Mayor W R Wallace (Chair)

Deputy Mayor D Bassett

Cr G Barratt

Cr C Barry

Cr L Bridson

Cr J Briggs

Cr M Cousins

Cr S Edwards

Cr T Lewis

Cr M Lulich

Cr G McDonald

Cr C Milne

Cr L Sutton

Membership:

13 

Meeting Cycle:

Council meets on a six weekly basis (Extraordinary Meetings can be called following a resolution of Council; or on the requisition of the Chair or one third of the total membership of Council)

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That in light of additional information received after the Traffic Subcommittee’s meeting, Council refers the matter back to officers for a full review.”

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations (i)-(iv) contained in the report be endorsed with a new part (v) to read:

(v)       asks officers to report to the June 2017 Community Plan             Committee on necessary funding for the Jackson Street             Streetscape Design.”

“That the two recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed and appoints Cr Milne to the selection panel.”

“That the two recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That Council:

(i)            receives the legal advice;

(ii)          endorses the recommendation based on the legal advice received; and

(iii)        requests the Chief Executive to continue to work with Living Wage Hutt Valley on issues such as contracting.”

“That the recommendation contained in the memorandum be discussed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the memorandum be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the memorandum be endorsed.”

“That Council:

(i)            approves the affixing of the Common Seal to all relevant documents in connection with the items set our in Schedule 1 contained in the report; and

(ii)          approves the deeds executed under Power of Attorney set out in Schedule 2 contained in the report.”

(A)

(B)

(C)

General subject of the matter to be considered.

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter.

Ground under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution.

Report of the City Development Committee held on 2 May 2017: Proposed New Private Street Name – No.1-13 Laura Fergusson Grove

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons.(s7(2)(a)).

That the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exist.

Report of the Finance and Performance Committee held on 3 May 2017: Response to Hutt City Community Facilities Trust Funding Proposal

The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities(s7(2)(h)).

That the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exist.

Report of the Community Services Committee held on 4 May 2017: Arts and Culture Subcommittee Recommendations – Community Representation on Arts and Culture Subcommittee

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons.(s7(2)(a)).

That the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exist.

Minutes of the Hutt City Council held on 14 March 2017: Appointment of Directors – Seaview Marina Limited and Urban Plus Limited

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons. (s7(2)(a)).

The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege (s7(2)(g)).

That the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exist.

Community Representatives for the Civic Honours Committee.

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons. (s7(2)(a)).

That the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exist.

a)

Korokoro Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/357)

Speaking under public comment, Mr Aaron Creighton a resident of Korokoro Road, agreed that the stretch of road was currently unsafe, adding that the 50km speed limit was too high given the number of blind corners, driveway accesses and parked cars in the area.  He further explained he was opposed to the current proposal, as it would mean the loss of several on-street carparks.  He advised that a number of properties did not have off-street parking, and relied on the area of the road to park cars.  He further advised that the public parking area at the bottom of Korokoro Road was not secure, and he had experienced car theft from there.   He believed a solution to the safety problem was to either widen the road, and/or install speed humps.

In response to questions from members, Mr Creighton confirmed he was opposed to the proposal, and that he was concerned pedestrian and traffic safety would be compromised by the proposal.  He agreed the proposal would make the situation safer outside some properties, but not for the road as a whole.  He further confirmed that if the speed limit was reduced in the area, and that if the road was part of the long term Substandard Road Upgrades, he would accept the current proposal.  He confirmed property numbers 16, 14 and 6 had no off-street parking, and that numbers 10 and 8 did.

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.  He advised that initial investigations indicated widening this portion of Korokoro Road would cost in excess of $600,000.  He said that speed humps were not an option on hill roads.

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Engineer said he was unsure where Korokoro Road was listed on the Substandard Road Upgrades.  He noted that the area had safety concerns for both cars and pedestrians.  He advised that the most recent speed count showed vehicles were generally travelling under the speed limit at the bend.  He confirmed the proposal would result in the loss of a number of on-street carparks, and that if marked, there would be three parks in the existing layby.  If unmarked, residents would be able to fit four cars into the space.

In response to further questions from members, the Traffic Engineer confirmed that the only other location for on-street parking in the area was outside property number 18.  He advised ownership of the land outside number 18 Korokoro Road would need to be investigated, as would the cost of sealing or gravelling the land. 

RECOMMENDED:   (Cr Cousins/Cr Sutton)             Minute No. TRS 17202

“That the Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)         approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in             Korokoro Road, Korokoro as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the             report; and

(ii)        requests officers to investigate alternative off road parking, for the             residents as close as possible to the area outlined in Appendix 1 attached to the       report as a temporary measure until the Substandard Road Programme begins for Korokoro Road.”

b)

Randwick Road, Moera - Proposed P15 Parking, No Parking On Grass and No Stopping At All Times Restrictions  (16/152)

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Engineer explained the Sola Power Throwing Academy had not been specifically consulted with about the proposal, but had been consulted with in 2015.  He further explained that Council’s Traffic Bylaw prohibited cars parking on grass areas, and that the resource consent granted to Sola Throwing Academy provided for a maximum of two on-site carparks only.  He advised the site was very close to a busy intersection and that having cars parked along the relevant stretch of road presented a traffic safety issue.

RECOMMENDED:   (Cr Bridson/Cr Cousins)            Minute No. TRS 17203

“That the Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)        approves the installation of P15 Parking At All Times in Randwick Road, Moera as shown in Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii)       approves the installation of No Parking On Grass Restrictions in Randwick Road, Moera as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(iii)      approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report; and

(iv)      requests officers to monitor the parking situation and report back to the Traffic Subcommittee.”

c)

Randwick Crescent (Moera Carpark) - Proposed Mobility Park and No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/380)

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Engineer advised that mobility access was required on either side of a mobility park, and that this sometimes required the car to be reversed into a park. 

recommended:    (Cr Lewis/Cr Briggs)                 Minute No. TRS 17204

“That the Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of a Mobility Park and No Stopping At All Times Restrictions at the Moera Carpark, in Randwick Crescent, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.“

d)

The Esplanade (Petone Wharf) - Proposed P120 Parking Restrictions and No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/412)

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Engineer confirmed there was unrestricted parking to the west of the Petone Wharf, and that it was only the area closest to Petone Wharf which was proposed to be restricted.

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Lewis/Cr Sutton)                          Minute No. TRS 17205

“That the Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)        approves the installation of P120 Parking Restrictions in the Petone Wharf car parking area, on the Esplanade, Petone as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(ii)       approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in the Petone Wharf car parking area, on the Esplanade, Petone as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

e)

Holyoake Crescent - Proposed Mobility Park and No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/359)

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Engineer advised that the Mobility Parks Schedule was reviewed every five years, and residents could at any time request a mobility park be installed or removed.  He did not consider the proposal would create a precedent, as each situation and request was assessed on its own merits.

recommended:    (Cr Edwards/Cr Briggs)          Minute No. TRS 17206

“That the Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)        approves the installation of a Mobility Park Restriction in Holyoake Crescent, Avalon as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(ii)       approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Holyoake Crescent, Avalon as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

f)

460 High Street - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (17/361)

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Engineer reiterated that each request was assessed on its own merits.  He did not consider that the proposal would create a precedent.

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Briggs/Cr Bridson)             Minute No. TRS 17207

“That the Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the replacement of three P60 Parking Restrictions with P15 Parking Restrictions outside Nº 460 High Street, Lower Hutt, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

g)

Taita Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/414)

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

RECOMMENDED:   (Cr Sutton/Cr Edwards)        Minute No. TRS 17208

“That the Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions along Taita Drive as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

h)

Titoki Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/384)

Speaking under public comment, Ms Sandy Bellward, on behalf of the owners and residents of 7 Titoki Street, explained that it was necessary for them to have access to their property at all times, and that sometimes this was not currently possible.  She said the street was within the Tsunami Evacuation Zone, and that if cars were parked on both sides of the street, evacuation by vehicle may not be possible.  She stated that emergency services had difficulty negotiating the street, and that the rubbish truck did not enter the street.  She concluded that the residents of 7 Titoki Street supported the proposal.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Bellward confirmed the yellow lines proposed immediately opposite 7 Titoki Street were most important.

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Cousins/Cr Briggs)         Minute No. TRS 17209

“That the Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Titoki Street, Alicetown as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

Attachment 1

Korokoro Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 17/357

Attachment 1

Randwick Rd - Proposed P15, No Parking On Grass and No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 16/152

Attachment 1

Randwick Cres (Moera Carpark) - Proposed Mobility Park and No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 17/380

Attachment 1

The Esplanade (Petone Wharf) - Proposed P120 Parking Restrictions and No Stopping At All Times 7.2017 17/412 Cycle 2 2017

Attachment 1

Holyoake Cres - Proposed Mobility Park and No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 17/359

Attachment 1

High street (460) - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions 17/361 4.2017

Attachment 1

Taita Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 17/414

Attachment 1

Titoki Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 17/384

1.

Opening FORMALITIES - Karakia

The Chair read questions from Cr Milne querying the appropriateness of a religious item on the Committee’s agenda, and also whether a Chair of a Council Committee could place a prayer for any faith on its agenda.

The Chair advised that options for opening a meeting or closing a meeting, where appropriate, were allowed under Standing Orders.  She highlighted that there was no obligation by members to participate in saying the prayer.  A karakia timatanga was said to open the meeting.

RESOLVED:  (Cr Bridson /Cr Milne)                             Minute No. DPC 17101

“That in terms of Standing Order 10.4, precedence be accorded to item 6 dealing with the District Plan Update.”

Proposed District Plan Change 49
Copeland Street Reserve
Rezoning to General Residential Activity Area - Medium Density and General Recreation Activity Area (17/565)

The Senior Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

Cr Cousins requested the Chief Executive to ask officers from Council’s Parks and Gardens division to work alongside the project and provide development plans for the residual reserve. She further requested that the Chief Executive involve Council’s Communication Team in Plan Change 49.

The Chair said that in situations where Council sells surplus reserve land, consideration should be given to using the proceeds to buy reserve land in areas where it was required.

RECOMMENDED:  (Cr Bridson/Cr Cousins)              Minute No. DPC 17202

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)         notes the proposed Plan Change which is attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii)        resolves to promulgate Proposed Plan Change 49 for consultation;

(iii)       instructs officers to publicly notify Proposed Plan Change 49 as soon as practicable;

(iv)       allows officers to make any non-policy related changes to the details of the proposed Plan Change should the need arise;

(v)        asks the Parks and Gardens division to work in conjunction with officers to provide development details for the recreation area; and

(vi)       asks Council’s Communication Team be involved in the project.”

District Plan Update (17/580)

Report No. DPC2017/2/68 by the Divisional Manager Environmental Policy

Speaking under public comment, Mr T Baisden, representing the East Harbour Environmental Association (EHEA), said that Plan Change 36 was not fit for purpose because it was about notable trees and did not protect the native vegetation on steep hillsides. He further said that the East Harbour Hills would have a hazard risk of slipping. He advised that erosion control and coastal amenity needed to be clearly defined with regard to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), sections 6 and 7. He added that RMA s.76 removed the protections for existing vegetation in some way which was not clearly defined, and there were no rules for sections under 4000m². He said that this created uncertainty for landowners whereas the intent of the legislation was to create certainty.

The Chair noted that court action from EHEA against Council regarding Plan Change 36 was currently before the High Court and cautioned members and public speakers to exercise care when discussing the item.

Speaking under public comment, Ms L Mead, representing EHEA, said that Plan Change 36 was called “Notable Trees”. However, the main occurrence from the Plan Change was deletion of all vegetation protection, especially in the hill residential landscape protection zone. She reiterated that removal of native vegetation could result in soil instability which would mean that section 7 of the RMA would not be complied with. She proffered a solution which would be that trees over 3m high be identified in groups and protected lot by lot, and that vegetation clearance be limited to 500m² for areas over 4000m².

In response to questions from members, Ms Mead said that Council could go through the area lot by lot and identify lots on the District Plan. She further said that EHEA could withdraw its court action against Council at any time.

The Divisional Manager Environmental Policy elaborated on the report. He added that officers had an offer out to EHEA to work on the issues.

Cr Cousins requested further consideration about public comment on matters which were currently before the court and the risk to Council of entrapment. She further said that there were issues of natural justice and that the public speakers had achieved a further submission on Plan Change 36 whereas others had not.

In response to the issues raised by Cr Cousins, the Chair requested that training be organised for Councillors on these matters.

Resolved:     (Cr Bridson/Cr Lewis)                   Minute No. DPC 17203

“That the report be noted and received.”

8.

Closing Karakia

A karakia whakamutunga was said to close the meeting.

Attachment 1

PC 49 - Draft Proposed Plan Change Document

RESOLVED: (Cr Cousins/Cr Sutton)                        Minute No. PRC 17201

"That the apology received from Mayor Wallace, and the apologies received from Councillors Bassett, Barry and Lulich for early departure, be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

RESOLVED:   (Cr Cousins/Cr Milne)                                              Minute No. PRC 17102

“That in terms of Standing Order 10.4, precedence be accorded to item 4 d) dealing with the Future of Molesworth Street Reserve Pomare, and item 4 f) dealing with Dog Controls for Avalon Park.”

a)

Overseas Travel Approval - Policy Change (17/651)

The Chief Executive elaborated on the report.

recommended: (Cr Cousins/Deputy Mayor Bassett) Minute No. PRC 17203

“That the Committee recommends that Council;

(i)        approves the Chief Executive be given delegated authority to approve overseas travel for staff; and

(ii)       approves the ‘tracked’ changes in the Sensitive Expenditure Policy attached as Appendix 1 to the report.”

b)

Redrafted Gift Policy for Elected Members (17/587)

The Chief Executive elaborated on the report.

recommended: (Cr Cousins/Deputy Mayor Bassett) Minute No. PRC 17204

“That the Committee recommends that Council approves the proposed Gift Policy for Elected Members (changes as underlined) attached as Appendix 1 to the report.”

c)

Reserve Reclassification - Wainuiomata (17/252)

The Chair elaborated on the report.

recommended:  (Cr Barry/Cr Briggs)               Minute No. PRC 17205

“That the Committee recommends that Council reclassify the Local Purpose Reserve (Community Use) located at the end of Hinau Grove, Wainuiomata, being Lot 1 DP 83036 (WN49C/742), as a Recreation Reserve in terms of section 19(1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977.”

d)

Future of Molesworth Street Reserve Pomare (17/536)

Speaking under public comment, Ms S Ah Young, representing Empower Management Limited (the Company), said that the Company had originally met with the Ministry of Education (MOE) and the Pomare School representatives over the Early Childhood Education Centre (ECE). However, the Company had not been involved in the issues which lead to the cancellation of the previous pre-school’s licence. She further said that the Company would operate an ECE for the Pasifica community.

In response to questions from members, Ms Ah Young said that the Company had a building in storage which could be moved to the site. She added that the previous ECE operator had approximately 45 people using the facility and consultation had revealed that people were not accessing it.

Speaking under public comment, Ms N Saluni, representing Empower Management Limited, said that the Molesworth Street Reserve provided an opportunity for the community to have an ECE centre. She added that the Company had a pick-up and drop-off service. She advised that the Company provided quality learning and other social services. She further said that the Company would make a difference to families in the low decile areas of Pomare and Taita.

The Community Projects and Relationship Manager elaborated on the report.

Members queried the reason that the fences were in place around the reserve. They discussed the suitability of the site for an ECE, and the MOE approval process.

recommended:  (Cr Barry/Cr Sutton)              Minute No. PRC 17206

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)      notes that as a result of the Valley Floor Review officers were directed to undertake a review of the reserve property at 132A Molesworth Street for the purpose of considering its future;

(ii)     notes that an independent assessment of reserve values has been undertaken which considers that the property has a low reserves value;

(iii)    notes that an application has been received from Empower Management Limited seeking to use the property to establish an Early Childhood Education (ECE) centre;

(iv)    asks officers to work with Empower Management Limited to assist it to find a suitable location for an ECE centre;

(v)     asks officers to undertake general consultation with the community about the future of the property and report back on the options; and

(vi)    notes that a decision on an alternative use of the property would be a matter for further consideration should Council decide, following due process, to revoke the reserve status of the property.”

e)

Proposed Road Stopping and Sale of Legal Road on the corner of Knights Road and Birch Street Waterloo (17/600)

The Chair elaborated on the report.

recommended:  (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Bassett)Minute No. PRC 17207

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)      notes that the owner of 227 Knights Road is interested in acquiring a small area of legal road of approximately 35m² which is situated between the legal boundary and existing fence as shown in Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii)     notes that the Road and Traffic Division see no need to retain this area of legal road for roading purposes now or in the future;

(iii)    agrees to stop the portion of legal road adjoining 227 Knights Road as depicted on the aerial photograph attached as Appendix 1 to the report; and

(iv)    agrees to sell the stopped road to the owner of 227 Knights Road, noting that the owner has agreed to meet all costs associated with the road stopping process and subsequent boundary adjustment, as well as the assessed market value of the land.”

f)

Dog controls for Avalon Park (17/632)

Speaking under public comment, Ms M Miller said that she supported public consultation on the issue.  She respectfully requested if
Cr Edwards, Central Ward Councillor, could be on the Hearings Panel and also for a member of the public to be on the Panel. She said that the neighbourhood dogs currently being walked in Avalon Park were family pets which were friendly to people, children and bikes. She further said that there were people who visited the park with their whole family, including the dog, and were disappointed when the dog had to stay in the car.

Speaking under public comment, Ms V Jenness said that she supported public consultation on the issue. She further said that walking dogs in the riverbank area was difficult or impossible due to bikes, wandering willie, poisonous river algae, and the presence of native birds.  She added that the slope of the bank was a problem for disabled people. She requested that Council build a small dog park in Hikoikoi Reserve.

The Divisional Manager Regulatory Services elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manager Regulatory Services said that the consultation form would include the officers’ options and a space to write additional ideas. He further said that the consultation timetable would be; 1 June 2017 – letter sent to affected parties; and June 2017 – consultation period.

Members agreed that Cr Edwards be on the Hearings Subcommittee and that the meeting be held during the daytime.

recommended: (Cr Cousins/Deputy Mayor Bassett)  Minute No. PRC 17208

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)      approves the public consultation process; and

(ii)     appoints a subcommittee consisting of Councillors Cousins, Lewis, Bridson, Briggs and Edwards, to hear submissions on the proposed dog controls for Avalon Park and make recommendations to Council.”

g)

Easter Sunday Shop Trading Policy (17/575)

The Principal Policy Advisor elaborated on the report.

Deputy Mayor Bassett left the meeting at 6.25pm.

Members agreed that any change to the Easter Sunday Shop Trading Hours would best be done with consideration to what the Metropolitan Councils in the region were undertaking.

recommended:  (Cr Milne/Cr Edwards)          Minute No. PRC 17209

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)   notes the report on Easter Sunday Shop Trading Policy that includes results of a pre-consultation phase;

(ii)  agrees to not take any further action and therefore not develop an Easter Sunday Shop Trading Policy at this time; and

(iii) asks officers to keep the matter under review and bring it back to Council if there is any change in the position of the regional Metropolitan Councils.”

5.

Urban Development Authorities (17/634)

Report No. PRC2017/2/117 by the Divisional Manager, Strategy and Planning

Crs Lulich and Barry left the meeting at 6.45pm.

The Divisional Manager, Strategy and Planning elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manger, Strategy and Planning said that she would seek clarification whether a local authority had full buy back provisions.

The Chair said that she would forward emails from the Resource Management Law Association to the Divisional Manager, Strategy and Planning.

Resolved:  (Cr Cousins/Cr Lewis)                                   Minute No. PRC 17210

“That the Committee approves the draft submission on the Government’s proposal to introduce legislation to create Urban Development Authorities  to support and fast track urban development projects.”

6.

Code of Practice - District Licensing Committee 2017 (17/636)

Report No. PRC2017/2/119 by the Solicitor

Crs Cousins and Bridson declared a conflict of interest and left the table for the duration of this item.

Cr Edwards assumed the Chair.

The Solicitor elaborated on the report.

Resolved:   (Cr Lewis/Cr Sutton)                                                Minute No. PRC 17211

“That the Committee:

(i)    receives the Code of Practice for the Hutt City District Licensing Committee (COP), attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii)   notes the amendments to the COP; and

(iii)  endorses the COP.”

7.

General Manager's Report (17/592)

Report No. PRC2017/2/120 by the Divisional Manager Environmental Consents

The General Manager Governance and Regulatory elaborated on the report. She asked that members email her any questions about the report in advance of the meeting to ensure that their queries could be answered.

Cr Briggs thanked officers for their co-operation regarding a church in Parkway and said that the community was thankful for the work done.

Resolved:  (Cr Cousins/Cr Edwards)                                          Minute No. PRC 17212

“That the Committee notes the contents of the report.”

Policy and Regulatory Committee Work Programme (17/505)

Report No. PRC2017/2/7 by the Committee Advisor

Resolved: (Cr Cousins/Cr Sutton)                                              Minute No. PRC 17213

“That the report be received.”

Attachment 1

Sensitive Expenditure Policy

Attachment 1

Gift Policy for Elected Members

Name of Person Receiving Gift

Position

Approximate Value of Gift

Description of Gift

Name of Company giving gift

Date Gift Received 

Manager informed
Yes/No

Comments

Attachment 1

Road Stopping Plan - Knights Road

a)

Petone 2040 (17/682)

Speaking under public comment, Mr M Fisher and Mr T Bennion, representing the P2040 Group, expressed support for the P2040 Spatial Plan.  Mr Fisher said the plan would provide a yardstick to measure projects against.  He asked members to support the officers’ recommendations.

Speaking under public comment, Ms P Hanna, Chair of the Petone Community Board, expressed support for the P2040 Spatial Plan.  She said it would provide a foundation for future planning in the area.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Hanna advised that a priority of the P2040 spatial planning was the Jackson Street streetscape and this had to be undertaken prior to considering the Petone Clock Walk.

The Urban Design Manager elaborated on the report.  He noted that the New Zealand Transport Agency’s work programme had been reassessed due to the Kaikoura Earthquake in 2016.

In response to a question from a member, the Urban Design Manager confirmed that the Cross Valley Link was an important piece of work for the City.

Cr Cousins noted that aspects of the plan affected the wider city and that consultation had not taken place outside of the P2040 area.  She asked that officers not proceed with projects that would impact the City outside the P2040 area until consultation with all affected areas had been undertaken.

RECOMMENDED:  (Deputy Mayor Bassett/Cr Lulich) 

                                                                                    Minute No. CDC 17203

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)      notes that Petone 2040 is supported by the Petone Community Board (PCB), Jackson Street Programme (JSP), and the Petone 2040 Community Group;

(ii)     notes that Petone 2040 has been well received by Councillors, and officers are seeking it as a spatial plan to assist their work;

(iii)    notes that Petone 2040 will form an important part of the Hutt growth ‘story’ being developed with the New Zealand Transport Agency and Greater Wellington Regional Council to consider city wide transport projects eg Cross Valley Link;

(iv)    approves the Petone 2040 Spatial Plan, attached as Appendix 2 (separately circulated) as Council’s and the community’s overarching long term development strategy for Petone and Moera;

(v)     notes the membership of the Petone 2040 Group as follows: Cr Tui Lewis (Chair of the Petone 2040 Group); Ms Pam Hanna (Petone Community Board Chair); Mr Mike Fisher (Petone Community Board Deputy Chair); Mr John Donnelly (Jackson Street Programme representative); Mr Matt Roberts (community representative); Ms Sue Piper (facilitator); and Mr Tom Bennion (community representative); and

(vi)    appoints Cr Sutton (Deputy Chair) as the City Development Committee representative to the Petone 2040 Group.”

b)

Petone Clock Walk (17/681)

Speaking under public comment, Ms V D’or, business owner in Petone, considered that the Clock Walk proposal was not a natural fit with the heritage aspect of Jackson Street.  She advised there was limited space and car parks in Petone.  She noted that she was a member of the Jackson Street Programme (JSP) and that JSP did not support the Petone Clock Walk proposal.

Speaking under public comment, Mr S Reid, Petone Clock Walk Group, advised that the proposal was a well researched project in terms of heritage and had 88% support from an online survey.  He stated he would like to know if the Jackson Street retailers supported the proposal, and if they did, he would ask the JSP to re-consider its opposition.

In response to questions from members, Mr Reid considered that the City Business District was not a good fit for the proposal as the clocks would get lost in the open spaces.  He said the proposal was a Petone proposal due to it being a “bubbling centre” with a lot of foot traffic.  He advised that the intention was to hold a design competition for the clocks.  He said that there were design guidelines linked to six heritage related themes and that the design must fit within the streetscape.  He noted the clocks on the proposal document were only examples.

Speaking under public comment, Mr G Gellen expressed support for the Petone Clock Walk proposal. 

Speaking under public comment, Ms P Hanna, Chair of the Petone Community Board, advised that the Board had recommended that the Clock Walk should await consideration as part of a Jackson Street streetscape design study.

Speaking under public comment, Ms L Dobbs, Chair of the Jackson Street Programme (JSP), advised that the Petone Clock Walk proposal could not be taken as an isolated project and needed to be considered with the P2040 Spatial Plan. She expressed concern about what might happen to car parking if the clocks were installed on the streets.  She said that building owners were currently focussed on earthquake strengthening of buildings and this work needed to be completed before considering the Clock Walk proposal.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Dobbs advised that JSP had no issue with talking about the proposal and would be happy to discuss the proposal further.

The Urban Design Manager elaborated on the report. 

In response to questions from members, the Urban Design Manager advised that a location for the clocks was better considered through the streetscape design of Jackson Street.  He confirmed it was possible for the Clock Walk Group to hold further discussions with the JSP.

Members noted that they did not want to see the Clock Walk proposal disappear due to the process and timeframe of the P2040 project.

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Cousins/Cr Milne)          Minute No. CDC 17204

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)      notes that the Jackson Street Programme (JSP) does not support the Petone Clock Walk;

(ii)     notes that Petone Community Board and Petone 2040 Community Group agree that Petone Clock Walk should be considered through Petone 2040;

(iii)    agrees that further discussions be held between JSP and Petone Clock Walk to then be brought forward to the P2040 Group;

(iv)    agrees that further progress for the Petone Clock Walk is considered through a Jackson Street streetscape design under the Petone 2040 Spatial Plan and asks that the P2040 makes this project a priority and notes Council’s support of the project;

(v)     asks officers to report to the June 2017 Community Plan Committee on necessary funding.”

5.

International Relations (17/701)

Report No. CDC2017/2/134 by the Visitor Market Development and International Relations Manager

Speaking under public comment, Ms S Knowles, International Student Manager at Sacred Heart College and Ms V Wilson, International Student Manager at Wainuiomata High School spoke in relation to international education.  Ms Knowles noted that in addition to the positive experience and value that international education provided to students, it also generated a significant contribution to the economy.  She said that the total value of New Zealand’s educational industry in 2016 was $4.28billion making it the fourth largest export industry.  Both Ms Knowles and Ms Wilson advised that they travelled overseas and noted the importance of building successful relationships.  Ms Wilson asked that Council continue to support the work undertaken by officers to assist the building of these relationships.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Wilson advised it was important for schools and Council to work together on building relationships.  She noted the status that the Mayoral position provided in relationship building.

Speaking under public comment, Mr H Clark representing the Hutt Valley business community, expressed support for option 2 contained in the officers’ report.  He noted the importance of leveraging the political spheres of influence and relationships with sister cities.  He said that education had been a focus and it would be good to also focus on business and commercial gain.

 In response to a question from a member, Mr Clark advised that Tempe, Arizona would be interested in the high tech manufacturing sector of the Hutt Valley, noting that this sector was an evolving landscape.

Cr Barry left the meeting at 8.33pm.

The Visitor Market Development and International Relations Manager elaborated on the report.  He advised the importance of maintaining and realising the potential of Sister City relationships.  He noted the benefits of the relationships, noting that Tempe, Arizona provided knowledge about science, technology, engineering and advanced manufacturing.  He said that currently international students brought $17M into the City and that there were opportunities to increase this number.   He confirmed that the political sphere assisted in relationship building and making connections, especially in the Asia markets.

In response to questions from members, the Visitor Market Development and International Relations Manager confirmed that officers would report back to the Committee every six months against the international relations work programme.  He noted that the work programme may change to reflect progression in relationships.

In response to questions from members, the Divisional Manager, City Development advised that the Hutt Sister City Foundation (the Foundation) was an important partner for Council in regard to Sister Cities, in particular with Tempe, Arizona, and that officers regularly met with the Foundation.  He said that existing relationships had provided the introduction of ideas to the City and provided the STEMM Festival as an example due to the links with Tempe, Arizona.  He noted that resources were not invested in dormant sister cities relationships.

In response to a further question from a member, the Visitor Market Development and International Relations Manager acknowledged that community ownership of the relationships was critical.

Cr Edwards noted he saw the benefit that the relationships provided to the City but was aware that Council was facing difficult decisions with the Annual Plan process this financial year.

Resolved:        (Deputy Mayor Bassett/Cr Edwards)        Minute No. CDC 17206

“That the Committee:

(i)      notes Lower Hutt’s longstanding sister and friendly city connections and the current status of these relationships;

(ii)     notes the current opportunities and limitations for Council in its international relations activity;

(iii)    agrees to retain a more reactive approach with current staff resources and operating budget;

(iv)    approves the respective proposed international relations work programme attached as Appendix 1 to the report; and

(v)     reports back to the City Development Committee every six months on progress.”

6.

Independent Survey of Petone Fair - results and recommendations (17/624)

Report No. CDC2017/2/105 by the City Events Manager

Speaking under public comment, Ms V D’or a Petone business owner, noted that Jackson Street Programme would like to trial a Sunday for the Petone Fair.

In response to questions from members, Ms D’or considered that further discussions with all parties should occur.  She said that she would support the fair if it was what was best for Petone and for Jackson Street.

Speaking under public comment, Mr M Henley and Ms A Kemble-Walsh, organisers of the Newtown Festival, advised that festivals/fairs generated social, cultural and economic benefits in the areas they were held.  They advised not to change the time schedule as festivals/fairs were based on a regional /national calendar and stall holders found it essential for their planning and advertisting. 

Speaking under public comment, Ms L Dobbs, Jackson Street Programme Chair (JSP), advised that JSP had held discussions with Petone Rotary for the last three to four years asking for a Sunday trial.  She noted that one retailer had lost approximately $60,000 on the one day of the fair.

In response to questions from members, Ms Dobbs considered that the clientele of the fair had changed over the years and lower numbers now frequented the retail shops during the Fair.  She confirmed that the JSP had advertised the fair through its networks.  She said that the JSP had no issue with discussing the matter further.

Speaking under public comment, Mr C Partington, Petone Rotary Fair Convenor, advised the fair had run for 26 years.  He noted that Jackson Street had changed over that time and said the fair had been instrumental in bringing people to the street.  He stated that the Fair generated economic benefit for the area.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Partington advised that Petone Rotary was open to further discussions regarding the fair.

Speaking under public comment, Ms H Swales, Jackson Street Programme Coordinator, noted that Saturday was the biggest shopping day of the week for retailers on Jackson Street.  She asked that a Sunday be trialled.

In response to questions from members, Ms Swales said that retailers had indicated a loss of revenue on the day of the fair.  She advised retailers would prefer the fair be held on a Sunday as a lesser number of retailers opened on a Sunday.  She said that MarketView data had shown a downward spiral of revenue for retailers on fair day.  She considered that revenue lost on fair day was not regained through the year by retailers.

Cr Lewis declared a conflict of interest in the matter and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

The Chair noted that there was an error in the Chair’s recommendations in the agenda.  He said he did not endorse recommendation (iv) “… agrees that Petone Rotary should be asked to change the day of the fair from a Saturday to a Sunday for a minimum of two consecutive years as a trial, starting from 2018” contained in the officer’s report.

The City Events Manager elaborated on the report.  She advised that this was not a Council owned event rather an event that Council supported.

In response to questions from members, the City Events Manager advised she was not confident that further discussions would resolve the issue but considered further discussions should take place.  She confirmed that the surveys undertaken by Council were independent. 

MOVED:   (Cr Barry/Cr Sutton)

“(iv)    approves, in principle, that the Petone Rotary Fair continue on a Saturday.”

The motion was declared CARRIED by division with the voting as follows:

          For:                                            Against:

          Cr Barry                                                Deputy Mayor Bassatt

          Cr Barratt

          Cr Edwards

          Cr McDonald

          Cr Milne

          Cr Lulich

          Cr Sutton

          Total: 7                                      Total: 1

Cr Cousins abstained from voting on the matter.

Resolved:       (Cr Barry/Cr Sutton)                                    Minute No. CDC 17207

“That the Committee:

(i)      acknowledges the differing views of parties regarding the day of the week that the Petone Rotary Fair should be held on, noting valid concerns on all sides;

(ii)     acknowledges that officers have made numerous attempts over the last 24 months to assist the parties in finding an agreeable solution, but to no avail;

(iii)    notes that an independent survey of Jackson Street businesses was undertaken to understand the preference for the Petone Fair to be on a Saturday or Sunday and the financial impact of the Fair currently being on a Saturday; and

(iv)    approves, in principle, that the Petone Rotary Fair continue on a Saturday.”

7.

Proposed New Private Street Name - (1-5)/14 Otamarau Grove (17/201)

Report No. CDC2017/2/131 by the Traffic Engineer

Speaking under public comment, Mr K Munro, a resident of the private road, spoke in support of the name “Karearea” due to the native bush falcons residing in the area.

Speaking under public comment, Mr B and Mrs K Blackler, residents of the private road, spoke in support of the name “Falcon” with their second preference being “Karearea”. 

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Engineer advised resident associations were not consulted with for the naming of a private road.  He advised a sub-plate could be added to the signage that explained a Karearea was a native bush falcon.

Resolved:     (Cr Edwards/Cr Barratt)                               Minute No. CDC 17208

“That the Committee approves the name of the new private road off Otamarau Grove, Maungaraki, attached as Appendix 1 to the report, as Karearea Lane.”

Resolved:    (Cr Cousins/Deputy Mayor Bassett)              Minute No. CDC 17209

“That officers approach all residents associations on the Western Hills to provide a list of up to 12 suitable names for future naming of streets for each area.”

8.

Proposed Two New Private Street Names - No.8 St Columbans Grove (17/382)

Report No. CDC2017/2/133 by the Traffic Engineer

Resolved:    (Cr Sutton/Deputy Mayor Bassett)                Minute No. CDC 17210

“That the Committee approves the names of the two new private roads at No.8 St Columbans Grove, Boulcott, attached as Appendix 1 to the report,  as Francis Douglas Way and Bobbio Court.”

9.

Temporary Road Closure Subcommittee minutes - 18 April 2017 (17/697)

Report No. CDC2017/2/75 by the Senior Committee Advisor

Resolved:     (Deputy Mayor Bassett/Cr Sutton)               Minute No. CDC 17211

“That the Temporary Road Closure Subcommittee minutes dated 18 April 2017 be adopted.”

10.

General Managers' Report (17/513)

Report No. CDC2017/2/106 by the General Manager, Strategic Services

In response to a question from a member, the General Manager, Strategic Services confirmed that officers would include a percentage column to the City Wide and CBD Remissions Policy and Funding tables in future reports.

Resolved:    (Deputy Mayor Bassett/Cr Sutton)                Minute No. CDC 17212

“That the Committee notes the updates contained in the report.”

a)

Walter Nash Centre Update (17/633)

Report No. CDC2017/2/72 by the Divisional Manager Community Hubs

The Divisional Manager Community Hubs elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manager Community Hubs  advised officers would investigate options to subsidise the gym membership at the Walter Nash Centre. 

Resolved:   (Deputy Mayor Bassett/Cr Barratt)       Minute No. CDC 17213

“That the Committee:

(i)         notes and receives the report; and

(ii)        asks officers to provide a report outlining the overall performance and identify             possible opportunities for the fitness suite at the Walter Nash Centre to the next             City Development Committee meeting to be held on 1 August 2017.”

b)

City Development Committee Work Programme (17/514)

Report No. CDC2017/2/70 by the Senior Committee Advisor

Resolved:   (Deputy Mayor Bassett/Cr Sutton)        Minute No. CDC 17214

“That the work programme be received.”

Resolved:   (Deputy Mayor Bassett/Cr Milne)                          Minute No. CDC 17215

“That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely:

14.     Proposed New Private Street Name - No.1-13 Laura Fergusson Grove (17/381)

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as specified in Column (B) above.”

Resolved:     (Cr Milne/Cr Barratt)                                                 Minute No. FPC 17201

“That the apology received from Mayor Wallace be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

4.

a)

Recommendations to Council - 23 May 2017

Urban Plus Limited - Amendment to Constitution (17/667)

Deputy Mayor Bassett declared a conflict of interest and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

The Portfolio Manager, Urban Plus Limited (UPL) elaborated on the report. 

The Chair noted the current UPL Constitution did not cover the requirement to set up subsidiary companies on a project by project basis to isolate risk.

Recommended:    (Cr Milne/Cr Sutton)                               Minute No. FPC 17202

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)    approves the amendment to the UrbanPlus Limited (UPL) Constitution attached as Appendix 3 to the report, regarding the ability for UPL Directors to provide indemnity to Directors and employees of its current and future subsidiary companies;

(ii)   notes that a Deed of Indemnity will also have to be entered into as part of this proposal; and

(iii)  notes that the purpose is to provide indemnification to previous (retired), current and future Directors and employees of UPL subsidiary companies.”

The Chair declared a conflict of interest in relation to the Seaview Marina Limited (SML) Constitution matter. Cr Milne vacated the Chair and Cr Barry assumed the Chair for the duration of the matter.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive advised Council held insurance that provided indemnity for key staff.

Recommended:    (Cr Barry/Cr Sutton)                  Minute No. FPC 17203

“That the Committee recommends that Council approves, subject to approval by the Seaview Marina Limited (SML) Board and Council’s General Manager, Governance and Regulatory, similar changes be made to the SML Constitution to allow indemnification of previous (retired), current and future Directors and employees of SML and SML subsidiary companies.”

b)

Appointment of Trustees to Hutt City Community Facilities Trust (17/549)

Cr Cousins declared a conflict of interest and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

The General Manager Community Services elaborated on the report.  He acknowledged and thanked Mr Skene and Mr Leslie for their contributions to the Hutt City Community Facilities Trust, and their continued support since.

Recommended:    (Cr Milne/Cr Lulich)                   Minute No. FPC 17204

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)    approves the appointment of a selection panel consisting of Council’s General Manager Community Services, outgoing Hutt City Community Facilities Trust (CFT) Chair (subject to his agreement) and a Councillor to identify, assess and approach potential candidates for the position of up to three independent Trustees on the Hutt City Community Facilities Trust (CFT), in accordance with the Council’s policy for the Appointment of Directors;

(ii)   approves this process for future appointments to the Board of the CFT; and

(iii)  delegates to the selection panel the power to negotiate and decide an amount to be paid as an honorarium for the new Chair up to the existing remuneration level.”

c)

Response to Fraser Park Business Case (17/603)

Speaking under public comment Mr Jim O’Grady, Chief Executive Officer of  Squash New Zealand noted the Fraser Park Sportsville (FPS) project was significant in terms of its national facilities strategy.  He considered Wellington had missed out on hosting sporting events due to the lack of facilities.  He said FPS was a critical part of filling that gap and providing facilities capable of hosting premier, national and international events. He said a six court facility with a removable glass court would be ideal at the FPS facility. He noted Squash New Zealand’s endorsement and support for the FPS Project.  He said they would facilitate discussion between the regional and national body to consider what level of contribution could be made to FPS.

Speaking under public comment, Mr Greg McKeown, Chair of the Squash New Zealand said the FPS facility would enable aspiring leadership opportunities for squash players in Wellington.  He highlighted the economic and community benefits of hosting such high profile events. He noted Squash New Zealand accepted Council’s vision for the amalgamation of sports’ clubs to provide enhanced multisport facilities.  He said Squash New Zealand would advise what future financial support it could provide to FPS.

Speaking under public comment Mr Gary Gosper representing the Taita

Cricket Club noted the club had been a founding member of Sportsville.  He said the FPS complex would enhance coaching programmes for local children and children in low decile schools within Hutt City. He considered that working with other clubs would enhance relationships and provide an opportunity to work towards a common goal. 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Rory Crawford representing Lower Hutt City Football Club considered FPS would provide another dimension to the club.  He said at present they did not have clubrooms so FPS would provide an opportunity to engage with other teams and sporting codes. He considered it would increase its membership and encourage more participation.  He said being members of FPS would allow more inter sport contact for children in the Hutt Valley.

Speaking under public comment, Mr Glen Roff  representing the Governing Body for Softball New Zealand said he endorsed the further development of FPS.  He said Softball New Zealand would continue to support the Hutt Valley Softball Association, and noted they were a key association for their code.  He said the Hutt Valley was an ideal geographical location for softball events and was used frequently. He considered their facilities at FPS would be seen as the heart of national and domestic softball, and would increase exposure and the profile of the sport.  He said FPS would provide a legacy for future generations, as well as supporting the health and wellbeing of the local community. 

The Chair acknowledged Mr Corey Love’s attendance at the meeting.  He highlighted Mr Love was a silver medallist in squash from the Masters Games held recently in Auckland.

Mr Mark Heissenbuttel, Ms Trudy Englebretsen , Mr Bill Heaps and Mr Mark Sorenson representing Fraser Park Sportsville provided a presentation.

Mr Heissenbuttel noted they now had 295,000 annual visitors to Fraser Park, and over 7,000 affiliated members.  He highlighted that Fraser Park was a valued part of the community. He advised the request for the operating grant would enable FPS to run events, provide programmes and integrate these into schools in the Hutt Valley.  He noted FPS would not make any surpluses until year four of operation, and any shortfall would be funded by FPS.  He highlighted participating clubs would still have to undertake fundraising to ensure their viability within the new entity. He acknowledged the participating clubs’ commitments to handing over their facilities to FPS, as well as their revenues and club identities. He noted FPS was confident that the commercial agreement, business model and leases in place would protect Council against risk. 

In response to questions from members concerning board continuity, Mr Heissenbuttel noted he had been Chair of the FPS Board for seven years and was committed to seeing the project through to completion.  He said the build was expected to take 10 months with a two month fitout. He noted the FPS Board was committed to the Business Case, and thanked founding member clubs for supporting them. He noted they had produced profit and loss statements for each of the clubs for now and into the future.

Mr Sorensen thanked Council for its commitment and vision to sport investment.  He noted the collaboration amongst sporting clubs that had resulted from the Sportsville model.  He said Fraser Park would provide an opportunity to deliver a legacy for future generations, and a facility to host international events.   

Mr Heaps noted he was a member of the FPS Board.  He advised that the Business Case had been developed on best practice models, focussing on benefit outcomes.  He highlighted these benefits were supported by Professor Dalziel, who was a Professor of Economics at Lincoln University.  He noted Professor Dalziel had completed surveys and economic value studies for Sport New Zealand.  He further noted these studies had identified $25M plus in benefit outcomes to the community over the first 10 years of FPS operating.  

In response to questions from members, Mr Heaps said Sport New Zealand had identified from surveys that new generations wanted access to multiple sporting codes. He said the operating grant was required to see FPS through the three year review period and also to provide programmes and events to the community over this time. He noted when FPS produced the Business Case it had to make an assessment on what may be required after the third year.  Assumed in that, was that Council would want to continue to support FPS.   He said that if the level of activities were raised then there would be scope for additional income and after three years of operating, and trends in costs would be more clear. 

In response to questions from members, Ms Trudy Englebretsen noted the operational grant would assist in providing staff to attract events and programmes to the FPS facility. She highlighted the clubs would manage their sporting codes and FPS would provide the infrastructure to support those activities.  She said sports hubs such as FPS provided a diverse club base, and staff would have the ability to partner with other clubs and extend coaching where needed.  She advised the first priority would be to make clubs more capable and ensure delivery of support into schools within the community. She said if Council was able to offset some operational costs such as insurance and rates, FPS would likely be comfortable with a reduction in Council’s contribution. 

The Chief Financial Officer noted he was a member and the Treasurer of the Fraser Park Squash Club, a member and former Treasurer of the Avalon Rugby Club and a member of the Taita Cricket Club.

The General Manager, Community Services elaborated on the report.  He advised FPS would be larger and more extensive than other Sportsville facilities in Hutt City.  He noted there were some operating challenges within the Business Case, but considered these could be managed over the long term.  He noted the property costs of $330K annually included $80K for rates, and the current combined rates bill for the eight founding clubs was $13K.  He said the difference in cost was the result of Council’s current rating system, which was based on capital value.  He advised the CFT had included $80K as a building maintenance fund into the future.

In response to a question from a member, the General Manager Community Services advised Council had agreed that any day to day maintenance costs of CFT assets would be the tenant’s responsibility.  He said medium to long term asset replacements had been calculated into rental charges, for inclusion in the CFT Deferred Maintenance Fund.   He said end of life replacement costs past 70 years were not covered.

The Chief Financial Officer advised that as there was not a competitive market for the sale and purchase of sports buildings and facilities, that Council’s valuation service provider used Optimised Depreciated Replacement Cost as the basis for estimating the rateable value of sports buildings and facilities, and that this approach had an adverse impact on the rates levied on new sports buildings and facilities. He highlighted that the FPS founding members current clubs facilities were likely to be fully depreciated, and the FPS facility would be new, which was the reason for the rates variance.  He noted some Councils did not charge rates to sports clubs.  He advised Council currently received approximately $272K per annum in general rates from the three Community Facility (CF) rating categories of which sports clubs were a part of. He noted the Deferred Maintenance Fund was a fund the CFT would hold in trust, to be used only for defined long term maintenance costs.

The Chair considered that based on feedback Council should guarantee revenue for FPS for four years and conduct a review of this support during the fourth year. 

On behalf of Mayor Wallace,  Deputy Mayor Bassett acknowledged and congratulated the CFT and the sports clubs involved in the FPS development. 

Recommended:    (Cr Milne/Cr Barratt)                               Minute No. FPC 17205

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)    recommends to the Community Plan Committee, subject to Council approval, and subject to any cost reduction that Council is able to provide to the business case (eg Insurance), an operating grant to Fraser Park Sportsville (FPS) of:

a)    $150,000 for the first full year of operation;

b)    $125,000 for the second year;

c)     $100,000 for the third year; and

d)      $75,000 for the fourth year;

(ii)   agrees for this operating grant to be reviewed after three years of FPS operating; and

(iii)  agrees that a condition of annual funding will be that FPS formally reports to Council six monthly and in particular progress against its Business Case.”

Recommended:    (Cr Barry/Cr Briggs)                    Minute No. FPC 17206

“That the Committee recommends that Council asks officers to provide a report on the rating policy for sporting, recreational, cultural and community facilities.”

5.

Finance Update (17/602)

Report No. FPC2017/2/104 by the Chief Financial Officer

The Chief Financial Officer elaborated on the report. 

In response to questions from members, the Chief Financial Officer advised there had been delays on the cycleways due to the business case process.   

Members asked officers to provide a note within the Finance Update,  to explain comparisons of the carryover figures for the current financial year, the last financial year and last three financial years.

Resolved:           (Cr Milne/Deputy Mayor Bassett)                    Minute No. FPC 17207

“That the Committee notes the year to date financial performance and the forecast year-end position.”

Finance and Performance Work Programme 2017 (17/625)

Report No. FPC2017/2/69 by the Committee Advisor

Members noted the Information Technology Activity Report had been deferred to a later date to allow the newly appointed Chief Information Officer time to prepare the documentation.

Resolved:        (Cr Milne/Cr Sutton)                                        Minute No. FPC 17208

“That the report be noted and received.”

Resolved:               (Cr Milne/Deputy Mayor Bassett)              Minute No. FPC 17209

“That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely:

9.       Response to Hutt City Community Facilities Trust Funding Proposal (17/605)

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as specified in Column (B) above.”

Resolved:               (Cr Milne/Cr Sutton)                                              Minute No. FPC 17210

“That Mr Alister Skene, Chair of Hutt City Community Facilities Trust, be permitted to remain after the public during consideration of item 9 -“Response to Hutt City Community Facilities Trust Funding Proposal” as he has knowledge of the matter to be discussed that will assist the Committee in relation to this item.”

Attachment 3

UPL Constitution - proposed amendment re Indemnity and Insurance Clause

Resolved:    (Cr Barratt/Cr Sutton)                                    Minute No. CSC 17201

"That the apologies received from Mayor Wallace and Cr Briggs be accepted and leave of absence be granted."

a)

Review of Community Funding (17/656)

Report No. CSC2017/2/107 by the Community Projects and Relationship Manager.                                                                                

Speaking under public comment, Mrs B Hay, representing the Stokes Valley Community House and Mrs A Godfrey, representing the Petone Community House and Board expressed concern with the proposed Community Funding Strategy.  They explained they had been working closely with Council for the past three years under the existing strategy and were concerned the proposed strategy could undermine the good work undertaken to date.  They were appreciative of the proposed 3-5 year funding cycles in the proposed strategy, but considered the total amount of funding available ($700,000), was not a lot of money. They believed that if Council partially funded a number of projects, not all projects would be fully completed.  They acknowledged there were additional avenues that not-for-profit organisations could apply to, but that these funds were strongly contested.  They expressed further concern at the weight given to the 2016 survey and considered the survey was a missed opportunity to fully understand the value of what community groups accomplished.

Mrs Hay and Mrs Godfrey expressed further concern that there had been limited consultation about the proposal.    They asked members to delay recommending the funding review proposal until consultation with all the users had occurred and the full implications were investigated and understood.

Speaking under public comment, Mr A Sainsbury, on behalf of the  Citizens Advice Bureau, Lower Hutt (CAB) considered nothing was wrong with the existing contestable funding model, with room for improvement in the way it was used.  He expressed concern that the CABs of the City may not fit into the proposed strategy, and believed the new strategy was inequitable as the CAB leases a Council building.  He stated further concern with the lack of consultation and was unclear how the CAB could continue to provide an on-going service to the community, under the proposal.  He asked members to delay recommending the funding review until further consultation and consideration had occurred.

Speaking under public comment, Ms I Rangiwhetu, represenging the Petone Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) supported Mr Sainsbury’s comments.  She considered the CABs should be adequately funded under the proposed funding system, and maintained there was no information as to issues with the current system.  She acknowledged that ongoing secured funding allowed the CAB to operate.  She considered historical funding of CABs showed they were an important vehicle to provide services and should result in CABs being treated differently.  By way of information, Ms Rangiwhetu advised under New Zealand CAB’s policy all CABs must apply to separate entities for funding, which greatly reduced the options for applications.  She concluded CABs were vital and neutral.

Speaking under public comment, Mr K Buck, Co-ordinator CAB Petone, stated there was no evidence that the current funding model was not working, or that change would provide a better service.  He stated one positive outcome of the proposal was the certainty provided by the five year contracts.  He asked that there be further community involvement before Council made a final decision.

Speaking under public comment, Ms A Black representing Youth Inspire considered the proposal created a level playing field and could create collaboration between community groups.  She said that it would focus funding into areas that needed it the most and provided opportunities for new initiatives.  She added that the proposal would impact on Youth Inspire, and would bring the Council funding regime into line with other funding providers.  She believed the proposal was a targeted, focussed approach and outcome based.

The Community Projects and Relationship Manager elaborated on the report.  She explained the existing funding model had been reviewed to create a more strategic funding approach.  She highlighted the survey results indicated support for change, and acknowledged the concerns raised under public comment regarding the consultation process.

Ms K Frykberg, previous Chair of  Philanthropy NZ and now a member of the Sir Edmond Hillary Fellowship Board, said she had provided advice during the review.  She noted that improved transparency and an assurance that Council’s overarching vision was met, were ideal goals for a funding review.  She advised that demand for community funding would always exceed supply.

The General Manager, Community Services acknowledged the work the officers had undertaken to date. He said the purpose of the review was to find ways to compliment Council’s other spending within communities.

In reponse to further questions from members, the Community Projects and Relationship Manager explained the formation of positive working partnerships with community groups was essential to being able to provide ongoing support and monetary assistance.  She said that having time limit to funding helped to develop diversity and the ability of organisations to adapt to a changing environment.  She elaborated on the collaborative partnership model, explaining joint applications from groups offering similar or complementary initiatives would be welcomed.  She added that if Council approved the proposal, officers  would begin developing more detail, with a view to discussing this with affected groups within six months.  She assured members that any groups that may not fit within the new model, would be assisted to obtain other funding streams in the community.

The General Manager, Community Services advised that if the proposal was approved by Council, officers would hold regular discussions with affected groups to assist them in preparation for the 1 July 2018 commencement date, and in exploring innovative options for cost reductions.

Members noted that while there was no evidence the current model was not working the proposal may show a better way of allocating funding.  They acknowledged the good work the CABs undertook, and were assured by officers that this would be taken into account under a new system.

Members asked that officers to provide six monthly progress reports to the Committee.

Members considered the proposal would provide opportunities for new organisations to be heard; for innovation in the delivery of community services to be developed; for collaboration between organisations seeking funding; and for collaboration between funding agencies to be encouraged.  It was agreed that a time limit for funding should be imposed, and that Council should not be seen as the only source of funding.

RECOMMENDED:  (Cr Barratt/Cr Milne)                  Minute No. CSC 17203

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)        approves the 2017/2022 Community Funding Strategy, attached as Appendix 2 to the report, effective from 1 July 2018;

(ii)       notes that changes to the existing funding arrangements will be made incrementally over 2017/18, 2018/19 and 2019/20; and

(iii)      notes that the existing Community Funding Policy will be amended to ensure it aligns with aspirations and requirements of this proposed Community Funding Strategy.”

b)

Review of Community Committees (17/661)

Report No.CSC2017/2/108 by the Community Projects and Relationship Manager.

Speaking under public comment, Mr M Ellis expressed support for the Community Panel proposal as he believed the proposal would assist in better decision making.   He expressed concern that the three panel areas were inequitable, with the North-East being too large an area.  He explained this area had too many issues and facilities to be understood fully by one panel. 

In response to questions from members, Mr Ellis explained the panel members would need to ensure proper networks were established within its areas, especially through the sports clubs. 

Speaking under public comment, Mr T Heslin expressed support for the Community Panel proposal, as he believed it would provide communities with a way to complete projects within its areas.  He expressed concern at the large size of the North-East area, believing this area should be split into two separate panels.

Speaking under public comment, Mr F Allen, also speaking on behalf of Mr G McKenna, spoke of his opposition to the Community Panel proposal as he believed it undermined the current third tier of local government, and was contrary to the Local Government Act 2002.  He believed the current system worked well and that communities currently had representation through Wards and Community Committees.  He expressed concern at the small level of remuneration proposed for members of the Panels, and that previous delegations were removed. 

Speaking under public comment, Ms S LaFrentz and Ms D Mulligan expressed concern at the changes proposed.  Ms LaFrentz considered the previous community committees were valuable and important to residents, and enabled members to act as advocates.  She asked that four community committees be re-established. 

Ms Mulligan supported comments made by Ms LaFrentz.  She asked that Council maintain fairness and equality, stating democracy was important.  She expressed concern about the consultation undertaken to date.

 In response to questions from members, Ms LaFrentz and Ms Mulligan agreed the proposal may result in more funding being available for community projects, but that this was at the expense of equality and democracy. 

Speaking under public comment, Mr M Shierlaw expressed support for the  proposal.  He believed the re-allocation of salaries into the funding budget was a good idea, but was unclear why the previous delegations were removed. 

Speaking under public comment, Mr M Fisher believed the current proposal was an emasculation of the powers of communities and represented a loss of democratic rights to communities.  He acknowledged the idea of the community funding proposal was exciting, but not at the expense of the Panel’s delegations.  He considered that making the Panels too informal and could lead to them becoming “citizen lobby groups”. 

The General Manager, Community Services elaborated on the report.  He acknowledged the public comment and applauded the work the Community Committees had carried in the last triennium.  He explained the review was about finding a better way to obtain value out of rate payers’ dollars.  He said the concept was borne out of communities previously applying through the Annual Plan process and not being able to get funding.  He considered that representation would not be compromised. 

In response to further questions from members, the General Manager, Community Services advised that if the proposal was expanded to four Panels each Panel would receive approximately $120,000, reducing the amount of monies for the actual community fund.  He confirmed that the North-East Panel would cover the largest area, and could have a higher workload.  He added that the honorariums, administrative costs and amount of funding available would be the same as that for the other two Panels.  He said each Panel would have a certain amount of money to use at its discretion, but within a flexible set of criteria, with all projects receiving funding having to be aligned to Council priorities. 

MOVED: (Cr Barratt/Cr McDonald)

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)      approves the establishment of three Community Panels; and

(ii)     notes the new Community Panel approach would be reviewed after
          12 months.”

AMENDMENT MOVED: (Cr Bridson/Cr Sutton)

“(i)    approves the establishment of four Community Panels; and

(ii)     notes the new Community Panel approach would be reviewed after
          12 months.”

The amendment was declared CARRIED on a show of hands.

MOVED:  (Cr Bridson/Cr McDonald)

“Approves the delegations be transferred from the previous Community           Commitees to the new Panels.”

The motion was declared LOST on a show of hands.  Cr Lulich abstained from voting on the matter.

The Chair agreed to investigate how the previous Community Committees would be recognised for their work in the last triennium.

recommended:    (Cr Barratt/Cr McDonald)       Minute No. CSC 17204

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)    approves the establishment of four Community Panels; and

(ii)   notes the new Community Panel approach would be reviewed after
12 months.”

5.

Community Development Fund Recommended Allocations 2016/2017  (17/639)

Report No. CSC2017/2/125 by the Community Advisor Funding and Community Contracts

The Community Advisor Funding and Community Contracts elaborated on the report. 

In response to questions from members, the Community Advisor Funding and Community Contracts explained the allocation of funds criteria included the footprint of delivery of the applicant. She further explained that officers had regular discussions with other funding agencies to benefit all applicants and to ensure there was no “double dipping”.  She noted that unsuccessful applications were directed to other funding agencies.

Resolved:    (Cr Barratt/Cr Lulich)                                     Minute No. CSC 17205

“That the Committee agrees to the recommended allocations for the Community Development Fund 2016/2017, attached as Appendix 1 to the report.”

6.

General Manager's Report (17/512)

Report No. CSC2017/2/127 by the General Manager Community Services

The General Manager Community Services elaborated on the report.

In response to questions from members, the General Manager, Community Services agreed to provide six monthly updates on the funding issues for the Panels.  He agreed that actual measurement of all activities against the objectives was difficult for some workstreams.  He noted that other agencies may hold data that could be helpful to measure success of some Council initiatives. 

Members noted that in areas where hubs had not been developed, the communities were seeing the value of the investment and benefits in those areas.  It was agreed measurement of the results of expenditure was crucial to justify the monies spent, and that reporting back to the communities was vital.

The Chair expressed the Committee’s appreciation of the value of the work by the Community Services Division, particularly in the Youth area.

Resolved:     (Cr Barratt/Cr Lulich)                                    Minute No. CSC 17206

“That the Committee notes the updates contained in the report.”

Community Services Committee Work Programme (17/630)

Report No. CSC2017/2/71 by the Senior Committee Advisor

Resolved:   (Cr Barratt/Cr Bridson)                          Minute No. CSC 17207

“That the work programme be received.”

Resolved:   (Cr Barratt/Cr Sutton)                                        Minute No. CSC 17208

“That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely:

10.     Arts and Culture Subcommittee recommendations - 11 April 2017 - Community Representation on Arts and Culture Subcommittee (17/665)

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as specified in Column (B) above.”

Attachment 2

Proposed Community Funding Strategy

Attachment 2

Proposed Community Funding Strategy

Attachment 2

Proposed Community Funding Strategy

Recommendations

It is recommended that Council adopts the Living Wage Policy, attached as Appendix 1 to the report, which allows the Living Wage to be paid to employees on a case-by-case basis.

No.

Title

Page

1⇩

Remuneration and Employment Policy

172

2⇩

Finance and Performance Committee Report - Living Wage Considerations for Hutt City Council - 1 March 2017

175

3⇩

Legal Advice - Part 1

188

4⇩

Legal Advice - Part 2

198

5⇩

Living Wage Aoteroa report - HCC Contractors

203

Attachment 1

Remuneration and Employment Policy

Division

Chief Executive’s Office

Date created

May 2017

Publication date

When approved by Council

Review period

May 2020

Owner

Bradley Cato

Approved by

Tony Stallinger

Version

Author

Date

Description

V 1.0

Bradley Cato

TBC

Approved by Council

V 2.0

Name

DD/MM/YYYY

Reviewed

Attachment 2

Finance and Performance Committee Report - Living Wage Considerations for Hutt City Council - 1 March 2017

Recommendations

That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)    notes the information in the report;

(ii)   recommends that Council EITHER:

a.    not adopts the Living Wage at Hutt City Council; OR

b.    adopts the Living Wage for Council employees with effect from
1 January 2018; OR

c.     adopts the Living Wage for Council employees meeting specified criteria only, with effect from 1 January 2018;

(iii)  recommends that Council EITHER:

a.    not adopt a Living Wage policy at Hutt City Council in respect of direct contractors to Council; OR

b.    adopts a policy whereby contractors applying a Living Wage approach are given a weighted preference during Council tender processes; OR

c.     requests officers to conduct a thorough investigation into the potential costs and benefits of enforcing a Living Wage approach with significant direct contractors for service to Hutt City Council.

Current

New

Adult Swim

$5.00

$5.75

Child Swim

$3.00

$3.50

Swim Lesson

$15.00

$17.25

Gym Weekly

$12.00

$13.80

No.

Title

Page

1

Policy Research Paper

2