.co.nz/sites/niwa.co.nz/files/tool_1.4_climate_change_and_the_urban_environment_statutory_context.pdf

Building Act. (2004). Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment; Reprint as at 1 January 2015.

Civil Defence Emergency Management Act. (2002). Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management; Reprint as at 1 January 2014.

GNS Science. (2015 a). Risk-based-planning-approach-and-steps. Retrieved from GNS Science: http://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/RBP/Risk-based-planning/A-toolbox/Risk-based-planning-approach-and-steps

GNS Science. (2015 b). Natural Hazards: Earthquakes. Retrieved 2015, from GNS Science: http://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/Our-Science/Natural-Hazards/Earthquakes

GNS Science. (2015 c). New Zealand Active Faults Database. Retrieved 2015, from GNS Science: http://data.gns.cri.nz/af/

GNS Science. (2015 d). Risk-based planning approach and steps: Step 1 - Know your hazard. Retrieved 2015, from GNS Science: http://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/RBP/Risk-based-planning/A-toolbox/Risk-based-planning-approach-and-steps/Step-1-Know-your-hazard

Greater Wellington Regional Council. (2012). Wellington - highest rate of sea-level rise in NZ. Retrieved 2015, from Greater Wellington Regional Council: http://www.gw.govt.nz/wellington-highest-rate-of-sea-level-rise-in-nz/

Greater Wellington Regional Council. (2013). Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region. Wellington: Greater Wellington Regional Council.

Greater Wellington Regional Council. (2014). Section 32 Report: Natural Hazards (Preliminary draft for discussion). Wellington: Greater Wellington Regional Council.

Greater Wellington Regional Council. (2015). Greater Wellington GIS Viewer. Retrieved 2015, from Greater Wellington Regional Council: http://mapping.gw.govt.nz/gwrc/

Group, Technical Advisory. (2012). Report of the Minister for the Environment’s Resource Management Act 1991 Principles Technical Advisory GrouP. Wellington.

Lane, E., Gorman, R., Plew, D., & Stephens, S. (2012). Assessing the storm inundation hazard for coastal margins around the Wellington region. Wellington: NIWA Client Report CHC2012-073 prepared for Greater Wellington Regional Council, Kapiti Coast District Council and Wellington City Council.

Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act. (1987). Section 44A: Land information memorandum. Department of Internal Affairs; Reprint March 2015.

Managing Flood Risk. (NZS9401:2008). Managing Flood Risk – A process standard, NZS9401:2008. Standards New Zealand.

Ministry for the Environment. (2008 a). Climate Change Effects and Impacts Assessment: A Guidance Manual for Local Government in New Zealand. 2nd Edition. Mullan B; Wratt D; Dean S; Hollis M; Allan S; Williams T, Kenny G and MfE. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.

Ministry for the Environment. (2008 b). Preparing for climate change: A Guidance Manual for Local Government in New Zealand. Ministry for the Environment.

Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. (2001). Building on the edge: The use and development of land on or close to fault lines. Wellington: Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment.

Power, W. (2013). Review of Tsnunami Hazard in New Zealand. GNS Science consultancy Report 2013/131.

Quality Planning. (n.d.). Risk-based approach to planning for natural hazards. Retrieved 2015, from The RMA Quality Planning Resource: http://www.qualityplanning.org.nz/index.php/planning-tools/natural-hazards/risk-based-approach-to-planning-for-natural-hazards

Ramsay, D., Gibberd, B., Dahm, J., & Bell, R. (2012). Defining coastal hazard zones and setback lines. A guide to good practice. Hamilton, New Zealand: National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd.

Resource Management Act. (1991). Ministry for the Environment; Reprint as at 3 March 2015.

Saunders, W., Beban, J., & Coomer, M. (2014). Analysis of natural hazard provisions in regional policy statements, territorial plans, and CDEM Group Plans. GNS Science Report 2014/28.

Smith, N. (2015). Next steps in National’s Bluegreen agenda. Wild Things Conference; 13th August 2015.

The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement. (2010). Policies 24: Identification of coastal hazards; 25: Subdivision, use, and development in areas of coastal hazard risk; 26: Natural defences against coastal hazards; 27: Strategies for protecting significant existing development from coastal hazard risk.

UNISDR. (n.d.). Local HFA: Local Government Self Assessment Tool (LGSAT). Retrieved 2015, from Prevention Web: http://www.preventionweb.net/applications/hfa/assets/lgsat/documents/en/LGSAT_Offline_Template_en.pdf

Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group. (2007). Updated Hazard and Risk Analysis for the Wellington Region CDEM Group Plan. Wellington.

Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group. (2013). Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan 2013 - 2018. Wellington.

Appendix A Methodology

The Strategy has been developed through a series of workshops involving representatives of the councils and a wider group of stakeholders who have participated at different stages.

The methodology for the development of the Strategy incorporates five stages:

· Stage 1: Vision and Objectives

· Stage 2: Issue Identification

· Stage 3: Draft Action Plan

· Stage 4: Local Government Act hearing processes

· Stage 5: Confirmation and implementation of the Strategy

Methodology for the development of the Natural Hazard Management Strategy

Stage 1: Vision and Objectives

The vision and objectives were first developed, along with a series of principles. These were made available for public review.

Stage 2: Issue Identification

A Stocktake and Issues Report^{^[17]} forms part of Stage 2 Issue Identification and outlines the results of a stocktake to better understand what information currently exists across the respective councils on hazards and hazard risk, and how these risks are currently managed. The stocktake provided an initial identification of key issues in relation to consistency in approach and application of good practice in hazard/risk mapping and planning provisions used by different local authorities.

Stage 3: Draft Action Plan (subject of this report)

Numerous actions to achieve the objectives were then developed through further engagement, and refined into:

· A concise set of actions and an implementation plan

· An equally important set of “ways of working” which will help to inform and provide guidance to those engaged in the actions

Governance and Reporting

The following diagram sets out the governance and reporting structure that has been followed in the preparation of the Strategy.

Timeline

The following timeline illustrates what has been completed and what the next steps are:

The Project Team

Dr Iain Dawe, Senior Policy Advisor (Hazards), Greater Wellington Regional Council

Sylvia Allan, Allan Planning & Research Ltd

Caroline van Halderen, Senior Planner, MWH

Council Representatives (the representatives varied over the period of the project)

Matthew Hickman, Greater Wellington Regional Council

Nicola Etheridge, Upper Hutt City Council and Porirua City Council

Matt Trlin, Porirua City Council and BECA

Jonathan Streat, Greater Wellington Regional Council

Sharyn Westlake, Greater Wellington Regional Council

Lucy Harper, Greater Wellington Regional Council

Tracy Berghan, Greater wellington Regional Council

Andrew Cumming, Hutt City Council

Bronwyn Little, Hutt City Council

Angela Bell, Upper Hutt City Council

John McSweeney, Wellington City Council

Mitch Lewandowski, Wellington City Council

Andrew McLeod, Wellington City Council

Peter Matich, Porirua City Council

Alison Lash, Kāpiti Coast District Council

Sarah Stevenson, Kāpiti Coast District Council

Sherilyn Hinton, Kāpiti Coast District Council

Darryl Lew, Kāpiti Coast District Council

WREMO

Bruce Pepperell

Sarah Gauden-Ing

Technical Experts

Dr Rob Bell, Principal Scientist, Coastal and Estuarine Physical Processes, NIWA

Dr Andrew Taie, Principal Scientist, Climate, NIWA

Dr Graeme Smart, Principal Scientist, Natural Hazards and Hydrodynamics, NIWA

Chris Robson, Engineering Geologist, MWH

Appendix B Description of Natural Hazards in the

Wellington Region

Natural events become hazardous when they adversely affect human lives. The Wellington region has one of the most physically diverse environments in New Zealand. It is also one of the most populous regions and, consequently, communities are affected by a wide range of natural hazards. The Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management group developed a comprehensive hazard and risk analysis report describing the region’s most at-risk areas from its relevant hazards in 2007 (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007)(Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007). This report combined with the Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region provides the background information on hazards and risks within the Wellington region (Greater Wellington Regional Council, 2013)(Greater Wellington Regional Council, 2013).

Earthquakes

The Wellington region is located within an area of high seismicity near the boundary of the Pacific and Australian tectonic plates. Stresses in the earth’s crust produced by the subduction margin have produced a number of faults, both on land and on the seafloor, around the Wellington region. Many of these faults are still active and present a significant hazard. Earthquakes are caused when stresses that have built up on these faults are released, creating earthquake hazards of surface fault rupture, ground shaking and, in some areas, liquefaction (and potentially landslides and tsunami which are covered in a separate section of this report). The five faults that could potentially cause the most damage in the region are shown in the table below together with their recurrence intervals and maximum magnitudes.

Recurrence Interval & Maximum Magnitude for six of Wellington’s Most Potentially Damaging Faults

Fault	Recurrence interval (yrs)	Elapsed time since last event (yrs)	Maximum Magnitude (Richter Scale)
Wellington Fault	~ 900	~ 300	7.6
Ohariu Fault and North Ohariu	2200	1050 - 1000	7.6
Ohariu Fault and North Ohariu	1500 - 3500	~ 1000	7.3 - 7.7
Wairarapa Fault	~ 1200	160	8.3
Carterton Fault	700 -1000	unknown	7.0
Hikurangi Subduction Zone (whole)	6000 -7000	unknown	9.0
Masterton Fault	~ 1000	unknown	6.7
Hikurangi Subduction Zone (partial)	~ 500 - 1000	~ 550	8.1 – 8.5

Surface fault ruptures occur particularly in sufficiently large (magnitude 7.0+) and shallow (< 40 km) earthquakes where the fault movement may cause vertical uplift / downthrust or horizontal / lateral movements that deform the ground surface. Of particular interest are high magnitude earthquakes (7.0+) from the rupture of a local fault (especially the Wellington Fault) that will cause wide spread ground deformation and uplift and/or subsidence.

Ground shaking is the most widespread effect of an earthquake and is usually most severe closest to the fault. On release, waves of energy travel through the ground and produce a shaking effect. When the waves reach ground level, they slow down and are transformed into surface waves that produce either a vertical or lateral movement. The ground shaking is influenced by surface geology. In loose unconsolidated sediments such as gravels, sands and silts, ground shaking effects can be amplified. Areas likely to experience the highest amplification include reclaimed land around central Wellington, Kilbirnie, Rongotai and Miramar, Petone, Lower Hutt, Wainuiomata, Mangaroa Valley and low-lying areas around Porirua Harbour and Pauatahanui.

Liquefaction occurs when unconsolidated soils, particularly silty and sandy soils, become saturated with water in a shaking event and behave more as a liquid than a solid. Liquefaction has a range of associated effects such as ground subsidence, lateral spreading, landslides, foundation failures, flotation of buried structures and water fountaining. Areas at risk in the Wellington region include reclaimed land around Wellington City; Hutt River mouth and lower floodplain (Petone, Seaview, Gracefield); Porirua CBD and Pauatahanui; low lying areas on the Kāpiti coast, and areas built on drained/reclaimed watercourses or swamps (e.g. Wainuiomata, Miramar Peninsula interior and Kilbirnie).

Coastal Hazards

With over 500 km of coastline, the Wellington region is exposed to coastal hazards from a range of sources. Coastal hazards encompass coastal erosion and inundation, sea-level rise and tsunami.

Coastal erosion and inundation, often associated with storm surges and wave overtopping, have the capacity to cause significant damage to infrastructure and flooding in low-lying coastal areas. Storms in the Wellington region generally come from three main sources: southerly storms usually in winter, northwest storms persisting in spring and ex-tropical cyclones typically in summer and autumn months.

A storm surge is the short term elevation of the local sea level due to meteorological conditions of wind set-up and barometric lift (inverse barometer effect from relaxation of sea surface during low atmospheric pressure). Waves cause an additional wave setup through the surf zone and then run-up on the beach or seawall.

Around the Wellington region a combined storm-tide and wave setup elevation with a return period of 100 years is around 1.6–2.5 m (Otaki-Kāpiti), 1.6–2.3 m (south Wellington), and 1.5 m (Wellington Harbour) above Wellington Vertical Datum -1953 (Lane, Gorman, Plew, & Stephens, 2012)Invalid source specified..

Due to a mix of natural processes of geology, tectonics, sediment supply, wave exposure, storm-tide and relative sea-level rise, some sections of the coastline are in long term retreat – such as Paekākāriki and Te Kopi on the south Wairarapa Coast. Other areas have episodes of erosion that form part of a cycle of erosion and deposition (such as Paraparaumu). Storm-tide, wave run-up and associated coastal erosion can also cause inundation. Places particularly susceptible to coastal flooding and overtopping include areas on the Kāpiti Coast (Raumati South, Paekākāriki), Wellington south coast (Island Bay, Lyall Bay) and Wellington Harbour (Eastbourne, SH2, Lambton Quay).

Wellington has experienced an average rise in sea level of about 2 mm per year over the past 100 years. Most of this rise is due to climate change but it is being exacerbated by subsidence of the region (lower North Island) over the past decade, caused by slow-slip seismic events from deep tectonic plate movements. Projections for the end of this century indicate that the sea level in Wellington region could rise by 0.8 m by the 2090’s or 1.0 m by 2115 (Greater Wellington Regional Council, 2012)Invalid source specified., in line with the Ministry for the Environment guidance for coastal hazards and climate change (Ministry for the Environment, 2008 a)Invalid source specified..

A tsunami is a series of waves generated by the sudden displacement of a water surface. The three main generating mechanisms are submarine fault ruptures, underwater or aerial landslides or volcanic activity. The Wellington region is at risk from tsunami generated from both distant (far-field > 3 hr travel time) and local sources (near-field < 1 hour travel time). Regionally-generated tsunami with 1–3 hr travel time (e.g. Solomon Islands or northern Kermadec area) are considered to pose less threat. Earthquakes off the coast of Chile present the largest far-field tsunami risk for the Central New Zealand region, while there are three potential sources of near-field tsunamis: the Hikurangi Subduction Margin of Pacific/Australia Plate boundary off the southeast coast, local faults in Cook Strait and submarine landslides off Cook Strait Canyon (Power, 2013)Invalid source specified..

Flooding

A flood occurs when an area of land, usually low-lying, is inundated with water from river flooding, flash floods or ponding. Frequent heavy rainstorms, the steep gradients of many river catchments and human occupation of floodplains combine to make flooding the most frequently occurring natural hazard event in the Wellington region. A heavy rainfall event is defined as 100 mm over a 24-hour period. The classic mechanism in the region for localised severe rainfall is a southerly front meeting a northwest front. The areas of greatest flood risk in the region are those catchments and floodplains that drain both west and east of the Tararua Range, where the highest rainfall occurs.

Flood risk also arises from high-intensity short-duration events over, for example 30 minutes to a few hours i.e. flash flooding.

River flooding from bank overtopping onto flood plains from prolonged rainfall is a particular risk for the Otaki and Waikanae River flood plains and the Lower Hutt valley. A credible event is a 500 year flooding event on the Hutt River exceeding the design standard of the stop banks. In order for this to occur, heavy intense rainfall from a stationary front bringing over 500 mm of rain over a 36-48 hour period to the Hutt River Catchment is needed. This would flood the Hutt Valley floodplain as well as causing flooding in the Otaki or Waikanae River valleys.

Serious flooding can also occur should flood defences fail before their supposed design capacity is reached. This can occur, for example, due to “piping” through or under banks, debris jams, out-flanking, bank scouring, bank slumping, landslide induced “tsunami” and channel capacity loss through in-channel deposition.

Sedimentation and erosion of rivers and streams, river mouths and tidal inlets, can be sudden (during an event) or develop gradually over time and can further exacerbate the flood risk by raising bed levels and undermining banks.

Flash flooding from intense heavy rainstorms is a high risk in short steep catchments such as in Waikanae, and Paekakariki. Surface flooding or ponding is due to the capacity of stormwater systems being exceeded, impeded drainage (drains being blocked) or antecedent conditions of the water table being high when the ground is waterlogged. This can occur around Porirua Harbour and Pauatahanui Inlet, as well as localised areas, such as the inter-dune depressions on Kāpiti Coast, and parts of Wellington City and Lower Hutt.

Other Natural Hazards

Landslides

The geology, tectonic setting and climate make the Wellington region particularly prone to landslides. These factors combined with inappropriate planning decisions and inadequate engineering design / maintenance make landslides second only to flooding, in terms of the economic costs from damages (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007)(Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007).

Whether a slope fails or not depends on a balance between the strength of the slope material and the driving or shear stress acting on the slope. Water plays the biggest role in slope failure due to its addition to the mass on the slope. The two main types of antecedent conditions that lead to slips in the region are i) a wet winter with susceptibility increasing towards the end of the period, and ii) a dry summer with a major rainstorm event producing falls of over 200 mm.

Based on the region’s historical record, there are on average seven significant rainfall-triggered landslide events every year (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007)(Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007). The next most common triggering mechanism is earthquake shaking. Strong earthquake shaking of intensity > MM eight is likely to generate large (>100,000 m³) bedrock landslides throughout the region. This intensity of shaking is expected in the region every 170 years on average.

Drought

Drought is a prolonged period of low rainfall leading to a severe soil moisture deficit. It becomes a hazard when people choose to live (and/or derive their livelihoods from the land) in drought-prone areas or when the drought limits water availability for municipal supply.

Research by the GWRC indicates a relationship between the Southern Oscillation Index and seasonal low rainfalls (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007)(Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007). La Niña conditions, with predominant easterly/northeasterly flows, often result in lower than average rainfall in Kāpiti, the western and southern Tararua Range and the Rimutaka Range. This leads to low flows in the Otaki, Waikanae, Hutt, Wainuiomata and Orongorongo Rivers. Furthermore, if El Niño conditions are present in spring, then summer rainfall is likely to be below average in the central Wairarapa.

Wildfire

A wildfire is an unplanned blaze that starts in an open space, such as a hillside. Wildfires can be started through lightning strikes, arson, sparks (e.g. from a truck tyre blowout or train), or from out-of-control camp fires. Wildfire risk is heightened during prolonged drought conditions. The way a wildfire spreads will depend on the fuel (e.g. wood, scrub, dry grass/undergrowth), available oxygen, weather conditions (wind speed and direction, temperature, humidity) and slope angle.

Around 20 per cent of the land (165,500 hectares) in the Wellington region is at high to extreme risk from wildfire. This land is characterised by gorse and scrub vegetation, steep slopes, low rainfall and proximity to human habitation. The most at-risk areas are the southern and western edges of Wellington, the eastern Hutt hills and areas around Wainuiomata and Eastbourne.

Wind

High winds can occur throughout the region and can cause widespread damage to buildings, infrastructure and forestry. These winds may also disrupt transport (particularly ferry crossings and plane landings), and impact on power and telecommunication lines. The windiest areas are generally along Wellington’s coasts. Westerly winds, turned south by the Tararua Range, are funnelled through the gap of Cook Strait to produce strong north or north-westerly winds in the western Wellington region. Southerly winds flow parallel to the main Wellington ranges and are not as strong or as characteristically gusty as the north-westerly, however, they have higher average sustained wind speeds. The return period for a severe wind gust (sustained over 3 seconds) of 200 kph is roughly 140 yr (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007)(Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007).

Lightning

Lightning occurs most frequently in the region during northwest storms but can also occur when a cold dry southerly front meets a warm moist northerly front, or from cumulonimbus thunder cells. Higher incidence of lightning strikes occur in the Tararua ranges, north Wairarapa and Kāpiti Coast. On average, there are between 0.15 and 0.7 lightning flashes per square kilometre every year in the region. Risk from lightening is low and can be reduced to near zero if basic precautions are undertaken (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007)(Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007).

Snow and Hail

Hail can occur in southerly storms, when a cold dry southerly front meets a warm moist northerly front, or from convection thunder cells (cumulonimbus) on warm summer days. Hail is considered severe when it is over 30 mm diameter (golf ball size) (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007)(Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007).

Snowfalls occur in the region in winter and early spring each year. These falls are generated from southerly storms, and are particularly located in the Hutt Valley, SH1 north of Paraparaumu and elevated areas above 500 metres. Heavy snowfall is regarded as more than 25 cm falling in a 24 hr period or 10 cm in 6 hrs. Falls below 200m above sea level are infrequent but 1 per year may be expected at between 200-500 m and 5 per year at 600-1000 m (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007)(Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2007).

Volcanic Hazard

There are no volcanoes in the Wellington region. However, there is a residual risk from ash fall from volcanic eruptions in other areas. Based on the 1995 and 1996 Mt Ruapehu eruptions the extent of ash fall for the Wellington region is estimated to be around 1 mm if winds are from northwest direction. The consequences of ash fall include human health impacts, economic impacts such as damage to property, clean-up costs, contamination of water supplies and possible closure of the airport.

Appendix C Planning Legislative Framework

This section outlines the planning provisions that councils use for managing natural hazard risk. To understand this it is necessary to consider the wider RMA framework.

Resource Management Act

The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) provides a mandate for councils to manage natural hazards, climate change impacts and the effects of hazard mitigation measures on the environment and is the primary statute for promoting hazard provision in regional and district plans. The legislation reflects the concept that decisions which affect local communities should be made by those communities.

While natural hazards are not specifically mentioned in Part 2 of the RMA, there are many activities involved in the mitigation of natural hazards that may be considered under Part 2 matters. There are a number of sections and subsections under Part 4 of the RMA that require regional and district councils to manage the effects of natural hazards and to gather information, undertake research and keep records of natural hazards, viz s30(1), s35(1) and S35(5j) (Resource Management Act, 1991)Invalid source specified..

Subdivision and land development is controlled through the RMA. The legislation grants local authorities powers under s106 (and s220) to refuse subdivision if the land is prone to natural hazards. Whilst this is an important provision, regional and district plans would incorporate adequate limitations to prevent the subdivision and development of at-risk land, or ensure mitigation methods for any development that does take place (Allan, n.d.)Invalid source specified..

The Minister for the Environment’s recent speech to the Environmental Defence Society’s conference reconfirmed the current Government’s intent to secure better management of natural hazards through changes to the RMA (Smith, 2015)Invalid source specified.. Details on these changes are yet to be released.

National Policy Statements and National Environmental Standards

National Policy Statements (NPSs) provide direction to local government on how competing national benefits and local costs should be balanced. National environmental standards (NESs) are regulations that set baseline nationwide minimum standards for particular issues.

While there are yet no national policy statements or national environmental standards addressing particular natural hazards, the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010 (NZCPS 2010) identifies coastal erosion and other natural hazards as a key issue facing the coastal environment. The NZCPS includes policies on the identification of coastal hazards (The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement, 2010)Invalid source specified.. These policies relate to at least a 100-year planning horizon, subdivision, use and development in areas of coastal hazard risk; natural defences against coastal hazards; and strategies for protecting significant existing development from coastal hazard risk.

The Minister for the Environment recently confirmed the Government’s intent to pursue a National Policy Statement on Natural Hazards, in addition to changes to the RMA itself, which will strengthen the system for managing risk from natural hazards (Smith, 2015)Invalid source specified..

Given the anticipated RMA reforms and their focus on the management of natural hazards, local authorities will need to be aware of developments at the national level in the event that new NPSs and NESs are developed and consider whether and how to incorporate such documents into their RMA plans and decision-making.

Wellington Regional Policy Statement

The Wellington Regional Policy Statement (RPS) (operative from 2013) sets out the framework and priorities for resource management in the Wellington region, including natural hazards. The RMA requires all regional councils to produce an RPS for their region and to review it every 10 years. Regional and district plans must “give effect” to the RPS. The current RPS for the Wellington Region takes a general “all hazards” approach and mentions all the main hazards experienced in the region.

There are a number of non-regulatory methods in the RPS that will assist in managing natural hazards, both explicitly and indirectly in the regional plan. These methods relate to the sharing and collection of hazards information, integrating management across administrative boundaries and assisting with biodiversity restoration projects.

To ensure integration with other hazard management activities in the region, the preparation of hazard provisions in the regional policy statement is linked with work being undertaken, and priorities established, as part of the Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan (CDEM Group Plan).

Wellington Regional Plans

Regional plans address specific hazard issues relevant to regional council functions including coastal hazards, floodplain management, land stability and geothermal hazards. A regional council can prepare a specific natural hazard regional plan; however, the interrelated nature of hazards with other environmental features or effects means that natural hazard provisions are generally dispersed amongst various sections of other regional plans.

Regional plans can contain objectives, policies and rules addressing natural hazards. Unlike district councils, regional councils can have rules in regional plans for controlling land (for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating natural hazards) that are exempt from existing use right clauses under s10(4) of the RMA. This makes them particularly useful in managing natural hazard risk in areas where development has taken place before plan rules to manage these risks could be implemented.

Regional plans generally include rules requiring resource consents and set out specific objectives and policies against which such consents are measured.

In Wellington, there is no regional plan for natural hazards, but there are hazard-related policies in the coastal, freshwater and soils plans. The regional coastal plan has hazard policies relating to occupation, use and disturbance of the foreshore, the freshwater plan deals with flood hazards and mitigation, and the soils plan has policies relating to soil erosion (Greater Wellington Regional Council, 2014)Invalid source specified..

The regional plans are currently under review in the proposed Natural Resources Plan (NRP), which was publicly notified in late July 2015. The proposed NRP combines coastal and regional plans and incorporates regulatory and non-regulatory methods. It is taking a general hazards approach without singling out individual hazards.

Council District Plans

Territorial authorities are required to prepare a district plan for their district and these plans are required to give effect to regional policy statements. Territorial authorities, when reviewing their district plan, need to be aware of the direction outlined in a regional policy statement, and how that should be implemented through their district plan. The Wellington RPS directs councils to identify high hazard areas and avoid inappropriate development in those areas.

Wellington City Council (WCC), Porirua City Council (PCC), Hutt City Council (HCC), Upper Hutt City Council (UHCC) and Kāpiti Coast District Council (KCDC) are all involved in developing the proposed Natural Hazards Strategy. The current RPS post-dates the development of most of their district plans. New plans and plan reviews need to provide clear direction through policy, rules and other means as to the approach and the desired outcomes sought in managing natural hazard risk.

Other

It is also important to consider non-RMA legislation available to manage natural hazards. The Local Government Act, Building Act and the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act are complementary to the RMA, and whilst these have different functions in relation to natural hazards management they are particularly relevant for the NHMS. Furthermore, specific to flooding hazards, NZS 9401:2008, the Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Act 1948 (SCRCA), Land Drainage Act 1908 (LDA), and the River Boards Act 1908 (RBA) also form part of the statutory context. This context is summarised below.

Local Government Act 2002

The Local Government Act (LGA) focuses on the functions and operations of local government and includes financial management, and provision and management of community infrastructure. The Act requires local authorities to prepare Long Term Plans (LTP) to describe the activities and strategic direction of the local authority over a 10-year period. The main tool for addressing risk management for key community assets is the Asset Management Plan which deals with the procedures and works required to meet functional requirements of assets and infrastructure. Both these plans are expected to include (and continue to review) climate change risks on an ongoing basis, using up-to-date information on the extent and likely effects of potential change.

Local Government Official Information Act 1987

Under this Act Local Authorities must issue a Land Information Memorandum (LIM) on request that details information held about a property including relevant natural hazards information. If that information is included in the District Plan, the authority is not required to include it in the LIM.

Building Act 2004

The Building Act prescribes the legal requirements for all buildings and includes sustainability as its core purpose. The Act allows local authorities to delay building work until a resource consent is obtained and can apply where development is taking place on hazard-prone land where plan rules require a resource consent (s37) (Building Act, 2004)Invalid source specified..

The Building Code is a regulation that accompanies the Building Act and is required to take account of all physical conditions that may affect a building, including temperature, water, snow, wind, differential movement, time-dependent effects and reversing and fluctuating effects. The Building Code also applies to site works, which must take into account changes in groundwater level, water, weather and vegetation, and ground loss and slumping.

Under the Building Code, structural elements of buildings and elements that are difficult to replace must be designed for a life not less than 50 years. This provision is for the protection of life in a hazard event, rather than maintaining the integrity of the building.

Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002

One purpose of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (CDEM) is to improve and promote the sustainable management of hazards in a way that contributes to the social, economic, cultural and environmental well-being and safety of the public, and also the protection of property (s3) (s4) (s7) (Civil Defence Emergency Management Act, 2002)Invalid source specified..

The Act provides for planning and preparation for emergencies and for response and recovery in the event of an emergency. While it focuses on emergencies and appropriate responses, it also has strong community engagement and risk management aims.

The CDEM Act requires the CDEM Group^{^[18]} to produce a group civil defence emergency management plan. The broad purpose of a CDEM group plan is to enable the effective and efficient management of natural, biological and technological hazards for which a coordinated approach would be required to manage an incident.

The second generation Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan (CDEM group plan) was made operative in 2013 (Wellington Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2013)Invalid source specified.. In addition to containing operating procedures for the response to hazard events, it also analyses all the hazards that affect the region and ranks them according to their effects and the vulnerability of the community.

NZS 9401:2008

NZS 9401:2008 provides a risk-based approach for the management of flood risk. The standard requires:

· A broad understanding of the natural and human systems from catchment headwaters to the seas, their interactions and the significant factors that affect flooding and in its impact on society

· A rigorous basis for managing flood risk, within broadly defined and evolving concepts of sustainability and the behaviour of natural systems

· Comprehensive assessment of risks associated with floods, and their management;

· Involvement of all stakeholders

· Definition and agreement on the roles, responsibilities and function for flood risk management among individuals and organisations from local to national level.

Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Act 1948, Land Drainage Act 1908 & River Boards Act 1908

These three Acts provide operational powers for regional councils and territorial authorities to carry out works to protect property from flood damage and prevent soil erosion. The SCRCA is the most important of these for taking active steps to prevent flooding or control its effects (Technical Advisory Group, 2012).

The powers of local authorities under these Acts are subject to the RMA. For example, section 13 of the RMA places a restriction on certain uses of beds of lakes and rivers unless expressly permitted by a national environmental standard, regional plan or resource consent. Activities undertaken under these Acts need to comply with this restriction. Further, while the Acts provide authorities with powers to enter and use property to manage flood risk, they are subject to existing protection for private property rights (Technical Advisory Group, 2012).

The Government has been considering for a number of years whether to repeal these Acts and include their relevant provisions in other legislation (such as the LGA).

Legislative Framework for Natural Hazards Management in New Zealand

Appendix D Good Practice

This section provides a broad summary of ‘Good Practice’ for natural hazard management. The summary is based on input from the project technical experts and also on existing good practice material. Where existing good practice material is used the relevant references are provided. Non-referenced statements are based on the views of the project technical experts.

Hazard and Risk Information

This section provides an overview of ‘good practice’ in terms of collection of natural hazard information. Hazard information is clearly important to the management of natural hazards as it informs quality decision-making processes.

The detail of the information gathered should be proportionate to the nature of the decision-making process, e.g. higher level regional policy will need less detailed information, while land use regulation intended to apply at a property-by-property level requires more detailed information. In this respect the Quality Planning website, (Quality Planning)Invalid source specified., recommends varying scales for hazard mapping based on the intended end-use, as follows:

· Regional (1:100,000 to 1:500,000)

· Medium (1:25,000 to 1:50,000) - typically municipal or small metropolitan areas

· Small (1:5,000 to 1:15,000) - typically site or property level. This scale is recommended for district plan hazard mapping.

Good practice also includes knowledge of and active use of online resources which contribute to a combined approach for the region. By way of example, key resources which should be utilised for good practice in determining earthquake hazards are set out below in the table. Contributing to the updating of these resources will ensure a greater shared knowledge of natural hazards.

Earthquake Hazard Key Resources

Resource	Link to Resource
GNS Science (GNS Science, 2015 b)Invalid source specified.	http://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/Our-Science/Natural-Hazards/Earthquakes
Greater Wellington GIS Viewer (Greater Wellington Regional Council, 2015)Invalid source specified.	http://www.mapping.gw.govt.nz/gwrc
PCE guidelines for building near fault lines (Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, 2001)Invalid source specified.	http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/Reports/pdf/Building_edge.pdf
GNS Science: New Zealand Active Faults Database (GNS Science, 2015 c)Invalid source specified.	http://data.gns.cri.nz/af/

The key information that needs to be gathered should cover all types of natural hazards present in an area, and their geographic extent within the area, their magnitude and return period. The table below provides a summary of the key parameters for good practice natural hazard information.

In addition to information directly related to the natural hazard, information is also needed to help inform understanding of the consequences associated with a hazard event. Such information should include the nature of existing and ‘planned’ land uses in the area expected to be impacted by the hazard. This may include information on key infrastructure and community resources or facilities, building construction type, and local demographic and economic information (GNS Science, 2015 d)Invalid source specified.. Information should also be available on the known inadequacies limitations and weaknesses of existing hazard mitigation works (e.g. flood protection works) and the influence that climate change may have on the magnitude, changing frequency and risk of a hazard event.

Hazard Information Requirements

Natural Hazard	Key parameters of ‘Good Practice’
ALL	Information should be available to all council staff on GIS and a high level of internal awareness should be maintained of this information and how it should be used
	Information on natural hazards and risk to property and regionally significant infrastructure should be made public
	Review and update information regularly, in accordance with a protocol
	The use of site-specific information which has been developed by others should be undertaken consistently and in accordance with a protocol
	Information, modelling and mapping of natural hazard extent and magnitude should take into account the impact of climate change, including sea-level rise and rainfall intensity
	The detail of the information should be appropriate to the intended end use
Flood Hazard	River/stream flood risk in urban or rural residential areas mapped to the 1% annual exceedance probability (AEP)
	Awareness of the weaknesses or limitation of flood protection works
	Residual risk for flood protection failure mapped (i.e. potential flooding losses with protection measures breached or overtopped).
	Extent of the mapped flood risk should take into account climate change (both on rainfall/runoff and sea-level rise at downstream boundary)
Earthquake Hazards	Fault trace maps should show level of uncertainty and constraint
	Liquefaction potential
	Ground shaking intensity
	Earthquake-induced slope failure potential
Coastal Hazards	Tsunami evacuation maps (using 2013 GNS tsunami review AEP levels as boundary wave heights)
	Coastal storm tide inundation to 1% AEP mapped and taking account of sea-level rise
	Evacuation maps for more vulnerable areas
	Identification of coastal erosion and inundation setbacks (Ramsay, Gibberd, Dahm, & Bell, 2012)Invalid source specified.
Other Hazards	Knowledge of area susceptible to landslide / slope instability
	Mapping of terrain categories for wind speed multipliers, based on AS-NZS 1170-2 (2011): Structural design actions - Part 2: Wind actions
	Consideration of the need to gather data on other hazards (e.g. wildfire, drought, thunderstorm/lightning)

In gathering and collecting information, consideration needs to be given to cross-boundary consistency and to how human activity and natural hazard events outside of a council’s jurisdiction may influence local natural hazards. In this respect, where a hazard risk crosses a boundary (e.g. a fault line or river) a coordinated effort to information gathering is recommended. Similarly, where activities from outside of the council’s area could influence the risk associated with a natural hazard then information on these matters should be collected.

Finally, the approach to information collection should recognise the cyclical nature of the planning process. In this respect information collection should be ongoing and include monitoring of the effectiveness of the natural hazard decision-making and management/treatment plan. A protocol should be established which ensures that the results of the monitoring are incorporated into an information review and update process.

Planning for Natural Hazards

Good practice recommends that a risk-based approach is taken to planning for natural hazards and follows a rational planning cycle (see diagram below). Detailed descriptions of the steps involved are provided on the Quality Planning (Quality Planning)Invalid source specified. and GNS websites (GNS Science, 2015 a)Invalid source specified. and with specific reference to flood risk in NZS 9401 (Managing Flood Risk, NZS9401:2008)Invalid source specified..

The initial phase in a risk-based planning approach is gathering information on the hazards of relevance to a district or region. Discussion on this aspect of the process is covered above. The next steps in the risk-based planning approach are to determine the consequences of the hazards occurring (including consequences from cascading hazards e.g. flooding and land slips) and then the likelihood of those hazards (or cascading hazards) occurring.

A variety of qualitative and quantitative methods are available to help determine the risk associated with a natural hazard. The method selected should be based on the hazard context, objectives of the analysis, the intended end use and resourcing. Consideration should also be given to cross-boundary consistency and how to incorporate cross-boundary influences on the consequences and likelihood of a hazard event. Finally, given that all approaches will contain a degree of uncertainty and inaccuracy, sensitivity analysis should be applied, i.e. the analysis should consider ‘what if’ the assumptions that have been made do not eventuate in the manner or to the extent envisaged.

A risk-based approach requires the ‘acceptable’ level of risk to be determined and a treatment or management plan established. While stakeholder engagement is important throughout the process, it is particularly critical during this phase. Determining the acceptable level of risk and the associated treatment plan involves evaluating trade-offs. The trade-offs that need to be considered are between an absolute risk-free community, the costs (environmental, social and economic) that may arise in achieving that outcome and who or what bears these costs. Community input is critical to this evaluation.

The treatment plan may involve regulatory (resource management policy and rules), non-regulatory (education and engagement programmes) and engineered solutions, or most likely a mix of these.

The final stage in the risk-based cycle is monitoring and evaluation. The purpose of this stage is to evaluate the effectiveness of measures implemented under the treatment plan and re-evaluate these where it is shown that they are not achieving the acceptable level of risk determined in the earlier stage.

Risk-based planning approach and steps (GNS Science, 2015 a)Invalid source specified.

Including Climate Change in Plans

Local authorities have both social and legal obligations to take climate change effects into account in their decision-making. Local government is required to operate under a range of principles that are set out in law or have evolved through good practice and case law. All must be kept in mind when dealing with climate change effects.

Guidance from the Ministry for the Environment, “Preparing for Climate Change: A Guide for Local Government in New Zealand” identifies the following key principles (Ministry for the Environment, 2008 b)Invalid source specified..

• sustainability

• consideration of the foreseeable needs of future generations

• avoidance, remedy or mitigation of adverse effects

• adoption of a precautionary / cautious approach

• the ethic of stewardship / kaitiakitanga

• consultation and participation

• financial responsibility

• liability

The guide also provides checklists to help ensure that climate change is considered in various plans.

Attachment 1

Regional Sport & Recreation Plan for the Wellington Region

Planning context

The regional strategy sits between a national and local planning context. Sport NZ’s Community Sport Strategy 2015-2020 provides national direction. It emphasises participant-centred responses to delivery and a focus on ‘system’ build through developing the system enablers:

· Intelligence: using data and information to generate participant insights for planning and decision-making

· Capability: building delivery capability – people and organisations

· Connectivity: becoming more consistent and aligned through increased collaboration and partnering

· Resources: prioritising where we allocate resources and reducing waste and duplication.

The Wellington regional strategy responds to this by providing a regional framework designed to contribute to system build while also creating a context for planning locally as represented by the diagram below.

Sport NZ Community Sport Strategy 2015 - 2020,Wellington Region Sport and Active Recreation Planning Framework 2016-2026,National direction,Regional planning framework,Local response to local needs within regional and national frameworks,Sport and recreation groups ,Councils ,Schools ,Health providers ,Iwi ,Funders ,Sport Wellington ,Regional projects

The regional delivery system

At its heart the delivery system for sport and active recreation across the region has three key components. It involves consideration of participants (who create demand) and the response from providers (supply) via a range of sport and active recreation opportunities and different mechanisms through which these opportunities are made available or delivered.

To be effective and recognised as New Zealand’s leading regional delivery system we will need to:

· ensure that participation opportunities and development pathways are accessible to all

· apply insights gained from research and various knowledge and information sources to our planning and decision-making

· ensure that we have the right spaces and places available to participants in the right locations

· build operational excellence amongst providers

· ensure that available resources are used to their fullest extent for maximum impact while also seeking ways to grow the resources for sport and active recreation

· develop greater connectivity through partnerships and collaboration.

IMPLEMENTATION

Governance and oversight

The success of this strategy lies in our willingness to adopt and use the planning framework, follow the implementation principles and act on our collective commitment to the ongoing development of sport and active recreation across the region.

Successful implementation will require ongoing governance and oversight to champion the strategy, provide leadership and influence, and maintain momentum going forward. We will also need to continue to advocate for greater collaboration at sub-regional and local levels as well as identify priorities and opportunities for regional collaboration.

Individual stakeholders, or groups of stakeholders, are best placed to lead regional projects and we will need to put a mechanism in place to provide support for projects, collate information, track progress and report to stakeholders on progress towards the outcomes of the strategy.

Funding the Regional Strategy

The planning framework is not intended to create additional work but instead provide an opportunity to integrate work already planned/scheduled into the regional framework i.e. what are you planning or implementing currently that will help achieve the vision and outcomes of the regional strategy. Much of this work will already have budget and other resources allocated to it from individual organisations’ baselines.

Over time, use of the framework will lead to greater consistency and, by capturing information in a common clearinghouse, we will be able to identify opportunities to work more collaboratively at regional, sub-regional and possibly local delivery levels. Through this process we will be able to share resources and potentially reduce costs that we would otherwise incur by working individually.

New initiatives such as the development of the regional spaces and places (facilities) plan will be funded through either re-prioritising the allocation of existing resources or by finding new investment (or a combination of both). It is important to understand that there will be some regional projects that will require the allocation of human resources more so than financial ones. A critical aspect of agreeing any regional project will be consideration of available resourcing to support the project.

Part of the strategy is about growing available resources and securing new funding from different sources. Success here will help to support regional projects.

Managing the implementation

Sport Wellington is an independent and objective advisor to and on behalf of the regional sport and active recreation sector. It is ideally placed to operate as the backbone organisation for regional sport and active recreation provision to ensure that programmes of work continue to progress. To this end Sport Wellington can:

· create and manage the regional sport and active recreation information hub/clearinghouse that will record progress against the intended outcomes of the regional strategy, provide a repository for the activities under the planning framework, provide insights and other information relating to the priorities identified in the planning framework.

· provide advisory and secretarial support for the future governance mechanism, coordinating information and work flows and meeting details

· develop and run workshops and forums focused on different aspects of the regional planning framework

· develop and manage the monitoring and evaluation framework for the regional strategy

· advocate on behalf of the region in support of sport and active recreation to agencies including central government.

Implementation Principles

Valuing Te Ao Māori

The needs of all in the region have been considered during the development of this strategy. However, implementation of the strategy will need to recognise and respond to the uniqueness of Māori in terms of opportunity, impact, partnerships, and values.

It is feasible that Toa Rangatira and Te Atiawa as Mana whenua can provide some leadership in the implementation of this strategy with support through Te Roopu Awhina and their Pou Hakinakina. Both Iwi have strong links in sport through their various sports associations and clubs.

The Māori population remains relatively youthful across the region and, in spite of high levels of participation in a range of sport and active recreation activities, some of the outcomes we are seeking through this strategy are not realised in the same way for Māori as for others.

By working in partnership with Iwi and other appropriate organisations we will be able to achieve desired outcomes for Māori in our region. In particular we will look to build partnerships that:

· increase and enhance Māori participation in sport and active recreation - both traditional and mainstream - in a variety of settings including kura, wananga and marae

· are compatible with core values of whanaunatanga, manaakitanga and rangitiratanga (amongst others)

· build capable and sustainable Māori sport and active recreation organisations

· encourage and support Iwi-based or marae-based sport and active recreation events

· recognise and celebrate the success of Māori in sport and active recreation

· help to create healthy and active Māori communities.

Partnership and Collaboration

No one organisation can implement all of the strategy on its own. Successful implementation will depend on partnership and collaboration across organisations and sectors and using our collective strengths to realise the outcomes.

Needs-based approach

Decisions for our organisations and the region will be based on evidence of need. This includes assessment of regional needs, balancing investment and the economic impact of sport and recreation facilities and services and making investment decisions based on where it matters most. An important aspect of a needs-based approach is not just anticipating need but adapting and responding to changing conditions and circumstances in a timely and appropriate way.

Future focused

Decisions will be made that will benefit long-term achievement. Stakeholders will see this strategy as an important part of achieving sustainable sport and recreation facilities and services that help meet our vision, for future generations as well as our current communities.

Demand-driven

As our population changes, demand for sport and active recreation will also change. As providers we need to be aware of, and keep informed about, changes that may affect demand for programmes and other opportunities in order to maintain participation levels.

Integrated planning

Sport and active recreation does not exist in a vacuum. It impacts, and is impacted by, other sectors / areas of work. Planning for sport and active recreation therefore needs to occur in a coordinated and integrated way to achieve the best solutions to meet the ongoing needs of people and communities, and to achieve value for money.

For example:

Apply locally-led delivery principles

Locally-led delivery principles provide guidance about how best to work with communities to develop sport and active recreation. They form an important part of the local delivery approach as identified by Sport NZ in their Community Sport Strategy 2015-2020. New Zealand’s local community sport principles^{^[23]} are:

Framework pillars	Regional strategy priority	Wellington City focus – local response
Participation opportunities	· Low participation groups · Providing young people with a broad range of quality participation opportunities – in and outside of school · Removing/minimising barriers to participation	· Identify and support low participation groups · Reduce barriers to participation
Regional Sporting Success	· Athlete development · Developing strategic partnerships – tertiary, HPSNZ, franchise sports, funders · Celebrating regional sporting success	· Attract and support regional and national events · Support franchise and representative sport · Work in partnership with Sport Wellington to expand the successful talent development programme across the region
Spaces and Places	· Regional Spaces and Places plan (including venues/stadia for hosting events) · Facility partnerships · Sportsville and sports hub development · Regional and community events planning	· Work with Sport NZ, Sport Wellington and other TAs to develop a regional facilities plan (spaces and places) · Work with GWRC and other TAs, and mountain biking and the trail user community to develop a regional trails framework
Workforce Excellence	· Workforce development - paid staff - volunteer planning and development - leadership development · Knowledge building - research and insights	· Sport club capability and health · Support for emerging sports
Strategic Investment	· Regional Investors’ Network · Growing the funding pool	· Provide grant funding to clubs for planning · Provide grant funding to support strategic projects and partnerships with the community · Review the criteria for why and how Wellington City Council invests in and supports sport · Investigate the regional funders’ model adopted in Auckland and establish the benefits of adopting a similar approach in the Wellington region.

Attachment 1

Wellington Regional Trienniel Agreement 2016-2019

4. PROTOCOLS

4.1 The councils of the Wellington Region will work together on issues where it is agreed that the Region and the communities within it will benefit from a regionally collaborative approach.

4.2 The councils of the Wellington Region will work together in line with the protocols and principles outlined in the Wellington Regional Strategy Multilateral Agreement in regard to the Wellington Regional Strategy.

4.3 When a council has a significant disagreement with the position of the others, the group will make every effort to accommodate, acknowledge or at least fairly represent the dissenting view.

4.4 The councils of the Wellington Region will proactively present their case to the Government and other councils from other regions to ensure that the Wellington Region's interests are protected and enhanced.

4.5 When a significant decision or issue affects a particular council, or its population, then that council should have the lead role in formulating the Region's response.4.6 Where facilities and services of significance benefit more than one district, and are intended to be funded by more than one district, those districts that intend to participate shall be involved in identifying, delivering, and funding the facility or service. One Council shall take the lead for the project, appointed by the participating councils.

4.7 The agreement acknowledges each council’s unique accountability.

4.8 The councils agree to act in good faith on issues of information and disclosure.

4.9 The councils agree to work collaboratively in an open and transparent manner.

4.10 The councils agree to build on work currently being undertaken within the Region and to continue to address issues of co-ordination, roles and responsibilities.

4.11 As signatories to this agreement all councils will ensure provision of the following:

a) Early notification to affected councils, through the distribution of draft documentation, of major policy discussions which may have implications beyond the boundaries of the decision-making council. This specifically includes the development of consultation policies and policies on significance.

b) Opportunities for all councils in the Region to be involved in early consultation on the development of each other’s draft Annual Plan and draft Long Term Plan and other significant policy consultation processes.

c) The application of a 'no surprises' policy, whereby early notice will be given over disagreements between councils concerning policy or programmes, before critical public announcements are made.

5. CONSULTATION

5.1 Consultation in relation to this agreement will be undertaken within the following groups:

a) A meeting of the Mayors, Regional Council Chair and their Chief Executives will occur at least once every six months to discuss general policy business and to review the performance of the agreement.

b) Existing regional and sub-regional forums such as:

· The Wellington Regional Mayoral Forum

· The Joint Wairarapa Councils’ Meeting

· The Wellington Regional Strategy Committee

· The Wellington Regional Transport Committee

· LGNZ Zone Four

· Regional Civil Defence Emergency Management

c) Meetings between staff as necessary to achieve communication and co-ordination on issues identified in the agreement.

5.2 Under Section 15(2) of the Act, the following consultation processes will apply to proposals for new Regional Council activities:

a) Where a proposed new Regional Council activity is significant in terms of the Wellington Regional Council's policy on significance, the process will be as set out in s.16 of the Act.

b) Where a proposed new Regional Council activity is not significant in terms of the Wellington Regional Council's policy on significance, the Regional Council undertakes to notify all other councils in the Region prior to commencing any public consultation, in line with the principles of 'no surprises', transparency and good faith.

c) Where the parties to this agreement are unable to agree, dispute procedures set out in s.16 (4)-(7) of the Act will apply.

5.3 The following consultation process will apply to any change, variation, or review of the Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region, and the preparation of any future Regional Policy Statement:

a) The Regional Council will seek the input of territorial authorities into the review of the Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region.

b) The Regional Council will make available to all local authorities, for discussion and development, draft copies of:

· any change or variation of to the Regional Policy Statement

· any proposed Regional Policy Statement.

c) Territorial authorities will be given a reasonable period of time, but no less than 30 working days, to respond to any such proposal. The Regional Council agrees to consider fully any submissions and representations on the proposal made by territorial authorities within the Region.

6. OTHER ISSUES

The parties agree that, in addition to the general consultation obligations of this agreement, the councils of the Wellington Region will continue to meet together in various forums to develop common approaches on issues identified as priorities for the Region, including the progressing of Shared Services initiatives consistent with the following principles:

Collaboration Principles

In giving effect to shared services the councils will adopt the following principles to guide progress towards implementation of shared services across the region:

1. Transferable - regardless of future decisions around governance, that any approach to shared services be transferrable to any new council structure.

2. Beneficial - that shared services focus on services where these will result in significant cost savings, and focus on the delivery of functions that result in more effective and efficient delivery for households and businesses.

3. Sustainable/ that the approach has longevity and sets a benchmark for quality service provision in the region but can be scaled up.

4. Urgent – that the approach can realise benefits quickly and, if necessary, start small.

6.1 Collaboration within the region

The Mayoral Forum will:

· Be the vehicle for oversight of projects, such as collaboration projects.

· Review existing collaboration and shared services arrangements as necessary to ensure that current arrangements remain relevant and optimal

· Identify new opportunities for collaboration and shared services for consideration by the councils

7. SERVICING

7.1 The parties agree that responsibility for servicing this agreement shall be shared, with responsibility passing from local authority to local authority at the start of each triennium. Servicing involves:

· providing those secretarial services required

· within the limits outlined in the protocols and principles above, acting as a media and communications contact (including the provision of information to the public on request) in relation to matters covered in the agreement.

7.2 The parties agree that the Upper Hutt CityCouncil will be the council responsible for servicing this agreement for the 2016 -2019 triennium, after which it shall pass to the remaining local authorities as listed in appendix one, unless otherwise agreed.

7.3 The parties also agree that responsibility for servicing, and making media comment on behalf of, existing specific regional and sub-regional forums, will lie within those specific forums.

REVIEW OF THE AGREEMENT

The parties agree to review the terms of this agreement in accordance with s.15(3) of the Act within four weeks of a request by one of the councils made in writing to the council delegated responsibility to service the Agreement.

9. DISPUTE RESOLUTION

In the event of a disagreement over the terms of this agreement, the parties agree to refer the issue of disagreement to arbitration for non-binding resolution. If no agreement on an arbitrator is forthcoming an arbitrator will be appointed by the President of the Wellington Branch of the New Zealand Law Society.

This agreement is signed on this _____________ day of _____________________

2017, by the following on behalf of their respective councils.

Carterton District Council __________________________________

John Booth - Mayor

Greater Wellington Regional Council __________________________________

Chris Laidlaw - Chair

Hutt City Council __________________________________

Ray Wallace - Mayor

Kapiti Coast District Council __________________________________

K (Guru) Gurunathan - Mayor

Masterton District Council __________________________________

Lyn Patterson - Mayor

Porirua City Council __________________________________

Mike Tana - Mayor

South Wairarapa District Council __________________________________

Vivien Napier- Mayor

Upper Hutt City Council __________________________________

Wayne Guppy - Mayor

Wellington City Council __________________________________

Justin Lester - Mayor

Attachment 1

Hutt City's Accessibility and Inclusiveness Plan 2017-2027

HUTT CITY’S ACCESSIBILITY AND INCLUSIVENESS PLAN 2017-2027

What is a Disability?

Disability is something that happens when people with impairments face barriers in society that limit their movements, senses or activities

Disabled people are people who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others. This is the understanding of disability in the Convention ^{^[26]}

The underlying approach

The principles and underlying approach of Hutt Council’s Accessibility and Inclusiveness Plan 2017-2027 are based upon three key documents:

· The New Zealand Disability Strategy 2016 to 2026;

· The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2008; and

· The Treaty of Waitangi.

NEW ZEALAND DISABILITY STRATEGY 2016-2026

The aim of the New Zealand Disability Strategy (NZDS) is to ensure that government departments and agencies consider disabled people’s needs before making decisions. Underpinning the New Zealand Disability Strategy is a vision of a fully inclusive society.

‘A society that highly values our lives and continually enhances our full participation.’

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (the Convention) is an international agreement about protecting and promoting the human rights of disabled people throughout the world. New Zealand signed the Convention on 30 March 2007, and ratified it on 26 September 2008.

The Convention recognises that people with impairments often face discrimination because of their disability and from not being recognised in Government policy and services. The purpose of the Convention, as stated in Article 1 is:

“To promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all people with disabilities and to promote respect for their inherent dignity”

UN CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES 2008

The two articles of the Convention that will be of particular relevance to the Hutt Council’s Accessibility and Inclusiveness Plan 2017-2027 are:

Article 8 – Awareness Raising; and

Article 9 – Accessibility

Article 8 states that Governments should take immediate, effective and appropriate steps to;

• Raise awareness throughout society, including at family level, and to encourage respect towards disabled people,

• Eliminate prejudice and abuse against disabled people,

• Raise awareness of the value of the contribution disabled people make to society.

Article 9 of the Convention states that to enable disabled people to live independently and take part in all areas of life, government should take action to ensure accessibility, equal to that of non-disabled people. This includes taking action in relation to the built environment, transport, public services or facilities as well as information and communication services, and emergency services.

Also important is Article 4.3 which states that in the development and implementation of legislation and policies to implement the present Convention and in other decision making processes concerning issues relating to persons with disabilities, State Parties shall closely consult with and actively involve persons with disabilities, including children with disabilities through their representative organisations.

TREATY OF WAITANGI

There are a number of provisions in the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) that relate specifically to Māori. The key provision is in section 4 of the Local Government Act 2002. In order to recognise and respect the Crown’s responsibility to take appropriate account of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, and to maintain and improve opportunities for Māori to contribute to local government decision-making processes, Parts 2 and 6 provide principles and requirements for councils that are intended to facilitate participation by Māori in local government decision-making processes.

Whilst section 4 clearly acknowledges responsibility for the Treaty obligations lie with the Crown, Parts 2 and 6 of the Act are intended to facilitate participation of Māori in local government. Local government is charged with the responsibility to promote opportunities for Māori and other members of the public to contribute to its decision-making processes. These provisions apply to all Māori in the city, district, or region. They acknowledge that Māori other than mana whenua may be resident in the area.

The principles of the Treaty are:

• Partnership: Maori and the Crown have a relationship of good faith, mutual respect and understanding, and shared decision making

• Participation: the Crown and maori will work together to ensure Maori (including whanau, hapu, iwi and communities) participate in the disability sector at all levels of decision making around disability issues. Participation includes the right to seek opportunities for self-determination and self-management.

• Protection: the Crown actively contributes to improving the wellbeing of Maori including support for independent living and the protection of Maori property and identity, in accordance with Maori values. Maori have the same rights and privileges as other citizens.

VISION

Vision one: Hutt City is a liveable, accessible and inclusive city where everyone has the opportunity to participate fully in our community.

Vision two: One accessible and inclusive experience of service for all

PRINCIPLES

Equity

Everyone has the same rights and opportunities. Human rights are protected as the fundamental foundation of all Council policy and practise.

Inclusion

Hutt City encourages the involvement of all people in our community. The value of a fully inclusive and mutually supportive community is respected.

Partnership

People with disabilities are involved in community decision making processes.

Awareness and respect for all abilities

Recognise and value a person’s abilities and their potential to contribute rather than focusing on reasons why they cannot.

Leadership

Hutt City Council will provide leadership to the wider community by demonstrating a commitment to the vision through its internal policies and practices.

Barrier free

The need to eliminate barriers created by the social and physical environment that interfere with the human rights of disabled people.

GOALS

Goal 1:

Council communication and information is accessible to all people

· Accessibility of HCC websites and published information

· Voting information is provided in easy read and captioned when online

KPIs

Accessibility of HCC websites and published information

i. The Ministry of Social Development guidelines on best practice communication are applied when developing communications material and engaging face to face (kanohi ki te kanohi).

https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/planning-strategy/accessibility-guide/accessible-communications.pdf

ii. Council’s website is in the top 5% in New Zealand for accessibility to disabled people

iii. Council’s website contains an “Accessibility page” which gives options for feedback and use of the website

iv. Key strategy and policy documents are easy to access and read. This means

o They are not only available in PDF form

o The font size, colour and contrast used is easily readable by people with sight impairments

Voting information

i. Council promotes accessible voting information with the Electoral Commission.

Goal Two

Council culture and processes^{^[27]} include disability awareness and staff receive appropriate training

KPIs

i. All council staff receive regular disability awareness training measured by HR records of training staff receive this includes:

a. Induction processes

b. The level of visibility of practical assistance that is available e.g. assistance for hearing and sight impaired

c. Contracts containing disability focused requirements

ii. That relevant officers are introduced to the Advisory Group once it is established to advise the group on their areas of responsibility and establish a process for involving the Advisory Group in decision making processes where decisions will have a direct impact on the disability community. Specific areas include:

· Strategy and Planning

· Community Partnerships

· Leisure Active

· City Development

· Libraries

· Museums

· Parks and Gardens

· Environmental Policy

· Urban Design

· Road and Traffic

· Environmental Consents

· City Promotions (includes web site development)

Goal Three:

All people are able to move about the city easily and safely without being limited by the physical environment

KPIs

i. Street Audits of Lower Hutt are carried out on a regular basis measured by the street audit report

ii. Council makes every effort to ensure that all Council owned assets and facilities are accessible and inclusive to all people.

Goal Four:

In order to give effect to Articles 8 and 9 itself Council will champion and promote employment opportunities for people with impairments and also:

KPIs

i. Establish an Accessibility and Inclusiveness Advisory Group (AIAG)

ii. Provide support to groups in the community that are giving effect to CRPD articles 8 & 9

a. Provide opportunities for valid employment of disabled people where possible

b. Ensure job descriptions make it clear that disability is not a barrier to employment at Council

Review

The Accessibility and Inclusiveness Plan will be reviewed every three to five years.

DEFINITIONS

Meaningful participation is:

· the active involvement of informed citizens in government decision-making outside the ballot box

· ensuring that citizen needs, concerns and values are represented in policy and action.^{^[28]}

Diversity

The concept of diversity encompasses acceptance and respect. It means understanding that each individual is unique, and recognizing our individual differences. It is about understanding each other and moving beyond simple tolerance to embracing and celebrating the rich dimensions of diversity contained within each individual.^{^[29]}

Accessibility

Accessibility refers to the design of products, devices, services, or environments for people with disabilities. The concept of accessible design ensures both "direct access" (i.e. unassisted) and "indirect access" meaning compatibility with a person's assistive technology (for example, computer screen readers). Accessibility is strongly related to universal design which is the process of creating products that are usable by people with the widest possible range of abilities, operating within the widest possible range of situations. This is about making things accessible to all people (whether they have a disability or not^{^[30]})

Inclusiveness

Inclusion of people with disabilities in society means involving them in every aspect of social participation others enjoy. Inclusion is something that must come from a desire to include them in the activities of the community, family, friendships and more and therefore must come from the actual desire to spend time with and interact with them. Including people with disabilities is something that you cannot legislate into the hearts and minds of people; it is something that people must want.^{^[31]}

[1] Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC), Wellington City Council (WCC), Porirua City Council (PCC), Hutt City Council (HCC), Upper Hutt City Council (UHCC), Kapiti Coast District Council (KCDC)

[8] https://www.beehive.govt.nz/speech/nz-symposium-disaster-risk-reduction-opening-address

[9] http://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/national-disaster-resilience-strategy-development/

[10]http://www.getprepared.org.nz/sites/default/files/uploads/WREMO%20Community%20Resilience%20Strategy%202nd%20edition.pdf

[11] http://wellington.govt.nz/about-wellington/resilient-wellington

[12] http://www.gw.govt.nz/assets/Climate-change/GWRCClimateChangeStrategy7-10-15.pdf

[15] It was recognised however that some variation may be appropriate to reflect varying hazard ‘landscapes’ within the region.

[16] See Outcomes and Performance Measures in section 4.4.

[17] Report available on this link: http://www.gw.govt.nz/assets/council-hazards/WRNHMS-Stocktake-Issues-Report-Final-18-04-16.pdf

[18] CDEM groups are made up of territorial authorities, regional council, emergency services and lifeline utilities.

[19] Living Well refers to improvements in physical and mental wellbeing, individual development and achievement, and social and community development through regular participation in sport and active recreation.

[20] Sport New Zealand. (2015). Sport and Active Recreation Regional Profile: Wellington Region – Findings from the 2013/14 Active New Zealand Survey. Wellington: Sport New Zealand

[21] 2011-14 NZ Health Survey, Ministry of Health

[22] The Costs of Physical Inactivity – Toward a regional full cost accounting perspective, Auckland Council, Waikato Regional Council, Wellington Regional Strategy Committee

[23] Sport NZ Community Sport Strategy 2015-2020

[24] Sport New Zealand, 2015. The Economic Value of Sport and Recreation to the Wellington Region. Wellington: Sport New Zealand.

[25] Dalziel, P. (2011) The Economic and Social Value of Sport and Recreation to New Zealand. AERU Research Report No. 322, prepared for Sport and Recreation New Zealand. Lincoln University: Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit.

[26] New Zealand Disability Strategy 2016-2026

[27] This means Councillors and Council staff conducting themselves in a knowledgeable and empathetic way that is respectful of disabled people

Participation opportunities	Regional sporting success	Spaces and places	Workforce excellence	Strategic investment
More people participating in sport and/or active recreation and meeting the Ministry of Health’s physical activity guidelines.	More athletes on the talent pathway and more regional sporting success (teams and individuals) nationally and internationally.	Integrated network of local and regional places and spaces that provide more people in the region with better places to participate.	A high-performing workforce delivering quality sport and active recreation opportunities to the region.	Sufficient, sustainable and targeted investment supporting increased physical activity through sport and active recreation.

	Participation opportunities	Regional sporting success	Spaces and places	Workforce excellence	Strategic investment
Objective	Ensure everyone has access to a range of formal and informal participation opportunities and is encouraged to participate	Develop, support and recognise sporting excellence across the region	Develop a coordinated approach to providing an accessible, fit-for-purpose network of regional, spaces and places that support and encourage sport and active recreation	Support the development of a strong and enterprising sector through building people capability (paid and volunteer workforce)	Align investment with regional and local priorities for sport and active recreation and grow the funding pool
Outcome	More people participating in sport and/or active recreation and meeting the Ministry of Health’s physical activity guidelines	More athletes on the talent pathway and more regional sporting success (teams and individuals) nationally and internationally.	Integrated network of local and regional places and spaces that provide more people in the region with better places to participate.	A high-performing workforce delivering quality sport and active recreation opportunities to the region	Sufficient, sustainable and targeted investment supporting increased physical activity through sport and active recreation
Priority focus areas	· Low participation groups · Young people · Provision of a broad range of quality sport and active recreation participation opportunities · Removing/minimising barriers to participation to make it easier to access sport and active recreation opportunities i.e. cost, accessibility	· Athlete development (including access to talent development pathways and athlete services) · Developing strategic partnerships – tertiary, HPSNZ, franchise sports, funders · Celebrating regional sporting success	· Identifying and developing a regional facilities network to enable community participation · Facility partnerships · Sportsville and sports hub development · Regional and community events planning	· Workforce development - paid staff - volunteer planning and development - leadership development · Knowledge building through research and insights	· Establishing a coordinated approach to funding sport and active recreation across the region and aligning with regional projects and local priorities · Growing the funding pool
Success indicators	Growth in regular participation in current low participant groups and overall More people meeting Ministry of Health physical activity guidelines	Performance of regional teams and individuals Performance hubs established and operational Joint performance development projects initiated Annual sports awards held	Regional facilities plan developed and operational Facility partnerships increase Increase in the number and range of events hosted across the region	Integrated training and development opportunities Engagement and retention of the workforce including growth in volunteering – (numbers of volunteers and hours contributed) Positive customer experiences, retention and growth in participation Improved planning and decision-making in relation to sport and active recreation	Increased investment in regional sport and active recreation activity
Measures	tbc
Regional Project Opportunities	Engagement with low participation groups · Women and girls 13 years and older · Older people · People from low socio-economic areas of our region · Different ethnic communities, in particular Chinese and Indian people · People with disabilities · People with health-related problems	Regional Talent Plan – including performance hub establishment and athlete services provision	Regional Facilities Plan to identify priority projects and funding process Schools/Councils Partnerships as a means of maximising existing facilities for both school and community use. Regional Events Plan	Regional Workforce Development Plan Regional Volunteer Planning	Regional Investors’ Network

Party Responsible		Financial Year
		Triennium

Masterton District Council		2007-10
Porirua City Council		2010-13
South Wairarapa District Council		2013-16
Upper Hutt City Council		2016-19
Wellington City Council		2019-22
Carterton District Council
Greater Wellington Regional Council
Hutt City Council
Kapiti Coast District Council