Agenda of Extraordinary Meeting of Council

COUNCIL
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)

Power to (being a power that is not capable of being delegated)[1]:

• Make a rate.

• Make bylaws.

• Borrow money other than in accordance with the Long Term Plan (LTP).

• Purchase or dispose of assets other than in accordance with the LTP.

• Purchase or dispose of Council land and property other than in accordance with the LTP.

• Adopt the LTP, Annual Plan and Annual Report.

• Adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the Act in association with the LTP or developed for the purpose of the Local Governance Statement.

• Appoint the Chief Executive.

• Exercise any powers and duties conferred or imposed on the local authority by the Public Works Act 1981 or the Resource Management Act 1991 that are unable to be delegated.

• Undertake all other actions which are by law not capable of being delegated.

• The power to adopt a Remuneration and Employment Policy.

Decide on:

Policy issues

• Adoption of all policy required by legislation.

• Adoption of policies with a city-wide or strategic focus.

District Plan

• Promotion of Plan Changes and Variations recommended by the District Plan Committee prior to public notification.

• The withdrawal of Plan Changes in accordance with clause 8D, Part 1, Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

• Approval, to make operative, of District Plan and Plan Changes (in accordance with clause 17, Part 1, Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991).

Representation, electoral and governance matters

• The method of voting for the Triennial elections.

• Representation reviews.

• Council’s Code of Conduct and Local Governance Statement.

• Elected Members Remuneration.

• The outcome of any extraordinary vacancies on Council.

• Any other matters for which a local authority decision is required under the Local Electoral Act 2001.

• All matters identified in these Terms of Reference as delegated to Council Committees (or otherwise delegated by the Council) and oversee those delegations.

• Council‘s delegations to officers and community boards.

Delegations and employment of the Chief Executive

The review and negotiation of the contract, performance agreement and remuneration of the Chief Executive.

Meetings and committees

• Standing Orders for Council and its committees.

• Council’s annual meeting schedule.

Operational matters

• The establishment and disposal of any Council Controlled Organisation or Council Controlled Trading Organisation and approval of annual Statements of Corporate Intent on the recommendation of the Finance and Performance Committee.

• Civil Defence Emergency Management Group matters requiring Council’s input.

• Road closing and road stopping matters.

• All other matters for which final authority is not delegated.

Appoint:

• The non-elected members of the Standing Committees (including extraordinary vacancies of non-elected representatives).

• The Directors of Council Controlled Organisations and Council Controlled Trading Organisations.

• Council’s nominee on any Trust.

• Council representatives on any outside organisations (where applicable and time permits, recommendations for the appointment may be sought from the appropriate standing committee and/or outside organisations).

• The Chief Executive of Hutt City Council.

• Council’s Electoral Officer, Principal Rural Fire Officer and any other appointments required by statute.

9 06 November 2017

Extraordinary Meeting of Council

17 October 2017

File: (17/1605)

Report no: HCC2017/5/259

105 Western Hutt Road - Proposal to Change Reserve Classification and Lease to New Zealand Response Team 18 for Civil Defence Purposes

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to consider a proposal to change the reserve classification of the property at 105 Western Hutt Road to enable the property to be used for a community purpose.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the Council:

(i) notes that New Zealand Response Team 18, in looking for a suitable site to relocate, is seeking Council approval to lease part of the property at 105 Western Hutt Road;

(ii) notes that this is a reserve property which will need to have its Scenic Reserve classification changed if it is to be used for this purpose;

(iii) agrees to publicly notify a proposal to change the reserve classification of the property situated at 105 Western Hutt Road, being at the entrance to Percy Scenic Reserve, from Scenic Reserve to Local Purpose Reserve (Community Buildings) on the basis that the property does not have reserve values consistent with a Scenic Reserve and that it would be more suited for community uses as a base for Civil Defence purposes; and

(iv) agrees in principle, subject to the change in classification, to leasing a part of the property at 105 Western Hutt Road to New Zealand Response Team 18.

Background

2. The property at 105 Western Hutt Road is at the entrance to Percy Scenic Reserve, located between Dowse Drive and State Highway 2, at the Dowse Interchange. Its legal description is Section 20-24 Survey Office Plan 426962. The property is owned by the Crown with Hutt City Council holding a control and management appointment. A plan of the property is attached as Appendix 1. The area shaded blue is that part of the property proposed to be leased.

3. The State Highway 2 upgrade, including the development of the Dowse Interchange and the reconfigured entrance to Percy Scenic Reserve, completed in 2008, left much of the property at 205 Western Hutt Road isolated from the balance of the Reserve. The old Percy Scenic Reserve custodian’s house was relocated to the property but required significant investment to make suitable for use and was eventually removed from the property, as it was uneconomic to upgrade. No other suitable use associated with the reserve was identified.

4. The property is just less than half a hectare in size with a portion extending over the internal reserve road off Dowse Drive. The main part of the property is sealed and is fenced on three sides.

5. Council has recently received a formal request from New Zealand Response Team 18 (NZ-RT18) to establish a base at the property for Civil Defence purposes. NZ-RT18 has had to vacate its current limited storage space at the Pavilion and has acquired a large shipping container as a temporary measure to store its equipment.

6. NZ-RT18 has assessed the property as being suitable for its purposes, noting that it is out of the tsunami and liquefaction zones, is an elevated site which will enable visual assessment of parts of the valley floor and would provide quick access all along the valley floor, being adjacent to SH2. It is also close to Fire and Emergency New Zealand’s secondary command site in Maungaraki.

7. NZ-RT18 would construct a 3 bay garage for storage purposes and as a second stage, build training and office space with kitchen and bathroom facilities, which would act as a secondary Emergency Operations Centre should the primary Centre be unable to be used. A copy of NZ-RT18’s request is attached as Appendix 2.

8. In order for the property to be used for this purpose, a change in reserve classification is required.

Discussion

9. The Scenic Reserve classification of this property is inappropriate given its physical nature and location. This classification is for the purpose of either:

a. protecting and preserving suitable areas possessing qualities of scenic interest, beauty or natural features; or

b. providing suitable areas which by development and the introduction of flora will become of scenic interest or beauty.

The property has no such qualities and is not used in support of other nearby properties which do meet the classification requirements. The property is almost completely sealed with very little vegetation on it.

10. The property has sat idle for the best part of 10 years and without a change in classification will likely continue to remain unused. The application from NZ-RT18 has prompted this proposed change in classification.

11. The use of part of the property as a Civil Defence base is supported. The site has been assessed as highly suitable for this purpose in terms of its location and its geography. There will be no impact on Percy Scenic Reserve.

Options

12. Council is being requested to agree to publicly notify the proposal. It can opt not to do so, if it considers that a change in classification is not supported.

Consultation

13. Council is required, under the Reserves Act 1977, to publicly notify the proposal to change the reserve classification. Any objections to the proposal will be considered by Council at a future meeting.

14. Iwi groups will also be notified of the proposal, as will the Western Ward Community Panel.

Legal Considerations

15. Section 24 of the Reserves Act 1977 sets out the process for changing the classification of a reserve. This process includes public notification of the proposal, consideration of objections and the forwarding of the Council resolution and objections to the Commissioner at the Department of Conservation for ratification.

16. Section 61 of the Reserves Act 1977 enables Council, as the administering body, to lease a local purpose reserve for any purpose specified in the reserves classification. The purpose sought in the sub-classification of Community Buildings is suitable for use as a Civil Defence response base.

Financial Considerations

17. The cost of notifying the proposal will be met from existing budgets. There are no other financial considerations at this time.

Other Considerations

18. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of local government in that it considers the future community use of reserve land that it manages on behalf of the Crown. It does this in a way that is cost-effective as it will result in land currently underutilised being put to an appropriate community use.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	NZRT18 Lease Area 105 Western Hutt Road.	13
2 ⇩	NZ-RT18 Proposal to Lease 105 Western Hutt Road	14

Author: Bruce Hodgins

Divisional Manager, Parks and Gardens

Approved By: Matt Reid

General Manager City and Community Services

18 06 November 2017

Extraordinary Meeting of Council

24 October 2017

File: (17/1628)

Report no: HCC2017/5/260

Proposed District Plan Change 50
135 Witako Street, Epuni - Rezoning from General Recreation Activity Area to Community Health Activity Area (Area 1)

Purpose of Report

1. To present Draft Proposed District Plan Change 50 to Council for consideration and approval.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the Council:

(i) notes Proposed District Plan Change 50 attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii) resolves to promulgate Proposed District Plan Change 50 for consultation;

(iii) instructs officers to publicly notify Proposed District Plan Change 50 as soon as practicable; and

(iv) allows officers to make any non-policy related changes to the details of Proposed District Plan Change 50 should the need arise.

Background

2. 135 Witako Street, Epuni (Lot 1 DP 53389) is a site that is 7,517m², is owned by Council, and until recently was part of Mitchell Park reserve. However, on 15 December 2015 the Council resolved that the land be declared to be surplus to requirements and that the reserve status be revoked. The reserve revocation was gazetted on 5 September 2016.

3. Currently, the site is zoned in the District Plan as General Recreation Activity Area, which is generally restrictive on any activities other than recreational activities. A change in zone is required to enable other uses of the site.

4. The purpose of Proposed District Plan Change 50 is to rezone the 135 Witako Street, Epuni from General Recreation Activity Area to Community Health Activity Area (Area 1) to enable appropriate development of the site.

5. No new District Plan provisions (Objectives, Policies, Rules or Standards) would be introduced and no existing District Plan provisions would be amended as a result of the Proposed Plan Change. The only amendment would be to the District Plan Maps to reflect the new zoning of the site.

Discussion

6. The section 32 evaluation which forms part of the Proposed Plan Change document (attached as Appendix 1 to this report) addresses the principles of the Resource Management Act 1991 as well as regional and local policy documents and strategies along with the objectives and policies of the District Plan in relation to the proposed rezoning. It also includes an assessment of the potential effects of the proposed rezoning.

Options

7. Four options have been considered for the site, and are outlined in more detail in the section 32 evaluation attached to this report. The four options are:

1) Retain the existing General Recreation Activity Area

2) Rezone the site to General Residential (Medium Density) Activity Area

3) Rezone the site to Community Health Activity Area (Area 1)

4) Rezone the site to Community Health Activity Area (Area 2)

8. Of the four options, Option 3 is recommended. Rezoning the site to Community Health Activity Area (Area 1) would enable the development of healthcare facilities at the site in keeping with the nature and scale of the existing development at the Hutt and Boulcott Hospitals.

9. The Community Health Activity Area (Area 1) also enables residential development of the site in accordance with the permitted activity conditions for the General Residential Activity Area, which would ensure that any residential development of the site would be of a nature and scale that is in keeping with the existing residential form in the surrounding residential area.

10. These matters are discussed in more detail in the section 32 report of the Proposed Plan Change document (Appendix 1).

Consultation

11. In preparation of the Proposed Plan Change consultation has been initiated with the following statutory authorities in accordance with Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991:

· Ministry for the Environment;

· Greater Wellington Regional Council;

· Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira Inc;

· Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust;

· Upper Hutt City Council;

· Porirua City Council;

· South Wairarapa District Council;

· Wellington City Council.

12. No feedback has been received from any of these parties to date.

13. Full consultation on the Proposed Plan Change will be undertaken under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 if and when the Proposed Plan Change is promulgated.

Legal Considerations

14. All requirements under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) will be followed.

Financial Considerations

15. There are no financial considerations.

Other Considerations

16. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it the proposal is the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it follows the statutory process outlined in the RMA and ensures that land subject to the Proposed Plan Change will have appropriate zoning.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Draft s32 Assessment PC 50 for Council Agenda	22

Author: Nathan Geard

Intermediate Environmental Policy Analyst

Reviewed By: Andrew Cumming

Divisional Manager District Plan

Approved By: Kim Kelly

General Manager, City Transformation

Attachment 1

Draft s32 Assessment PC 50 for Council Agenda

117 06 November 2017

Extraordinary Meeting of Council

25 October 2017

File: (17/1631)

Report no: HCC2017/5/18

CYCLEWAYS

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is two-fold. Firstly to seek Council approval to a Memorandum of Understanding between HCC and the Urban Cycleway Funding Authority, allowing Council to access up to $2.8M in subsidy funding. Of this $1.15M has already been spent on the 3 projects to date, with $1.65M remaining.

2. And secondly to seek Council approval to award a construction contract for the Wainuiomata Hill Shared Path project so that works can commence this summer.

3. Both of these decisions will have financial implications as set out in this report.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the Council:

(i) authorises officers to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Urban Cycleways Authority which will allow Council to access the remaining $1.65M of subsidy; in return for which Council commits to the construction of the Wainui Hill, Eastern Bays, and officers preferred option for the Beltway, (Northern and Central portions only), as discussed in this report;

(ii) authorises officers to award the contract for the Wainuiomata Hill project so that works can commence as soon as possible, with a target completion date of late 2018;

(iii) notes the strong level of community support for all three projects as expressed through previous years’ planning rounds, and in the project specific consultation held over the last several months; and

(iv) notes that the decisions in part (i) and part (ii) above will result in future capex expenditure estimated to be in excess of current budgets in the amount of $4.6M, and directs officers to accommodate this level of spending within the current LTP budget round.

Background

4. Council has for some time been looking to progress three major cycleways/shared path infrastructure projects: the Wainui Hill, to build upon the success of the recently completed Pukeatua Bridge; an Eastern Bays path to address safety and seawall concerns, and to help promote the Great Harbour Way concept; and an urban “Beltway” to complete a recreational shared path loop from Seaview to Taita. All three projects were initially scheduled for construction in the 2015-2018 period.

5. Progress on each of these projects has been as follows:

6. Wainui Hill Shared Path

● Stage 1 detailed design completed

● Stage 1 consented by GWRC

● Stage 1 value engineered to reduce cost

● Stage 2 detailed design completed

● Stage 2 value engineered to reduce cost

● Consultation work completed

● Land purchases largely completed

● Consent granted by HCC for entire route

7. Eastern Bays Shared Path

● Scope change agreed with NZTA regarding level of seawall replacement

● Strategic Business Case completed

● Indicative Business Case completed

● Detailed Business Case completed

● Consultation undertaken including meetings with residents of each bay

● Penguin surveys undertaken

● Multi Criteria Assessment undertaken with a wide range of relevant expertise

● Preliminary design completed

● Detailed design underway

8. The Beltway

● Strategic Business Case completed

● Single Stage Business Case completed (Indicative Business Case and Detailed Business Case undertaken concurrently)

● Concept route developed in three sections (southern, central and northern)

● Consultation undertaken

● Engaged with KiwiRail on work in the rail corridor

Schematics for each of these projects are attached as Appendices.

9. A Memorandum of Understanding was signed between Council and the UCF in July 2015 whereby the UCF agreed to provide a funding subsidy for each of these projects. The total amount of subsidy was capped at $2.8M (being $1.5M for Wainui, $1.2M for the Beltway, and $0.1M for Eastern Bays). At the time the MoU was signed access to the subsidy was conditional upon Council completing (or at least commencing) construction on all three projects before 30/6/18. Funding availability for the UCF ceases at that date.

10. As has been found by many other Councils, it has proved more difficult than expected to get these projects designed and consented, and the “construction” requirement will not be met. Nevertheless the UCF remains committed to progressing these projects and are thereby willing to amend the existing MoU. The new proposal is that Council can access the balance of the $2.8M as soon as it is required, and apply it to any of the three projects as and when required, (potentially for instance it could all be applied in this financial year to the Wainui Hill project), on the condition that Council commits to the delivery of these projects within a timeframe to be agreed.

11. In addition to the UCF subsidy, Council can also expect to obtain NZTA subsidy of around 50% of the Council spend.

Discussion

12. As at 1 July 2017, Council has a total of $8.0M budgeted for cycleways/shared path projects.

13. As more detailed design of each of these projects has progressed, responding to consenting and associated environmental issues, and taking into account feedback from community consultation; costs have increased significantly.

14. Estimated net costs to Council are now:

Wainui Hill $4.6M - a quoted price but subject to usual variations

- Tendered prices are valid only until November

- Includes contingency of 8%

Eastern Bays $7.3M - Estimated costs only, design 75% complete

- Includes contingency of 30%

The Beltway $0.3M - $4.0M -Estimated costs only

-Design 50% complete

-Includes 30% contingency

Options

15. Full completion of all three projects would therefore see a requirement for a further $7.9M of Council funding. Options exist to reduce this financial impact by reducing the scope of works, although, depending on the level of scope reduction, some UCF subsidy may be at risk. Discussion of these options as follows:

Wainui Hill

A considerable amount of value engineering has already been undertaken to minimise cost while still delivering an outcome which meets the project objectives. There is no opportunity to reduce the length of the works; clearly the path must go all the way from Hutt to Wainui.

Eastern Bays

Costs could be reduced by limiting the length of the Eastern Bays pathway which was to be completed; perhaps with some commitment to future works as budgets allow. Given that a much lower level of UCF subsidy applies on this project, such a reduction is unlikely to impact UCF subsidy. However, officers note the strong representations made by the Eastbourne Community over many years for early completion of this project, largely citing safety concerns, which officers endorse. Additional benefits of this project include seawall treatment to combat (the seemingly increasing numbers of) storm surge events and the tourism potential of the Great Harbour Way concept.

The Beltway

The schematics in the Appendices show the Beltway to be comprised of three sections; North, Central and Southern. Completing all three of these sections has been presented as Option A. Further Options (B to E) exist to reduce the scope of these sections as follows:

Option B Complete the majority of the Beltway but exclude the Primary Southern Route section. Net cost saving to Council would be $2.1M.

Option C Complete the Central and Northern sections of the Beltway but exclude the entire Southern Route sections. Net cost saving to Council would be $2.8M.

Option D Complete only the Central (excluding Waterloo) and Northern sections of the Beltway. Net cost saving to Council would be $3.3M.

Option E Complete only the Central (excluding Waterloo) section of the Beltway. Net cost saving to Council would be $3.7M. Note that this option is likely to compromise UCF subsidy, in which case the cost saving to Council would be reduced.

Community consultation on the Beltway project has been supportive, but there may be more acceptance of a temporary scope reduction on this project than the other two. However retaining a certain level of connectivity is an important consideration.

16. Officers note that the additional cost of $4.2M required for an underpass in the Southern section of the Beltway was not initially budgeted and that a Secondary Southern Route is available and could be completed in future years. However officers will continue to assess the underpass design for possible construction in the future.

Preferred Option

17. Officers believe that taking into account; financial implications including potential loss of subsidy, community feedback, and discussions with the UCF authority; a reasonable balance of works would be to complete the Wainui Hill and Eastern Bays projects in total, and the Northern and Central sections of the Beltway as per Option D.

Consultation

18. Officers have undertaken consultation with the community at various stages of the projects and will continue to engage throughout the remainder of the design process to ensure that we take them on the journey towards construction and the proposed new infrastructure.

We have engaged using a variety of consultation methods, including open days, targeted meetings and social media to obtain feedback from the community on the proposals. There are dedicated webpages on the Hutt City Council website where the community can also view the latest information on the projects.

Legal Considerations

19. All necessary regulatory and legal obligations in respect of these projects will be fulfilled.

Financial Considerations

20. Various financial information is outlined above. Expected actual spend for each of the options discussed above, is shown year by year below, and compared to existing budgets. Officers recommendation is for option D.

		17/18	18/19	19/20	20/21	21/22	22/23	Total
Current Budget		$5.2M	$0.7M	$0.7M	$0.7M	$0.7M	-	$8.0M
Expected Spend	Option A	$6.7M	$2.0M	$1.6M	$3.1M	$1.3M	$1.2M	$15.9M
	Option B	$6.7M	$2.0M	$1.6M	$1.0M	$1.3M	$1.2M	$13.8M
	Option C	$6.7M	$2.0M	$0.9M	$1.0M	$1.3M	$1.2M	$13.1M
	Option D	$6.2M	$2.0M	$0.9M	$1.0M	$1.3M	$1.2M	$12.6M
	Option E	$6.0M	$1.7M	$0.9M	$1.0M	$1.3M	$1.2M	$12.2M
Variance to budget	Option A	$1.5M	$1.3M	$0.9M	$2.4M	$0.6M	$1.2M	$7.9M
	Option B	$1.5M	$1.3M	$0.9M	$0.3M	$0.6M	$1.2M	$5.8M
	Option C	$1.5M	$1.3M	$0.2M	$0.3M	$0.6M	$1.2M	$5.1M
	Option D	$1.0M	$1.3M	$0.2M	$0.3M	$0.6M	$1.2M	$4.6M
	Option E	$0.8M	$1.0M	$0.2M	$0.3M	$0.6M	$1.2M	$4.2M

Other Considerations

21. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it provides infrastructure for active modes in line with Council strategy. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because the Wanuiomata Hill Shared Path has been value engineered and the other two projects have been subject to NZTA’s Business Case processes.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Eastern Bays Shared Path Route Map	123
2 ⇩	The Beltway Central Section Route Map 1	124
3 ⇩	The Beltway Central Section Route Map 2	125
4 ⇩	The Beltway Northern Section Route Map 1	126
5 ⇩	The Beltway Northern Section Route Map 2	127
6 ⇩	The Beltway Southern Section Route Map	128
7 ⇩	Wainuiomata Hill Shared Path Stage 1 Route Map	129
8 ⇩	Wainuiomata Hill Shared Path Stage 2 Route Map	130

Author: Simon Cager

Senior Project Engineer

Reviewed By: John Gloag

Divisional Manager, Transport

Approved By: Bruce Sherlock

Strategic Projects Director

[1] Work required prior to the making of any of these decisions may be deleted.

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