Agenda of Community Plan Committee

COMMUNITY PLAN COMMITTEE (Committee of Council as a whole)
Membership:	13
Quorum:	Half of the members
Meeting Cycle:	Meets as required during LTP and Annual Plan processes
Reports to:	Council

17 06 June 2018

Community Plan Committee

30 April 2018

File: (18/678)

Report no: CPC2018/3/148

Consultation Results - 2018-2028 Long Term Plan

Purpose of Report

1. This report outlines the results of the consultation undertaken on the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

Recommendations

That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i) notes 198 submissions (including five late submissions) were received for the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan and 94 individuals or groups presented their submissions in person to the Community Plan Committee (CPC) on 16 and 17 May;

(ii) notes the number of submissions is lower than in previous years, however this was expected given the consultation topics;

(iii) notes a higher proportion of submitters chose to present to the CPC than in previous years;

(iv) notes progress has been made with increasing online participation and participation from those typically under-represented in civic decision making processes;

(v) notes a parallel survey was conducted by Public Voice using our Citizens Panel and that overall the views of the panel were similar to that of submitters;

(vi) notes across the four consultation topics the majority of submitters and survey respondents agreed with the Council’s preferred option;

(vii) notes the results of the consultation, Citizen’s Panel survey and requests for funding are attached as Appendices 1 – 4;

(viii) notes that the results of the wage surveys are at paragraphs 22- 27; and

(ix) considers the information presented in these reports as part of the Committee’s decision-making on the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

For the reason(s) outlined in the report below

Background

2. On 20 February 2018 Council agreed the key theme for the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan and consultation would be the continuation of rejuvenating Lower Hutt City/”Growing our City”. It was agreed the Consultation Document was to connect the four strategies with the issues the city is facing to tell the rejuvenation story, specifically:

a. Promoting sustainable growth and development of the city and economy through a number of key projects including Riverlink, District Plan Change 43 and Technology Valley.

b. Developing sustainable community facilities and provision of services that promote wellbeing, particularly in the northern and eastern suburbs.

c. Ensuring our infrastructure is resilient, fit for purpose and meets the needs of today without comprising the needs of tomorrow. There will be a focus on the investment in our cycle ways and walk ways to make our city more accessible and safer for alternative modes of transport.

d. Promoting the sustainability of our beautiful natural environment and the commitments made in our Environmental Sustainability Strategy.

3. Council agreed to focus on increasing online participation for the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan consultation, as well as greater emphasis on those typically under-represented in civic decision-making processes. This included youth, Maori, ethnic minorities and the disability community.

4. The Consultation Document was adopted by Council on 28 March 2018 and received an unmodified opinion from Audit New Zealand. Audit New Zealand concluded that the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan Consultation Document provided an effective basis for public participation in the Council’s decisions about the proposed content of our 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

5. Consultation ran from 3 April to 3 May 2018. The overall theme of the consultation was the continuation of the rejuvenation journey. There were four key topics of consultation:

a. Should we continue to rejuvenate our city?

b. Hutt City development charges and rates remissions policy

c. Rates postponement scheme for residential ratepayers aged 65 and over

d. Rates remissions for community, sporting and other organisations.

6. There was extensive advertising of the consultation, including:

a. a public notice and advertisement in the Hutt News

b. flyer included in rates bill

c. radio advertising across eight stations

d. billboards on State Highway 2

e. signboards and posters around the city and suburbs

f. on our Council website and facebook page (facebook posts and advertisements)

g. displays in libraries and community hubs

h. media releases

i. promotional video created by Naenae Computer Clubhouse and the Youth Council which featured several Councillors

j. email newsletters to subscribers interested in receiving Council news

k. notification emails to special interest groups from Council officers and the Mayor

l. front line staff wearing branded t-shirts

m. public information sessions and stakeholder meetings

n. independent telephone survey.

7. Hard copies of the Consultation Document were made available by request, and were distributed to all libraries, community hubs, the main Council administration building and other appropriate Council facilities. Copies of the hard copy Consultation Document were also available at all public information sessions. A computer was made available at all libraries, community hubs, the main administration building and public information sessions so the public were able to do their submission online at the premises.

Consultation Results

8. 194 submissions were received before submissions were closed on Tuesday 8 May (later than advertised to allow for any submissions still to come through the post), with 94 people indicating they wanted to present to Council on 16-17 May. Following close off there were five late submissions.

9. Although the number of submissions is lower than in previous years, a higher proportion indicated they wanted to be heard. The lower number of submissions was expected given the nature of this year’s consultation. Council had already consulted heavily in previous years on significant projects, so the consultation was a continuation of past consultations. Consultation topics were limited and less emotive. The reduced number of submissions may also suggest the community supports the overall direction that the Council is heading, and has confidence. This is consistent with past consultations and our resident satisfaction survey.

10. The consultation was successful in driving up online participation with over half (51%) being received online compared to 18% last year.

	2018-2028		2017-18		2016-17		2015-2025
	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%
Online	99	51	226	18	91	7	144	22
Hard copy consultation document (+ hard copy flyer in 2017-18 and 2016-17)	34	17	862	70	944	77	260	39
Email	53	27	138	11	144	12	176	26
Other	10	5	10	1	50	4	89	13
Total	196	100	1236	100	1229	100	669	100

Our submitters

11. Progress has been made on engaging with those who are typically under-represented in civic-decision making processes. Among those who provided demographic information, submitters on average were younger and more ethnically diverse than in previous years.

LTP 2018-2028		Annual Plan 2017-18
Under 29 years	9%	Under 25 years	2%
30 – 49 years	39%	25 – 40 years	15%
50 – 64 years	29%	41 – 60 years	39%
Over 65 years	22%	Over 60 years	44%

	LTP 2018-2028	Annual Plan 2017-18
New Zealand European	77%	94
Maori	6%	5
Asian	6%	-
Other	11%	1

12. Of the submitters that indicated their address, the majority of submitters identified as living in Lower Hutt City, with all Wards represented. Compared to last year there were a greater proportion of submissions from Petone and Wainuiomata, and fewer from Eastbourne.

	LTP 2018-2028	Annual Plan 2017-18
Central Ward	17%	19%
Eastern Ward	11%	15%
Harbour Ward (Eastbourne)	7%	14%
Harbour Ward (Petone)	23%	17%
Northern Ward	4%	7%
Wainuiomata Ward	19%	10%
Western Ward	14%	17%
Outside of Lower Hutt	4%	2%

Public Voice Citizen’s Panel Survey

13. In addition to the public consultation process, a parallel survey was conducted by Public Voice using our Citizens Panel. The survey asked the same questions as those asked in the Consultation Document.

14. 515 residents responded to the survey. The survey participants represented all ages, ethnicities and wards. Compared to those who put in a submission, survey respondents were older and slightly less ethnically diverse. There was also a greater representation from the Central and Western Wards, and a lower representation from the Harbour and Wainuiomata Wards.

	LTP Consultation submitters	Citizen’s Panel Survey
Age
Under 29 years	9%	2%
30 to 49 years	39%	31%
50 to 64 years	29%	32%
65 years or over	22%	35%
Ethnicity
New Zealand European	77%	81%
Maori	6%	7%
Asian	6%	3%
Pacific People	-	2%
Middle Eastern, Latin American/African	-	1%
Other	11%	11%
Ward
Central Ward	17%	27%
Eastern Ward	11%	18%
Harbour Ward	30%	16%
Northern Ward	4%	10%
Wainuiomata Ward	19%	8%
Western Ward	14%	21%
Outside of Lower Hutt	4%	-

Summary of results for the four consultation topics

15. In general those who put in a submission had a similar opinion to those who participated in the Citizen’s Panel Survey, although there was some variance in strength of opinions.

Preferred option for consultation topic	LTP Consultation submitters	Citizen’s Panel Survey
Topic 1: Complete our planned sportsville and community hub projects.	53%	57%
Topic 2: Suspend the Hutt City development charges and rates remissions policy from 31 December 2018.	76%	68%
Topic 3a: Introduction of a rates postponement scheme for residential ratepayers aged 65 years and over.	52%	53%
Topic 3b: Draft rates postponement policy best ensures the total cost of the rates postponement is cost neutral to the Council.	84%	97%
Topic 4a: Extend rates remission policy to include all charitable organisations, which are used exclusively or principally for sporting, recreation or community purposes, regardless of whether they hold a liquor licence.	61%	67%
Topic 4b: Increase the rates remission to 100% of the general rate.	42%	38%
Topic 4b: Increase the rates remission to 50% of the general rate.	40%	55%

16. Across the four consultation topics the majority of submitters and survey respondents agreed with Council’s preferred options. The exception was whether rates remissions for sporting, recreation or community facilities should be increased to 100%; here opinions were more evenly divided between a rates remission of 50% and 100%. Among survey respondents a higher proportion favoured the remission to remain at 50%.

17. Suspending the Hutt City Development Charges and Rates Remission Policy from 31 December 2018 had the highest level of support from both submitters and survey respondents with three quarters (76%) of submitters and two-thirds (68%) of survey respondents supporting suspending the policy from 31 December 2018..

18. Nearly half of submitters (86) provided their view on what Council should focus on over the next 10 years. A focus on maintaining/upgrading infrastructure, housing/accommodation and reducing expenditure on unnecessary projects were the most common themes identified by submitters. Similar key themes were identified by survey respondents with ‘maintaining/upgrading infrastructure’, ‘traffic management issues’ and ‘improve public transport’ taking the top three spots. Other areas commonly mentioned by survey respondents were ‘Improve resilience and infrastructure’, ‘business development in the CBD’ and ‘housing development’.

19. Full results of the consultation and Citizen’s Panel survey are attached as Appendices 1-3. A list of funding requests has been included in Appendix 4.

Oral hearings

20. On 16 and 17 May 2018, 94 submitters took the opportunity to speak in front of the Mayor and Councillors on a range of topics including resilience and sustainability, living wage, RiverLink, Sportsville and other sporting and recreational facilities, housing, homelessness, and the future of Petone wharf.

21. The Community Plan Committee requested additional information following the hearing of submissions. This information has been included in the Memorandum “Additional Information Requested”.

Wage Surveys 2018

22. During April and May this year Hutt City Council conducted two surveys with residents regarding its approach to paying Council’s lowest paid staff.

23. Public Voice conducted a Citizen’s Panel Survey which received 803 responses. Peter Glen Research conducted a telephone survey of 400 residents, a sample which was selected to be broadly representative of the adult population of the city.

24. Both surveys asked residents to select one of the three following options.

1) Retaining the current budget with Council’s minimum wage increasing to $20 per hour by April 2021 in-line with Government’s commitment; or

2) Increasing Council’s minimum wage to $20 per hour from 1 July 2018. This is 33 months ahead of the Government’s commitment; or

3) Fully implementing a Living Wage of $20.55 per hour for all Council staff from 1 July 2018.

25. Responses to the Citizen’s Panel survey are separated into three categories. The random group has been recruited to be broadly representative of the city’s population. The self-selected group contains people that have requested that Council contact them in relation to its work. The non-panel group contains respondents who received the survey via social media platforms such as Facebook.

	Peter Glen Research	Public Voice Citizen's Panel – sample of 803
Options		Random	Self-selected	Non-panel
1	25%	25%	33%	8%
2	26%	31%	19%	16%
3	49%	44%	48%	76%
Number of Responses	400	211	497	95

26. On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being Low/No importance and 10 being Very Important, the majority of residents in both surveys considered it ‘moderately’ to ‘very important’ for Council to adopt the option they had selected.

27. The report for the telephone survey is in Appendix 5 and the Citizen’s Panel survey report is in Appendix 6.

Legal Considerations

28. The requirements of the Local Government Act have been followed in respect of the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan process.

Financial Considerations

29. All work required as part of the Long Term Plan process has been, and will be undertaken within current budgets.

Other Considerations

30. 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 opportunity has been provided for members of the public to comment on the manner in which Council proposes to meet the current and future needs of the community. It has done this in a way that is cost-effective as the Consultation Document, and supporting information was made accessible for residents both online and by hard copy. Computers were made available at all libraries, community hubs and the main administration building to reduce barriers for online participation. There was extensive advertising of the consultation to encourage public participation.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Consultation topics results from submitters	18
2 ⇩	2018-2028 LTP Consultation - text analysis of submissions	22
3 ⇩	Final 2018-2028 LTP Panel survey	38
4 ⇩	Funding requests from submissions	55
5 ⇩	PG HCC Wage Survey Report	59
6 ⇩	HCC Living wage survey 14 May 2018	85

Author: Josie Askin

Corporate Planner

Author: John Pritchard

Senior Research/Policy Advisor

Reviewed By: Wendy Moore

Divisional Manager, Strategy and Planning

Approved By: Kim Kelly

General Manager, City Transformation

Attachment 4

Funding requests from submissions

2018-2028 LONG TERM PLAN FUNDING REQUESTS

SUB NO	NAME	ORGANISATION	REQUEST	YEARS	AMOUNT
DAP18/1	Wirangi Luke	Te Runanganui o Te Atiawa	Fund and build 14m shell equivalent to the square footage of the two buildings. Te Aroha Hutt Valley Association will commit and be responsible for the 'Fit Out" of the community hub and assist with a percentage of funding as its contribution to the new extension	Not specified	Not specified
DAP18/42	David Syms	Petone Sportsville	Consideration be given to moving the capital funding for the Petone Recreation Ground Pavilion to the 2019-2020 financial year based on design concepts and costs soon to be obtained by Council Officers	2019-20	Not specified
DAP16/69	Mike Rogers	Lower Hutt City Association Football Club	Our submission is asking the Council to look favourably on the advantages of having Ignite Sport programmes delivered from Bell Park, utilising the existing clubrooms. We are asking the Council, through the Community Funding Plan, to make this a reality by nominating funds in the Community Funding Plan 2018-19, to assist Ignite Sport to achieve their vision for the park and community	Not specified	Not specified
DAP18/76	Merilyn Merrett	Friends of Waiwhetu Stream	Friends of Waiwhetu Stream request that a budget of at least $50,000 per annum be allocated for maintenance and improvements in the Waiwhetu Stream corridor as the present the budget of $30,000 per annum is insufficient. We have been advised that the spend for maintenance on Waiwhetu Stream has exceeded the budgeted amount several months before the end of this financial year.	Per annum	$50K
DAP18/86	Nathaniel Janke-Gilman	Changing Places New Zealand	To provide a fully accessible public toilet/shower in Lower Hutt for those requiring additional help	Not specified	Not specified
DAP18/90	Michael Gray		One off amount to reinvigorate and build an urban culture into High Street from Andrews Avenue to the south end of High Street	Not specified	$40K
DAP18/92	Nikki Wynne	Love Wainuiomata Team	Request for $450K + GST to complete Wainuiomata Development Plan over the next 3 years	Next 3 years	$450K
DAP18/98	Barbara Hay	Stokes Valley community	Request for additional facilities at Stokes Valley Hub. Includes costing for a basketball court.	Not specified	$145,560 (quote for asphalt basketball court)
DAP18/104	Chris Norton	Keep Lower Hutt Beautiful	“Lower Hutt! Don’t let it reach the beach” programme	Next 3 years	$50,000
DAP18/105 & DAP18/107	Dave Robson	Wainuiomata Trail project	Request for funding for Wainuiomata Trail project	Over 5 years	$500K
DAP18/106	Marcel Watt	Naenae Old Boys Cricket Club	Renovation of the playing surface at Naenae Park. Renovation or rebuild of the Green Room training facility	Not specified	$500K
DAP18/116	Tracy Coleman	Maungaraki Community Association	Upgrade Dowse Drive Recreation Reserve	2018/19	$100K
DAP18/119	Rachel Carr	Wellington Free Ambulance	Last year supported with $84,000, which equates to approximately .75 cents per person in your district, have already agreed to increase this to $1 per person in 2018.	2018/19	~$112K
DAP18/133	Andrew Crosland	Lower Hutt (Host) Lions Club	Support remedial work to replace the track of the Avalon Park Lion Train	2018-19	$140K
DAP18/136	Gary Baird	Hutt Valley Tennis Management Committee and members	1. Build an indoor tennis court structure 2. Demolish and rebuild a new Mitchell Park pavilion Total HCC funding for the Indoor Project = $1.1m. Remaining $700k is responsibility of HVT	Not specified	New $880K Remaining $250K to be allocated towards the Indoor Court Project
DAP18/142	David Syms	On behalf of John Sheehan	Hutt Recreation Ground Sports hub. · Operational Funding: Employment of a part time development manager to recruit other partners, help establish a formal management structure for any future facility, act as secretary to a future development committee and consult with local schools over potential use. · Project development and costings - engage consultants to produce building options and indicative costings.	Not specified	$25K operational funding $30K project development and costs
DAP18/146	Karen Wallace	Wellington Hockey Association and Wellington Regional Hockey Stadium Trust	Contribution towards replacing turf carpet	2019/20	$165K
DAP18/147	Mike Fisher		$150000 per annum for P2040 group with further funding allowances in individual departments’ budgets ie heritage incentives; roading etc could be a starting point.	Per annum	$150K
DAP18/149	Kristen Price	Toimata Foundation	Support of Enviroschools	Per year for three years	$44K
DAP18/160	Sandy Nimmo	The Rimutaka Inline Hockey	Rejuvenate roller skating rink at cnr of Harcourt Werry and Percy Cameron	Not specified	TBC ~$700K
DAP18/161	Lynne Philp	Citizens Advice Bureau	To meet increasing costs that CAB faces e.g. rental rates, staff salary etc	2018-19	$51,443
DAP18/164	Anita Mansell	Hutt Multicultural Council	$5,000 for Multifest to continue at present level At least $10,000 pa to engage a part time co-ordinator at least.	2018-19 Per annum	$5K At least $10K
DAP18/167	Alison Black	Youth Inspire	Continue to support	Not specified	Not specified
DAP18/168	Kevin Goldsbury	Ignite Sport	Proposal for Re-development of Bell Park and the establishment of an Ignite Sport Centre and Multi Court Surface	Not specified	Not specified
DAP18/172	Ron Vink	Te Whare Trust	Business case for Te Whare Tane - House for Men. Creating a place in the Hutt Valley where men are supported in their journey to live free of family harm.	Year 1 Year 2	$221K $243.5K
DAP18/179	Dina Awarau	Pomare Taita Community Trust	Request further financial support for: Meth Clinic; 10 year celebration for Christmas n da hood and Tumeke Taita; and community healthy lifestyle initiatives	Not specified	Not specified
DAP18/181	Sisi Tuala-Le’afa		Continue and Increase funding to assist with E.M.P.O.W.E.R program (3 prong program - Young Women, Tama Toa & whanau). Part time coordinator for these programs Currently run on a budget (very tight) of $10k for six months of programs	Per annum	Not specified but suggest $50K
DAP18/196	Julie Thomson	Volunteer Hutt	The annual running cost of Volunteer Hutt is $61,635. The income we acquired in the 2017/18 year for Volunteer Hutt was $33,000 from grants (including $10,000 from HCC) and community members’ fees. This leaves a shortfall of $28,635. We ask Hutt City Council to help reduce the funding shortfall by providing $10,000.	2018-19	$10K

Attachment 5

PG HCC Wage Survey Report

2018 HCC WAGE SURVEY

Research report prepared for

Hutt City Council

Wendy Moore

John Pritchard

May 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

				Page No.

1.	Introduction			3

2.	Research objectives			4

3.	Method			5

4.	Timing			5

5.	The research results:			6

5.1.		Which of the three wage policy options do Hutt City residents prefer?		7
5.2.		Preference by subgroups		8
5.3.		Level of importance		10
5.4.		Reasons for choosing each option	- Option 1	11
			- Option 2	15
			- Option 3	17
5.5.		Conclusion/executive overview		21
6.	Questionnaire			22 - 26

1. INTRODUCTION

By way of background, the Living Wage is defined as the income necessary to provide workers and their families with a basic lifestyle. The Living Wage is currently calculated to be $20.55 per hour, approximately $4.00 per hour above the current minimum wage.

In 2017 Hutt City Council resolved to support the Living Wage in principle, but only where this could be justified as the most cost-effective way to deliver services. About 200 Council staff will receive wage increases following this decision at a total annual cost of $213,000. The majority of these staff members are still paid below the current Living Wage of $20.55 per hour.

The Living Wage is independently calculated by the Family Centre Social Policy Research Unit. It is defined by them as the income necessary to provide workers and their families with a decent but modest lifestyle. The Living Wage is currently calculated to be $20.55 per hour. It is adjusted annually and is generally expected to increase each year.

Government recently committed to increase the statutory minimum wage from $16.50 to $20 per hour by April 2021. In preparation for the anticipated rise, Council has increased the budgets for future years to ensure staff members will be paid at or above the statutory minimum wage at all times.

Options and cost

Council is considering three options with regard to paying its lowest paid staff.

1) Retaining the current budget with Council’s minimum wage increasing to $20 per hour by April 2021 in-line with Government’s commitment. (This would be funded within current budgets); OR

2) Increasing Council’s minimum wage to $20 per hour on 1 July this year. This is 33 months ahead of the Government’s commitment. (This would require an estimated additional $250,000 over the next two years); OR

3) Fully implementing a Living Wage of $20.55 per hour for all Council staff on 1 July this year. Subsequent annual wage increases would be based on the Living Wage calculation by the Family Centre Social Policy Research Unit. (This would require an estimated additional $450,000 over the next two years and additional annual expenditure beyond that).

The additional funding for options 2 and 3 would require sourcing from some changes in other areas, such as:

- Increasing income through user charges; or

- Reducing funding on projects; or

- Reducing services or activities.

Council’s total annual operating budget is $165 million. The additional spending that would be required in relation to options 2 or 3 would be small in the context of Council’s overall expenditure.

Consultation

To assist Council with decisions that are needed regarding wage policy, Hutt City Council are currently consulting with residents, to check their views and gather information that will help decide if and when changes should be made. As part of the consultation process, Hutt City Council have commissioned Peter Glen Research to conduct a survey of Hutt City residents, to capture their views. The results of the survey will sit alongside other feedback mechanisms, such as its own online polling.

The results of the survey are presented in this report.

2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

These were defined as follows:

a) To determine which of the three wage policy options, outlined above, Hutt City residents would prefer Hutt City Council to adopt

b) To ascertain the degree of importance residents place on Hutt City Council adopting their preferred option

c) To understand residents’ reasons for selecting each of the options presented.

3. METHOD

The survey was undertaken among a stratified random sample of 400 Hutt City residents.

The survey participants were recruited using random selection procedures, but sample quotas were set to ensure that the survey was broadly representative of the Hutt City adult population (16+ years of age) by age, gender and ethnicity.

The interviews were spread over the six geographic areas (wards) within the city, to ensure that a proper cross-section of the community was represented. The sample was therefore structured as follows:

wards		survey sample		population
		No.	%	%

	Northern Ward	63	15.7	15.6
	Harbour Ward	70	17.5	17.6
	Western Ward	51	12.8	12.7
	Wainuiomata Ward	70	17.5	17.6
	Eastern Ward	69	17.3	17.3
	Central Ward	77	19.2	19.1


	total interviews	400	100.0%	100.0%

It is estimated that this provides a sampling variance on the total sample base of +4.1% at the 90% confidence level.

The survey was conducted using a combination of contact approaches and interviewing procedures. The majority of interviews were undertaken by way of telephone interviewing (landline and mobile), with some face-to-face, where necessary, to meet stratified sample quotas and to ensure that a proper cross-section of the community was engaged.

At enrolment, the purpose of the survey was outlined and an appointment arranged to call back, if the selected respondent was unable to complete the interview at the time of initial contact.

Fieldwork for the survey was undertaken by an experienced team of interviewers employed by Peter Glen Research. The interviews were administered by way of a structured questionnaire which was prepared in consultation with Hutt City Council. A copy of the questionnaire is attached in Section 6 of this report.

Peter Glen, the principal of Peter Glen Research, personally managed all aspects of the research project, from questionnaire design, through fieldwork set-up and supervision, to the analysis and reporting of results.

4. TIMING

Fieldwork was conducted from 23 April to 17 May 2018.

5. THE RESEARCH RESULTS

5.1. WHICH OF THE THREE WAGE POLICY OPTIONS DO HUTT CITY

RESIDENTS PREFER?

Respondents were initially read an introductory outline, detailing the wage policy options that Hutt City Council are considering for their lowest paid staff. The explanation is essentially that covered in the introduction to this report (see Section 1 on page 3). The explanation is also included in the questionnaire attached in Section 6.

Having considered the explanation, the respondents were then asked to select which of the following three options they would prefer Hutt City Council to adopt.

Option 1

Retaining the current budget with Council’s minimum wage increasing to $20 per hour by April 2021 in-line with Government’s commitment. (This would be funded within current budgets)

Option 2

Increasing Council’s minimum wage to $20 per hour on 1 July this year. This is 33 months ahead of the Government’s commitment. (This would require an estimated additional $250,000 over the next two years)

Option 3

Fully implementing a Living Wage of $20.55 per hour for all Council staff on 1 July this year. Subsequent annual wage increases would be based on the Living Wage calculation by the Family Centre Social Policy Research Unit. (This would require an estimated additional $450,000 over the next two years and additional annual expenditure beyond that).

The overall result of this questioning was as follows:

5.2. PREFERENCE BY SUBGROUPS

(a) BY WARD

The overall result shown in the previous section has been broken down further, to provide an indication of preferences across the six wards that form Hutt City. Results of this analysis should be taken as indicative only, as the base sizes for each ward are relatively small. Whilst the overall sampling variance on the total sample (n=400) is estimated at +4.1% at the 90% confidence level, the comparative variance for the sub-groups (wards) could be as high as +10.0% on average.

Whilst differences can be noted across the wards, the overall majority of opinion indicates that residents in all areas favour a move to increasing the minimum wage this year, ahead of the Government’s 2021 commitment. That is, an average 75% of residents support either Option 2 or Option 3.

(b) BY AGE GROUP

An analysis of the overall result by residents’ age groups reveals that all three wage policies have some support across the age spectrum. However, in this survey, Option 2 had a stronger level of support among residents under 30 years of age, whereas Option 3 was favoured more strongly by residents in the middle and older age brackets.

(c) BY GENDER

This analysis indicates that preference is fairly similar by gender, although a slightly higher percentage of men favour Option 1. In comparison, a slightly higher percentage of women favour Option 2. Option 3’s support remains consistent between men and women.

5.3. LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE

After the respondents selected the option they preferred, they were asked the following question:

“On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 equals ‘not at all important’ and 10 equals ‘very important’, how important is it to you that Council adopts the option you selected?”

The results were as follows:

RATING SCALE

RESPONDENTS’ RATINGS OF PREFERRED OPTION

Level of Importance

Importance

Score

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

(Retain budget. Minimum wage to $20/hr by April 2021)

(Minimum wage to $20/hr from 1 July ’18)

(Full Living Wage of $20.55/hr from 1 July ’18)

(n=101)

(n=105)

(n=194)

Very

Important

Moderately High

Importance

Moderate Importance

Moderately Low Importance

Low/No Importance

Total Respondents

100%

Average (Mean) Importance Score

7.5

8.1

8.5

The majority of Hutt City residents considered it ‘moderately’ to ‘very important’ for Council to adopt the option they had selected. However, those choosing Option 3 considered it more important overall than did the respondents who chose the other two options. This is reflected in the average (mean) point scores expressed.

5.4. REASONS FOR CHOOSING EACH OPTION

The research participants were asked to outline their reasons for selecting their preferred option. A wide range of perspectives emerged. These are summarised in the following section of the report, using examples of the respondents’ verbatim comments.

It can be noted that the percentages shown are based on the total 400 respondents who were interviewed. The percentages add to more than the net percentage of respondents who selected each option, because some of the research participants gave more than one reason for their selection.

OPTION 1

	% mentioning

SUPPORT FOR THE GOVERNMENT PLAN	12

“The Government have got it sussed. The Government’s commitment of increasing the minimum wage to $20 per hour by April 2021 seems to be the obvious option.”

“The Council should keep to the Government plan and to their budget.”

“Hutt City Council should adopt the Government guidelines. The minimum wage should be adopted, as planned, by April 2021.”

“Let the Council follow the Government guidelines and increase only in 2021.”

“I believe that the Council’s vision to pay staff a Living Wage is great. However, this should be implemented gradually and also in time with the Government’s plans. Council can make better use of taxpayers’ money at present and not rush ahead of the Government’s commitment.”

“Hutt City Council should stay with the Government’s guidelines. They should support the Government policy and work toward the bigger picture that has been planned.”

“Hutt City Council should stay with the Government’s guidelines.”

“Minimum wages should be in line with Government policy.”

	% mentioning

HCC NEED TO KEEP TO THEIR BUDGET AND EXISTING COMMITMENTS	9

“The other options mean that HCC would not be able to keep to their budget. They would need to source money elsewhere, which would not be good.”

“The Council need to be realistic about where money comes from and how it is spent. Keep to the present plan and budget, so that other projects do not fall behind any further.”

“Hutt City Council would have to source money from somewhere to pay for any higher wage bill, otherwise they would fail their budget. It needs careful assessment to balance the books. It seems to me that going with the Government commitment would allow them to do that.”

“If wage increases are paid earlier than currently planned, it would cost more and would mean a loss of other things that the Council currently provides and funds.”

“I do not want to see Council projects fall behind any further by reprioritising money for wages, when they do not have to do it.”

“Because present Council projects should be completed in their present budgets. Do not take money from these to pay additional wage increases. Stay with the Government guidelines.”

KEEP WAGE POLICY CONSISTENT FOR ALL LOW PAID WORKERS	7

“Make it the same for all workers. Go with the Government plan for 2021. Then it will be the same for all who earn low wages, including me now. This will be fair.”

“Wage policy for low paid workers will affect many people in other sectors, not just council. The health sector, for example, has many staff earning less than $20 per hour. Council should link with the Government commitment to keep wage payments equitable.”

“I do not think Council staff should receive a benefit that the public is not entitled to until 2021.”

“I hope to get the Living Wage sometime in the future. I relate to the plight of lower paid workers. I do not get $20 per hour myself, but it should be applied consistently for everybody, with regard to timing and amount.”

	% mentioning

WAGE INCREASES SHOULD BE PERFORMANCE RELATED/ PROVIDE AN INCENTIVE TO IMPROVE	4

“Wage increases should be performance related, even at a lower level.”

“Keep to low wages for unskilled workers, so they have an incentive to improve.”

“If they are earning below $20 per hour now, they must be unskilled workers. A small increase might be justified, but they will have a chance to earn more when they become skilled.”

“Some council staff might not be doing a good job. I don’t like the idea of just giving a wage increase. Any increase should be based on performance.”

WOULD FAVOUR INCREASING WAGES GRADUALLY/WITH SMALLER INCREASES	4

“I think the Council should keep to its current budget and improve the wages of its lowest paid workers gradually over time, with smaller increases.”

“Some small increases in wage rates will signal the intent and will help but will enable Council to keep to its budget and work towards the plans for 2021.”

“Make small movements in wages initially. Don’t do it all at once.”

“Just increase the minimum wages now to $17.50 or $18.00. Start the process of moving toward $20.55 in 2021.”

RATES ARE HIGH ENOUGH NOW; DO NOT WANT RATE INCREASES	4

“Rates are high enough now. Options 2 and 3 will just add to our rates bill.”

“It will be the ratepayers who pay if workers are paid earlier than 2021.”

“Call me selfish, but I do not want rate increases.”

“Council can make better use of ratepayers’ money at present and not rush ahead of the thirty-three months to which Government is committed. Any increases are likely to impact our rates.”

	% mentioning

WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF WAGES BETWEEN COUNCIL’S HIGHER & LOWER PAID WORKERS	3

“I would be pleased to see the lower wages increased and Councillors and high paid Council staffs’ wages reduced to a more realistic level for what they do.”

“The Council must have staff on very high wages. Even junior council staff are very highly paid there. They could cut the wages of the very high paid and then they could afford to increase the wages of those at the bottom.”

“The problem of low paid workers comes about because some people earn too much. They need to restrict earnings at the top end of the scale, so that they can pay more realistic wages to the lowest paid workers.”

WAGE INCREASES WILL JUST ADD TO INFLATION	2

“More wages will just add to inflation for all of us.”

“I am concerned about where the wage increases lead to. If the Council increases the wages of its lowest paid staff, it sounds a good thing to do. However, it will also mean that other staff will want a relativity adjustment and people in other sectors will also want an increase. This leads to inflation and, at the end of the day, none are any better off.”

“This policy sounds inflationary to me. It is not up to the Council to fix social injustice.”

MISCELLANEOUS REASONS

OPTION 2

	% mentioning

EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE A GOOD/FAIR WAGE (THAT ALLOWS THEM TO LIVE)	9

“I think everyone should have a fair wage that allows them to live and not just exist.”

“A good minimum wage would help many people/families.”

“All workers are entitled to a good wage. I support the principle of a fair wage for a fair day’s pay.”

“All workers should get a decent wage for the work they do.”

“I think all people should earn a decent wage. I have chosen this option for council staff to receive a minimum wage level a.s.a.p. They need to support themselves and their families, the same as all of us.”

“The increase should be paid a.s.a.p., so people can be paid fairly and respected.”

THE COST OF LIVING HAS INCREASED/IS INCREASING	7

“The cost of living has increased and many families are struggling.”

“We have expensive living costs now and many families are not living healthily. A good minimum wage would help lots of people.”

“Living costs are constantly rising and so middleclass and lower income families need the extra money to survive the daily costs.”

“Living costs are going up, especially for families, but generally wages are not going up.”

“My reason for choosing this option is that everything is going up. Costs have been increasing in recent years, everything has gone up.”

	% mentioning

THE CURRENT MINIMUM WAGE IS NOT FAIR/IS INADEQUATE/ NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED	5

“The minimum wage is shocking right now. Please pay $20 this year.”

“The current minimum wage is not fair. I know what it is like to be on the minimum wage and is a struggle to survive.”

“The minimum wage now is not a fair wage. Everyone is entitled to a fair wage.”

“The minimum wage is totally inadequate and needs to be improved.”

“I believe that most people on low wages work hard. They cannot get the benefits that some people who are unemployed can get on the dole. Low paid workers need to be better paid and rewarded for their effort.”

COUNCIL HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO SUPPORT THE LIVING WAGE/IMPROVE THE MINIMUM WAGE THIS YEAR	3

“Council should have a social conscience and recognise the Living Wage.”

“Council has a social responsibility and should improve the minimum wage right now.”

“Council should raise the minimum wage to $20 per hour this year. It should show leadership to its employees and other employers should follow suit.”

OPTION 2 PROVIDES A MIDDLE GROUND BETWEEN THE OTHER TWO OPTIONS	2

“Option 2 provides a middle ground between the other two options. It signals that the minimum wage needs to be improved but leaves room to increase it further.”

“I chose this option because it provides a balance between the other two alternatives.”

MISCELLANEOUS REASONS

OPTION 3

	% mentioning

EVERYONE SHOULD BE PAID (AT LEAST) A LIVING WAGE	21

“Everyone should be paid a Living Wage, i.e. one that they can live on.”

“People on lower wages should be paid a Living Wage. It is a struggle to pay for essentials these days and many cannot afford a house, either to rent or buy, that is affordable.”

“I support the paying of reasonable rates to all wage earners. A Living Wage is important for everyone.”

“I feel that everyone who works should have dignity and be able to have their head above water and be able to earn at least a Living Wage.”

“Decent hourly rates of pay are essential. People need to earn a good basic wage for their efforts, so they can live.”

“I think everyone should be able to work and earn to support themselves and their families. If $20.55 has been found to be the figure, this should be paid.”

“The Living Wage should be paid to all. It is very expensive to live, especially if you have a family. Rent is $400 minimum for a family these days. One person can barely pay the rent.”

“All people should be able to receive a decent wage. I support the Council paying the Living Wage amount now.”

“Wages are important. The Living Wage should be adopted by Hutt City Council. It would benefit everyone and help them pay their bills.”

“The lower paid workers need at least the Living Wage and if you pay it they will respond, as it recognises them as worthy contributors.”

“Everyone should be able to afford the basics. If everyone in society earns a Living Wage, society as a whole will flourish.”

“We all need to sustain homes, families and have a healthy life. This should be within the reach of all workers.”

“People on lower wages should be paid a Living Wage. It is a struggle to pay for essentials and virtually impossible to buy a house if they earn less than $20 per hour.”

“A Living Wage is important. Wages are low, when two working adults still cannot afford a home.”

	% mentioning

THE COST OF LIVING HAS INCREASED/IS INCREASING (AND PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING)	13

“The basic cost to live has gone up a lot in recent times and will go up more. It is a struggle for most people to pay for things these days. As one example, vegetables have gone up significantly in price. Do not wait until 2021. The cost of living will be a lot more then.”

“Wages have not kept up with inflation, to the point that two working adults cannot afford the basic costs of living.”

“The cost of living has gone up. The Council should pay $20.55 at least, to cover the basic cost of living.”

“Because costs are mounting. Accept the Living Wage recommendations.”

“The cost of living has gone up a lot in recent years. The Living Wage should be adopted by Hutt City Council, to help people pay their bills.”

“They need to pay their staff at least $20.55. This would recognise the increase in the cost of living and show that they value their staff. Many costs have gone up in recent times, even this year.”

“People on lower wages should be paid a Living Wage, because they struggle to pay for essentials. The cost of living has really gone up lately.”

“The Living Wage should be paid to cover the mounting cost of living. Give people the chance to live and not struggle.”

“I feel that lower paid workers should be able to earn the minimum rates and ensure they are living well, healthy lives and not struggling to do so.”

HCC SHOULD TAKE LEADERSHIP ON THIS WAGE ISSUE	7

“Council should be at the forefront in leading payment of the Living Wage to those they employ. Lead by example.”

“I have heard that other Councils are looking at this also. It is time HCC paid up and became leaders.”

“Council has a responsibility to lead in this area.”

“If $20.55 is the figure for a Living Wage, the Council should lead he way and pay it. Other Councils and employers should follow suit.”

“If the Hutt City Council do this, then other companies will notice and all low paid workers might get a rise. Everyone should be on at least $20.55 New Zealand-wide.”
	% mentioning

IT IS ONLY REASONABLE/FAIR TO PAY THE LIVING WAGE NOW/ THIS YEAR	7

“It is only reasonable that lower paid persons get paid the Living Wage now.”

“Be fair and pay the Living Wage that has been calculated and agreed now.”

“Be fair and see that people get a decent wage – this year.”

“A Living Wage is fair. It should be a minimum for everyone and it should be paid now.”

“Council have a job to be responsible. All employees should be paid fairly for the work they do, so recognise the independent figures and pay $20.55 per hour this year.”

I CAN RELATE TO BEING ON A LOW WAGE AND STRUGGLING	5

“I can relate to being on a low wage and struggling, not being recognised for the work I do. The basic cost to live should be paid now.”

“I can relate to being on a low wage. I am 50 and do not work now. Computers took my work. I support Council paying the $20.55 and giving their workers a wage on which they can live and not struggle.”

“If HCC do this, other companies will follow suit and I might get a rise. I do not earn $20 an hour, so I can relate to the situation their workers are in.”

“I was a Council employee on low wages, so I can empathise with them from my own experience.”

PAYING THE LIVING WAGE WILL HELP THE LOCAL ECONOMY	4

“I chose this option, because it will lead to more spending power for the community at large.”

“People having more money in their pockets is better than no money and it leads to more spending power within the community.”

“It is important for people to have more money to spend and the local economy will benefit because of this.”

“I’d like to see as many people as possible on a Living Wage. That would benefit the whole community – financially and socially.”

	% mentioning

THE LIVING WAGE WILL LEAD TO HAPPIER, MORE MOTIVATED WORKERS	3

“Surely if their workers get $20.55 per hour, they will be happier and more committed than they will be on a very low wage that doesn’t cover the bills.”

“Their workers will be more motivated if they are valued and paid at a fair rate.”

HCC NEED TO ENSURE THAT IT IS STILL A LIVING WAGE WITH INFLATION/AFTER TAX	2

“They need to ensure that it is still a Living Wage after tax. The taxman will take his share, so individuals will not actually receive $20.55 per hour in the pocket. The lower paid workers need at least a Living Wage and I would add ‘after tax’.”

“Every little bit helps, but costs are constantly rising. The Living Wage should be regularly reviewed to ensure that the wages people are paid keeps up with inflation.”

MISCELLANEOUS REASONS

5.5. CONCLUSION/EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW

The results of this research have shown that the most favoured wage policy option, of those presented, is Option 3. This option proposes to fully implement a Living Wage of $20.55 per hour from 1 July this year. Just on half (49% of) the Hutt City residents interviewed in the study favoured this option.

Option 2, which proposes to increase the minimum wage to $20 per hour from 1 July this year, was chosen by a further 26% of residents.

This gives a total of 75% of Hutt City residents who favour HCC moving to increase the wage of its lowest paid workers in 2018, ahead of the Government’s 2021 commitment.

Options 2 and 3 were primarily selected by respondents for the following reasons:

- They believed that all workers should be paid ‘a good, fair, basic wage’, or ‘a Living Wage that they can live on’.

- It was acknowledged that ‘the cost of living has increased’, ‘many people/families are struggling’ and ‘wages have not kept up with inflation’.

- Some respondents also argued that HCC should ‘take leadership’ or ‘has a responsibility to lead’ on this issue.

Nevertheless, it should be acknowledged that 25% of the Hutt City residents interviewed selected Option 1, which proposes to retain the current budget with Council’s minimum wage increasing to $20 per hour by April 2021 in line with Government’s commitment. These respondents raised several points for consideration:

- They supported the intent of the Government’s plan/guidelines.

- They noted that it would enable HCC to keep to its budget and existing commitments.

- Some respondents felt that policy relating to the minimum wage ‘should be consistent for all low paid workers’ (not just council workers).

- Others would favour ‘smaller increases over time’ and felt that ‘increases should be performance related/provide incentive to improve’.

- A few respondents specifically noted that they ‘do not want rates to increase’ and others would like ‘a more equitable distribution of wages between Council’s higher and lower paid workers’.

Finally, the policy decision was considered of ‘moderately high importance’ to ‘high importance’ to the majority of residents who participated in the research. This suggests that the Council will need to have clear justification for the decision it takes and communicate the decision accordingly.

6. QUESTIONNAIRE

2018 HCC WAGE SURVEY

April/May 2018

APPROACH.

“Good morning/afternoon/evening. I am …… from Peter Glen Research, a market research company. We are conducting a survey on behalf of Hutt City Council, who wish to gather feedback from Hutt City residents, about the future wage policy it is considering for paying its lowest paid staff.”

“For this interview, I need to speak to a Hutt City resident.”

“Is there somebody in your household who would be able to help me with the interview please? The interview will take approximately ( … ) minutes.”

IF MORE THAN ONE PERSON QUALIFIES, ASK TO SPEAK TO THE PERSON WHOSE BIRTHDAY FALLS NEXT. REPEAT INTRODUCTION IF NECESSARY.

IF APPROPRIATE PERSON IS UNAVAILABLE, ARRANGE TIME TO CALL BACK.

Respondent name: ____________________________ Phone number: _________

Time/day to call back: _______________________

“I would like to arrange a time to get your input to the possible wage options that Hutt City Council are considering. This is an important decision for Hutt City and the Council would value your input on the matter. Your input will be treated confidentially and will be combined with the views of other residents who are participating in the survey. Peter Glen Research will provide an overall interpretative report, to inform Council of public opinion, but will not link people’s names to the views expressed.”

“The interview will take approximately ( … ) minutes. Is it convenient to make an appointment time now, or is there a more convenient time I should call you back?”

if necessary, record call back details.

Respondent name: ____________________________ Phone number: _________

Respondent address: _________________________________________________

Time/Day to Call Back: ________________________

THE INTERVIEW

Introduction

We are interested in your thoughts on the wages Hutt City Council should pay its lowest paid staff.

The Living Wage is independently calculated by the Family Centre Social Policy Research Unit.^{^[1]} It is defined by them as the income necessary to provide workers and their families with a decent but modest lifestyle. The Living Wage is currently calculated to be $20.55 per hour. It is adjusted annually and is generally expected to increase each year.

Options (and cost)

Council is considering three options with regard to paying its lowest paid staff.

1) Retaining the current budget with Council’s minimum wage increasing to $20 per hour by April 2021 in-line with Government’s commitment. (This would be funded within current budgets); OR

The additional funding for options 2 and 3 would require sourcing from some changes in other areas, such as:

- Increasing income through user charges; or

- Reducing funding on projects; or

- Reducing services or activities.

Questions

Q.1	“Which of the three options, that Council is considering, do you prefer?”

Option 1: - Retaining the current budget with Council’s minimum wage increasing to $20 per hour by April 2021 in-line with Government’s commitment; _____________

Option 2: - Increasing Council’s minimum wage to $20 per hour on 1 July this year. This is 33 months ahead of the Government’s commitment; _______________________

Option 3: - Council fully implements a Living Wage of

$20.55 per hour for all staff on 1 July this year_________

Q.2	“On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 equals ‘not at all important’ and 10 equals ‘very important’, how important is it to you that Council adopts the option you selected?”

Write in number:

Q.3	“We would like to understand why you answered the first two questions as you did. Can you please tell me why you selected your preferred option and gave your rating? Are there any other reasons?” PROBE UNTIL ‘NO’ & POINTS ARE CLEAR

DEMOGRAPHICS

“In order to help us analyse our survey by statistical categories, can I please check … “

D.1.	CODE GENDER	Male ____________________________	01
		Female___________________________	02

D.2.	“Into which of the following age groups do you come?”

		16 - 19 years___________________________	01
		20 – 29 years __________________________	02
		30 – 39 years __________________________	03
		40 – 49 years __________________________	04
		50 – 59 years __________________________	05
		60 – 69 years __________________________	06
		70 years and over_______________________	07

D.3.	“Which of the following ethnic groups do you belong to? One or several groups may apply to you.”

		NZ Maori___________________________	01
		NZ European ________________________	02
		British______________________________	03
		Other European ______________________	04
		Pacific Island ________________________	05
		Chinese_____________________________	06
		Indian______________________________	07
		Other Asian _________________________	08
		Other (specify) ______________________	09

D.4.	“In which suburb do you live?”

write suburb: _______________________________________ then code:

1. Northern Ward:	2. Harbour Ward:	3. Western Ward:	4.Wainuiomata Ward	5. Eastern Ward:	6. Central Ward:
Stokes Valley	Petone	Kelson	Glendale	Naenae	Hutt Central
Pomare	Korokoro	Melling	Parkway	Fairfield	Woburn North
Taita	Eastbourne & Bays	Alicetown	Fernlea	Epuni	Boulcott
Wingate	Moera	Tirohanga	Arakura	Waterloo	Park Avenue/Avalon
	Gracefield	Harbourview	Homedale West	Waiwhetu	Naenae West
	Seaview	Normandale	Homedale East	Residential areas of Eastern Hills	Epuni West
		Maungaraki			Waterloo West
		Haywards Hill
		Manor Park

“Thank you very much for your help with this survey. The company I work for is Peter Glen Research and if you have any queries you can contact Peter Glen on 564-4525 or (025) 914-330”.

“My name is ______________________________________” (Interviewer’s Name)

122 06 June 2018

Community Plan Committee

01 May 2018

File: (18/687)

Report no: CPC2018/3/150

Sea Level Rise - Actions and Recommendations

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to:

a. Update the Committee on actions being taken related to sea level rise and climate change.

b. Make recommendations to the Committee concerning budget expenditure to address community concerns about and involvement in Council’s response to local sea level rise and climate change issues.

Recommendations

That the Policy and Regulatory Committee recommends that the Community Plan Committee recommends that Council:

(i) makes a budget allocation in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan of :

(a) $100,000 to acquire and use sea level rise maps to identify threatened places, assets and communities in Lower Hutt and develop specific response options; and

(b) $100,000 to begin engagement with Lower Hutt communities to build a common understanding of the risks faced by the community particularly the potential environmental, social, cultural and economic impacts associated with of climate change.

For the reasons outlined in the report below.

Background

2. On 30 April 2018, the Policy and Regulatory Committee meeting made the following resolution:

“That the Committee recommends that the Community Plan Committee recommends that Council:

(i) notes the mapping of sea level rise and climate change impacts occurring at regional level does not show in detail the effect of sea level rise on individual assets and households and therefore does not provide sufficient granularity to assist Council to successfully plan for and protect vulnerable parts of the city;

(ii) makes a budget allocation in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan to:

(a) acquire and use sea level rise maps to identify threatened places, assets and communities in Lower Hutt and develop specific response options. The indicative cost is $100,000; and

(b) begin engagement with Lower Hutt communities to build a common understanding of the risks faced by the community particularly the potential environmental, social, cultural and economic impacts associated with of climate change. The indicative cost is $100,000.”

Discussion

3. There are several pieces of work currently being undertaken addressing issues related to sea level rise and climate change that are occurring around the region. Below is a short summary of these.

Wellington Region Natural Hazards Strategy

4. The purpose of this Strategy is to ensure that the communities of the Wellington region work together to understand and reduce risks from natural hazards. Membership comprises:

· GWRC – climate change, rivers, coastal and policy teams

· WREMO

· Wellington Water

· Lifelines

· Regional Territorial Authorities

5. There is a Steering Group (which is there to ensure there is regional collaboration within these disciplines on the issues relating to all the natural hazards relevant to Wellington) and three Working Groups (each with its own terms of reference) which are focused on:

· research

· planning

· engagement

6. The research group is currently pulling together data on regional sea level rise trends to:

a. provide regional guidelines for each council to use

b. establish a good consistent science base for the region and provide information to the planning and engagement working group

This will ensure consistency when developing provisions in plans, LTP’s (where applicable) and consultation material

7. The planning group is developing consistent seismic provisions and a consistent sea level rise policy with common standards across the region. This will include a guidance toolbox to assist planners.

8. The engagement group (while recognising that each Council may be at different stages in the planning process and have different relationships with their community) is focused on:

a. establishing best practice approaches from agency experiences

b. developing a region wide communication approach on sea level rise

c. using information and supporting the planning and research groups where applicable to ensure a clear link between the different aspects of work being completed.

Wellington Region Climate Change Councillors Working Group

9. This group includes one main and one alternate elected member from each council in the Wellington region^{^[2]} and three mana whenua representatives. The purpose of the group is to provide a forum via which councils and mana whenua from across the Wellington Region can network, discuss issues, share information and where appropriate, achieve a consistent approach across all jurisdictions on climate change mitigation (reducing greenhouse gas emissions) and adaptation (preparing for impacts such as sea level rise, drought and enhanced natural hazards effects).

10. There are benefits for each Council from participating in a regional working group that provides coordination, facilitates joined up action and enables consistent leadership, advocacy and communications in relation to climate change. Hutt City Council agreed the Terms of Reference for the group in principle at its meeting in December 2017.

11. At its last meeting on 16 March the Wellington Region Climate Change Councillors Working Group moved towards recommending that the Wellington region use the same approach as that used in Hawkes Bay (Clifton to Tangoio Coastal Hazard Strategy 2120) to progress their work.

12. The Project Team in Hawkes Bay based their work on the Ministry for the Environment Guidance for Local Government on Coastal Hazards and Climate Change. They undertook comprehensive hazard and risk assessments for coastal erosion and coastal inundation, and seven coastal units for priority response were identified and agreed. Each priority unit has a recommended 100 year plan that is divided into approaches to managing coastal hazard risks in the short (0 to 20 years); medium (20 to 50 years) and long term (50 to 100 years).

13. A key concept underlying this approach is responding to uncertainty with pathways – people have choices about the pathways that they follow at different points in time. Adjustments can be made in response to changing hazards and pre-defined triggers (decision points).

14. Securing broad community support for the approach was key to the success of the project. Lessons learnt included:

a. Ensuring that the process was a ratepayer up process rather than a Council down process

b. Bringing the community “into the tent”

c. Disseminating knowledge – making sure people in the community can access information easily

d. Developing community champions

e. Blending political, technical and academic skills

f. Having the right people in the process at the right time

15. Council officers from around the region have met with Mitchell Daysh to discuss the possibility of implementing an approach for the Wellington region that is similar to that used in Hawkes Bay. Mitchell Daysh presented a draft project brief – this is attached as Appendix I. Council Officers are continuing discussions about how a region-wide approach might work.

16. The pinch point was the “who pays” question and this continues to be debated. If the Wellington Region Climate Change Councillors Working Group does recommend to participating Councils that the Hawkes Bay approach should be used here then it is likely that, if agreed to by all Councils, HCC will be asked to contribute financially to this work.

LGNZ survey to support understanding the impacts of climate change on local government infrastructure

17. Local Government New Zealand is undertaking a Climate Change Programme that intends to provide an evidence base to support a comprehensive framework for policy advocacy and decision making.

18. A key project under the programme is to assess and understand the impacts of sea level rise on local government infrastructure. For that effort, LGNZ has coordinated with NIWA to utilise GIS data to pinpoint 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 3.0 metre elevations. This information is being overlaid with each council’s GIS information to show where exposed infrastructure exists and to understand its depreciated and replacement value.

19. Hutt City Council has provided its data for this work to LGNZ’s consultants (Tonkin and Taylor), and it is currently being analysed.

20. While this work does provide some useful information on the Council’s exposure in relation to various sea level rise elevations, it does not show in detail the effect of sea level rise on individual assets and households. Therefore, the project does not provide a sufficient granularity to assist Council to successfully plan for and protect vulnerable parts of the city.

Wellington Water

21. Wellington Water Ltd is in the process of stormwater modeling the Western Hills and Petone. This will provide a detailed and accurate tool to understand the impacts that both sea level rise and increased rainfall intensity could have on the pipe and stream networks ability to drain these areas in a flood. This work is focused on the local drainage network response and will be completed by the end of June 2018. Discussions with Wellington Water indicate that this tool will quantify the impacts of climate change as well as provide a powerful communication tool for engaging in evidence based assessment of options to manage this risk.

22. However there are other areas particularly around Waiwhetu and Eastbourne that are also vulnerable to climate change impacts and detailed modeling of these areas is planned for in the next two years.

23. It will be essential for Councils to work alongside Wellington Water as knowledge experts to engage with its communities to develop responses and to discuss how those responses will be timed and paid for.

Comment

24. At this stage there are no plans to undertake comprehensive regional mapping of sea level rise in the short term. Hutt City Council will not have access to firm data on which to plan for adaptation and mitigation for individual assets and households until mapping is completed. This will impact on Council’s ability to successfully progress plans to protect vulnerable parts of the city

Sea Level Rise

25. The following information is provided to assist the Committee in its discussions. This information is contained in the latest Ministry for the Environment guidance document “Coastal hazards and Climate Change: Guidance for Local Government” http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate-change/coastal-hazards-and-climate-change-guidance-local-government

26. With regard to sea level rise observations and projections, the document notes the following:

Historic sea level rise and observations:

· Page 77: …” very likely that the mean rate of globally averaged sea-level rise was 1.7±0.2 millimetres per year between 1901 and 2010, producing a total rise in global sea level over that period of 0.19 metres (±0.02 metres). A slightly higher annual rise of 2.0±0.3 millimetres per year occurred in the 40-year period from 1971 to 2010”

· Page 80 …” an absolute SLR of around 2.0 mm/yr for New Zealand ocean waters”…

· Page 80: However: “When comparing locations, there is a noticeable spread of trends in local SLR, ranging from 1.37 mm/yr for Port Taranaki to 2.23 mm/yr at Wellington”

Projections:

· Page 86: “Due to the non-linear and delayed responses of ocean and ice environments to ongoing climate change, natural variability and uncertainty on rate of global emission, it is not appropriate to extrapolate historic or even recent trends in sea-level rise observation”

· Page 105-107: NZ sea level rise projection scenarios shown below, with sea level rise of at least 30cm in the next 30-40 years

Options

27. The options are that the Community Plan Committee:

a. Agrees to make a budget allocation in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan:

i. Of $100,00 to begin the process of acquiring and use sea level rise maps to identify threatened places, assets and communities in Lower Hutt and develop specific response options once that information is available

ii. Of $100,000 to begin engagement with Lower Hutt communities to build a common understanding of the risks faced by the community particularly the potential environmental, social, cultural and economic impacts associated with of climate change; OR

b. Does not agree to making these budget allocations in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan; OR

c. Directs officers to complete further work to develop more accurate costings for consideration in the 2019 Annual Plan.

28. Officers recommend Option (a).

Consultation

29. Officers have had discussions with GWRC and Wellington Water Ltd.

Legal Considerations

30. Officers have completed an initial analysis of Council’s potential legal liability vis a vis land use decisions and the impact this may have on where people decided or will decide to build/live/carry out business. A separate paper will be prepared to address this question for the Policy and Regulatory Committee meeting on 2 July 2018.

31. In summary, forewarned is forearmed – it is better to tell people of the possibility that they may be affected by sea level rise and/or climate change than not to say anything. To do this it is also best for Council’s to ensure that they take into account the most recent, accurate information known to inform decision. Citizens have expectations that local councils will make prudent decisions regarding where people can settle and buildings erected.

Financial Considerations

32. Investing in sea level rise mapping and community engagement has budget implications for the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

Other Considerations

33. 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 addresses the issue of sea level rise and climate change and their likely impact on the current and future needs of the lower Hutt community. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it recommends that the Committee consider recommending that the Community Plan Committee be asked to consider funding sea level rise mapping and community engagement as part of the Long Term Plan budget.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Briefing Note on Sea Level Rise Approach for Wellington Region _Draft for Comment.pdf	123

Author: Wendy Moore

Divisional Manager, Strategy and Planning

Author: Jörn Scherzer

Sustainability and Resilience Manager

Approved By: Kim Kelly

General Manager, City Transformation

136 06 June 2018

Community Plan Committee

01 May 2018

File: (18/686)

Report no: CPC2018/3/149

Encroachment Licence Fees

Purpose of Report

1. To seek Council approval for the new range of encroachment licence fees.

Recommendations

That the Policy and Regulatory Committee recommends that the Community Plan Committee recommends that Council:

(i) notes that the current Policy on Private Use of Hutt City Council Land was adopted by Council in 2003 and is due for review;

(ii) notes that the review will be completed in two stages, first stage is the review of the current encroachment fees, the second stage a review of the current policy as it relates to encroachments and reserve land;

(iii) notes that in preparing the draft Long Term Plan (LTP) it was indicated (in the fees and charges section) that encroachment fees were being reviewed and may alter as a result of the review;

(iv) notes that Council has indicated that a “market value of land” approach should be used when reviewing the setting of encroachment fees and that the first stage of the review has been completed accordingly;

(v) agrees that the following fees be adopted by Council:

a) application fee (new applications) $300.00

b) application fee (alterations to existing use) $300.00

c) changes to existing licences $100.00

d) annual licence fees – for gardens, single garage, double garage, drainage reserves and pavement encroachments – be set as outlined as Option 3 in the report. This takes into consideration the area and value of the encroachment area;

(vi) agrees that any change to encroachment licence fees be phased in so that the change is made when each licence is due for its next annual licence payment or within 12 months if the anniversary is soon after the decision to increase licence fees is made;

(vii) agrees that the Chief Executive be given the discretionary power around establishing the annual licence fee for encroachment licences where there are unusual or exceptional circumstances to consider and on an annual basis the CEO to report to the Finance and Performance Committee on any exercise of this discretionary power; and

(viii) agrees that the recommendations as noted above subject to any amendments or changes made by the Policy and Regulatory Committee for inclusion in the final LTP.

For the reason that the current policy has not been reviewed since 2003, and Council has indicated that a market value approach should be used when reviewing encroachment fees.

Background

2. The current Policy on Private Use of Hutt City Council Land was adopted by Council in 2003 and needs to be reviewed. This will be done in two stages - a review of the current encroachment licence fees followed by a review of the current policy relating to encroachments and reserve land. This report presents recommendations concerning the first stage of the review.

3. There are currently 278 encroachment licences issued by Council. There are four types of licences – garages (211), gardens (21), drainage (39) and street pavement (7).

4. In preparing the draft LTP (in the fees and charges section) it was noted that the encroachment fees were being reviewed and may alter as a result of the review. Any recommendations from the Policy and Regulatory Committee concerning encroachment fees will be referred to the Community Plan Committee for inclusion in the final LTP.

5. The current fees are:

Application fee (new licence applications) $173.00

Application fee (alterations to existing use) $58.00

Annual licence fee:

Gardens $115.00pa

Single garage $128.00pa

Double garage $256.00pa

Drainage reserve $57.50pa

Pavement encroachment $57.50pa

Discussion

Application fee (new applications)

6. The Licence Application fee is currently set at $173.00 and is charged when a person applies for an encroachment licence. The current fee was originally set in 2003 to cover Council costs. The cost to Council to process a new encroachment licence is now $300.00. Officers recommend that the application fee be changed to $300.00 to cover actual costs and that the fee is reviewed every two years to ensure it continues to cover costs.

Application fee (alterations to existing use)

7. This application fee is currently set at $58.00 and is payable for when licensees request changes to an existing use e.g. extending the size of a garage. The current cost to Council to process these changes is $300.00 as the same process is involved as that involved in processing a new licence application. Officers recommend that the application fee for alterations to an existing use be changed to $300.00 and be reviewed every two years to ensure it continues to cover costs.

Changes to existing licences – property bought or sold

8. The need to change existing licences occurs when a property is bought or sold. Change to the licence holder requires issuing a new licence and updating annual fee charging arrangements. Cost to Council is $100.00. This is not currently a cost Council charge for. It is recommended that a charge of $100.00 be introduced and regularly reviewed to ensure it continues to cover costs.

Annual licence fee

9. The annual licence fee is the annual payment by a licence holder to Council for continued use of the encroachment. The Council has indicated recently that a market value approach should be used when reviewing these fees. Given this indication officers have undertaken an analysis of the land area and the land value of each encroachment licence. Attached to this report as Appendices 1 and 2 are graphs showing the land area and land value of existing licences. This shows that there is a wide range of land areas and land values.

10. Outlined below are the charges other Councils in the Wellington region make for encroachment licences. This indicates the Hutt City Council current fee structure is lower compared to other Councils. It should also be noted that both Wellington and Porirua City Councils set some of their charges based on the encroachment area.

Wellington City Council

For road reserves use a fee structure based on a mix of fixed charges and fixed cost per m2.

· Application fee $460 (incl GST)

· Minimum fee $103.50 and a standard fee calc charge of $14.46/m2 (incl GST) so:

o 50m2 = $723.00 incl gst

o 25m2 = $361.50 incl gst

The standard fee rate per m2 reviewed every 2-3 years based on Consumer Price Index (CPI). Only adjust rate when CPI has moved enough to warrant change.

Porirua City Council (PCC)

The only charge is for structures (garages, car ports, exterior lifts and signs) with an annual fee of $7.40m2 (+GST). The current $7.40m2 rate is reviewed annually and any change is based on percentage increase in rates from the previous year. So based on $7.40m2:

· 50m2 = $370.00

· 25m2 = $185.00

Pavement encroachments not are licenced – PCC removed that requirement as an incentive to increase the vibrancy of their CBD by making it easy to place tables and chairs on the pavement.

Licence gardens but don’t charge for these licences

Upper Hutt City Council

Road reserve (including pavement) encroachment licence - $115.00

Kapiti Coast District Council

Only charge is for an Outdoor Dining Licence - $150.00pa

Options

11. Four options have been prepared for the Committee to consider:

a. Option 1: Status quo. Continue with the current flat fees for each encroachment type – do not take the variations in each encroachment area and value into account; OR

b. ‘Option 1(a)’ increase fees to get parity with other Councils in the region; OR

c. Option 2: Revised flat fee. Flat fees for each encroachment type, similar to option 1 but altered to reflect the area and value of the land occupied through the existing encroachment licences. The proposed annual fees are calculated based on the percentage of private benefits, the median encroachment area and median land value per sqm of the existing licences, plus GST; OR

d. Option 3: Discounted market rent. Takes into consideration the area and value of the encroachment area. For this option the percentage of private benefits, plus the 10 year average price to rent ratio (to convert value to rent) plus GST is used.

12. Looking at the pros and cons of these three options the first option (Option 1 and Option 1A) is easy to implement. Everyone knows how much we charge.

13. Option 2 provides an opportunity to consider the area of the land subject to the encroachment and the value of the land however it means that people pay the same fee whether they live in a prime location or in semi-rural areas.

14. Option 3 enables Council to consider both the value of the land and the lands location thus reflecting the variations in value between land in a prime location and other land. Option 3 also produces the fairest result because it reflects the value of the land both in terms of the square metres involved and the location of the land.

15. The following criteria have been used in a scoring system to determine the public-private benefits ratio as it relates to encroachment types. A private benefit means the net benefit an individual receives when something is used or consumed exclusively by them. A public benefit means the net benefit the community receives when something is available to be used or consumed by the general public.

a. Exclusiveness – no one can use or access the specified land

b. Unrestricted use – no limitation on use of the specified land

c. Effects on the land or surrounding environment, and

d. Other considerations that make Council reluctant (or interested) to offer the type of encroachment.

16. Attached to this report as Appendix 3 is the resulting score for the four types of encroachment licences. A verbal report will be tabled at the meeting to explain in more detail how this scoring system can be used to establish new annual encroachment fees. Using these results the chart below shows what the effect is on the proposed new annual fees.

Encroachment type	Option 1 Status quo ($)	Option 2 Revised flat fee ($)	Option 3 average fee based on % of market rent ($)	Difference ($)
Garage (per car park)	128.00	271	271	143
Garden	115.00	780	780	665
Drainage Reserve	57.50	914	914	856
Pavement	57.50	288	288	231

Option 1(a): Having noted the fees charged by other Councils in the Wellington region as outlined in paragraph 10 above, another option is to charge at an equivalent amount.

17. How does this affect Council income? The chart below shows the change in income based on the three options outlined above. Option 1(a) is also an option once the level of the fees is established.

Encroachment type	Option 1 Status quo ($)	Option 2 Revised flat fee ($)	Option 3 % of market rent
Garage	30,077	65,693	73,543
Garden	2,401	14,240	21,744
Drainage Reserve	2,159	30,990	40,271
Pavement	550	1,756	1,712
Total	35,188	112,679	137,270
% increase in income compared to Status quo	-	220%	290%

18. Why does Council earn more in Option 3 above? A person with an average encroachment licence will pay the same in Options 2 and 3; however, Option 3 takes into consideration the area of land and the location therefore as some people have much larger encroachment areas on prime locations they will pay more.

Discretionary power

19. Providing the CEO with a discretionary power around establishing the annual licence fee for encroachment licences where there are unusual or exceptional circumstances to consider is recommended. On an annual basis the CEO can then report to the Finance and Performance Committee on any exercise of this discretionary power.

Options

20. Given the approach Council wishes to take – to move to a more market value approach - four options have been presented for consideration. While this report presents options or approaches that could result in some significant increases in licence fees, it should be noted that the current fees have not changed in 15 years.

21. Attached as Appendix 4 is a range of examples (shown as lower, medium and upper) to illustrate how Options 2 and 3 works for each encroachment type.

22. It is recommended that Option 3 be adopted to reflect changes in market value and encroachment licence fees be reviewed on a regular basis.

Transitional provisions around new licence fees

23. The new licence fees will be established by Council when it adopts the LTP. It could make the new fees effective from 1 July 2018. Treasury staff have requested that the change be phased in so that the change is made when each licence is due for its next annual licence payment or within 12 months (if the anniversary is soon after the decision to increase licence fees is made). Officers recommend that Council adopt this approach.

Consultation

Survey to test proposed approach to the review

24. A survey managed by Public Voice was undertaken in 2017 to test public support for the approach suggested around setting fees for this review. 657 responses were received.

25. The survey asked if the application fee should cover the administration cost Council incurs when reviewing an application - 77% said ‘Yes’, 14% said ‘No’ and 9% ‘Don’t know’.

26. The survey also asked if respondents thought a public-private policy framework should be used to decide how much people using public (Council) land should pay - 76% said ‘Yes’ , 8% said ‘No’ and 15% ‘Don’t know’.

Legal Considerations

27. The conditions of Hutt City Council Encroachment licences enable Council to change the licence fee at its discretion.

Financial Considerations

28. The current fee structure has not been reviewed since 2003. The potential increase in revenue from encroachment licence fees is indicated in the chart above – refer to paragraph 17 above.

Other Considerations

29. 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 is recommending an approach that is cost-effective because it is recommending a fee structure that enables Council to recover its costs and annual licence fees that are based on the market value of the land being used.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Appendix 1: The Land Area of existing licenses	138
2 ⇩	Appendix 2: The Land Value of existing licences	139
3 ⇩	Appendix 3: Public Private benefit - scoring	140
4 ⇩	Appendix 4: A hypothetical range of encroachment licence fees for each encroachment type	141

Author: Graham Sewell

Principal Policy Advisor

Reviewed By: Wendy Moore

Divisional Manager, Strategy and Planning

Approved By: Kim Kelly

General Manager, City Transformation

MEMORANDUM 167 06 June 2018

Our Reference 18/908

TO: Chair and Members

Community Plan Committee

FROM: Kathryn Stannard

DATE: 28 May 2018

SUBJECT: Additional Information Requested

Recommendation

That the Committee notes the additional information provided in response to information requests.

Purpose of Memorandum

1. The purpose of the memorandum is to respond to information requests made by the Mayor and Councillors during the hearing of submissions on the Long Term Plan.

Background

2. The Community Plan Committee at its meeting held on 16 and 17 May 2018 requested additional information prior to its final deliberations on the Long Term Plan. This memorandum has been compiled from information provided by Council officers and is outlined below under key strategy headings.

Leisure & Wellbeing

Hutt Valley Tennis (DAP18/136)

This matter has been addressed in a separate report titled “The Proposed Budget Changes”.

Targeted Swimming Programmes

At its meeting held on 3 May 2018 the Community Services Committee considered targeted swimming programmes and passed the following recommendation – Minute No. CSC 18204:

RECOMMENDED:

“That the Committee recommends that the Community Plan Committee:

(i) receives the report;

(ii) notes that of all the options presented, officers believe Option 5 (new position – requested funding $80,000) would make the greatest difference; and

(iii) notes that currently there is no funding identified in the draft Long Term Plan for any of the presented items.”

Naenae Park

This matter has been addressed in a separate report titled “The Proposed Budget Changes”.

Maintenance Playgrounds/Sportsgrounds

This matter has been addressed in a separate report titled “Parks Asset Renewals”.

Team Naenae (DAP18/135)

Officers are meeting with the relevant Ward Councillors to better understand the concerns raised by Team Naenae regarding the development of a new Naenae Hub.

Colleen Dunne (DAP18/148)

Information on a proposal for chronic disease classes in Council’s leisure facilities will be prepared for consideration by Council’s Community Services Committee.

Eastern Community Panel (DAP18/101-002 & DAP18/101-001)

Over the last 10 years Hillary Court received four stages of paving upgrades in total value of circa $500K from Council’s Suburban Shopping Centres Improvement Fund. The Long Term Plan funding is $300K every two years and there is a priority list of shopping centres which officers are working their way down. It is worth nothing that Naenae is not due for further funding for at least another 10 years.

Outdoor Basketball Court and Hoops Speldhurst Park

Based on a preliminary design, the construction costs for a full sized basketball court is approximately $280k + GST. A half court would cost around $150k. Officers do not support the full court proposal due to the impact on the character of this park.

Wainuiomata Trail Project (DAP/18/107 and 105)

Wainuiomata Trail Project is seeking increased funding to speed up the rate of track construction to expand the mountain bike park. Officers are supportive of the track proposals and appreciate the economic and social benefits it would bring. However, this would involve the creation of new track assets at a time when officers do not have a clear picture on the maintenance/renewals cost in relation to available budgets. The volunteers commit to maintenance in their submission, but this may not be a reliable resource in the long-term.

Bell Park (DAP18/168)

Officers have liaised with Ignite Sports and the local residents to develop a concept plan for the Bell Park, which is ready for final approval. This includes hard court areas for use by Ignite and the local community as well as drainage, footpaths, potential fitness trail and general landscaping. The outline costs are still being developed but will be in the region of $250,000 for the hard courts and a further $300,000 for the wider landscaping.

Constance Gervasi (DAP18/46)

Officers will make contact with Constance Gervasi regarding Avalon Park and the exercise equipment.

Elle Abel (DAP18/166)

Officers will action the request for the installation of a changing table at Wainuiomata Shopping Centre from existing budgets.

Toimata Foundation (DAP18/149)

Officers will invite Toimata Foundation to present to Council’s Community Services Committee on their excellent work as a national support organisation for Enviroschools.

Te Awakairangi Health Network (DAP18/175)

Information on a Te Awakairangi Policy/Strategy will be prepared for consideration by Council’s Community Services Committee.

Hutt Valley Gymnastics (DAP18/74)

Information on funding for a regional facility will be prepared for consideration by Council’s Community Services Committee.

Ngaire Lambourn (DAP18/157)

Information on extending the Moera Library and flooding issues will be prepared for consideration by Council’s Community Services Committee.

CAB (DAP18/161)

Information on CAB options for the organisation to be based in the Hutt Libraries will be prepared for consideration by Council’s Community Services Committee.

Te Whare Tane – House for Men (DAP18/172)

Information on funding for the Te Whare Tane Project will be prepared for consideration by Council’s Community Services Committee.

Moera Community House (DAP18/126)

Information in response to the Moera Community House’s submission will be prepared for consideration by Council’s Community Services Committee.

Baseball NZ and Wellington Baseball Association (DAP18/52)

Information on a national baseball facility will be prepared for consideration by Council’s Community Services Committee.

Western Community Panel (DAP18/115)

Information on walkways in the Western Hills will be prepared for consideration by Council’s Community Services Committee.

Maungaraki Community Association (DAP18/116)

Information on the Dowse Drive Reserve and the recent knoll turning plus costings for any consequential works will be prepared for consideration by Council’s City Development Committee.

Keri Brown (DAP18/144)

This matter has been addressed in a separate report titled “Lower Hutt Homelessness Strategy”.

Heritage

Officers will explore how Council will integrate heritage as a city not only physical buildings but also the history of mana whenua and the place that we preside in.

Growth, Development & Sustainability

Riverlink Funds

To make Council’s contribution to the Riverlink project more visible, officers will be renaming all budgets for Riverlink in the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan as follows:

Local Urban Design

· Riverlink – promenade, urban improvements and footbridge – total $25.5M – funding over various years

· Riverlink – strategic property purchases – will be funds from the carryover

Roads and Accessways

· Riverlink – replacement riverbank car parking” - $0.8M LTP 2020-2021

· Riverlink – East Access Route (51% subsidy)” - $3.5M LTP 2020-2012

· Riverlink – contribution to Melling Bridge Renewal (1/3 share at 51% subsidy)” - $6.5M LTP 2025-2026

Stormwater

· Riverlink – stormwater requirements” - $2.1M

Officers will explore aspects of local stories being told in the Riverlink Project alongside local mana whenua.

Extending Free Wi-fi Around Wainuiomata Shopping Centre

With planning currently being undertaken on the Wainuiomata town centre in conjunction with the proposed redevelopment of the Mall by Progressive Enterprises, an investigation into the cost of extending free Wi-Fi around the Wainuiomata Shopping Centre will be undertaken as part of this work.

Riverbank Market

At its meeting held on 1 May 2018 the City Development Committee considered the Riverbank Market proposal. This matter has been addressed in a separate report titled “Riverbank Carpark Tariff Changes”.

P2040 Funding 2018-2019

The P2040 Group has requested $150K to:

1. Implement the protection and enhancement of heritage buildings in Jackson Street as prioritised by Council in 2017. This work would include demonstration projects with building owners to upgrade blocks of buildings and staged over several years. Perhaps a block of five to six buildings per year. These demonstration projects would trial and test building upgrades eg smartening up facades, removing poor features, rebuilding heritage features, replacing signage with more appropriate ‘heritage friendly’ designs in accordance with Council guidelines, street furniture and lights, footpath and parking reconfiguration trials etc. These small demonstration projects would demonstrate the intent of the more costly longer term (10-30 years) upgrade projects proposed by the JSSD. The demonstration projects could be partnered between Council, Petone 2040, Jackson Street Programme, Petone Community Board and with building owners. This work will show progress by Council on heritage, it will help the economic performance of Jackson Street, and it will continue the roll-out of (P2040) one of Council’s few spatial plans for the city.

2. Progress the 14 other key projects identified by the P2040 Strategy. For example, CVL is one of these and there is potential to strongly align Council’s business case with NZTA’s most recent GPS (government policy statement for land transport) criteria if led by design to emphasis walking, cycling, public transport, sustainability, resilience of city, population and economic growth, and safety. This will require external skills in transport planning, urban economics, urban design, landscape, biodiversity and social outcomes. Protecting heritage and character across the residential areas of Petone – this could be investigated as a heritage overlay in Council’s District Plan.

3. Facilitate progress with P2040 and manage ongoing community engagement (similar to the “Love Wainuiomata” project by utilising a part time co-ordinator). It would not be appropriate for this to be undertaken by JSP as the majority of P2040 projects have little to do with Jackson Street.

Sea Level Rise

At its meeting held on 30 April 2018 the Policy and Regulatory Committee considered the Sea Level Rise proposal. This matter has been addressed in a separate report titled “Sea Level Rise”.

Encroachment Licence Fees

At its meeting held on 30 April 2018 the Policy and Regulatory Committee considered the Encroachment Licence Fees proposal. This matter has been addressed in a separate report titled “Encroachment Licence Fees”.

Taranaki Whanui Memorandum of Understanding and Service Level Agreement (DAP18/192)

The current MoU and SLA were reviewed and signed off by Mayor Wallace on behalf of Council and Mr Wayne Mulligan for the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust on 17 July 2017 and the documents will expire 30 June 2020.

Michael Gray (DAP18/90)

Officers are organising a CBD Spatial Plan workshop. The workshop will include Rejuvenation of south High Street. Officers are working with Mr Gray and South High Street Rejuvenation Group.

Zero Carbon Act

A report will be prepared for consideration by Council at its meeting to be held on 28 June 2018.

Toimata Foundation (DAP18/149)

Information on enviroschools and sustainability will be prepared for consideration by Council’s City Development Committee.

Infrastructure

Jackson Street Programme (DAP18/156)

Officers have performance related discussions with contractors. Officers are happy to contact Jackson Street Programme to explain the process and are open to suggestions for process improvements. For the Committee’s information, officers notified all affected businesses of the works prior to them starting and then the contractor kept them informed throughout the job. Unfortunately, wet weather considerably extended the works and unforeseen ground conditions further compounded this. Officers are aware that road works are disruptive to residents, businesses and traffic but they have to be completed if Council wants safe and effective transport infrastructure.

Andrew Fuller (DAP18/108)

Information on the environmental impacts of 4K LED streetlights and options for the way they are used will be prepared for consideration by Council’s City Development Committee.

Max Shierlaw (DAP18/25)

Information on a model to reduce traffic issues near K-Mart, Petone will be prepared for consideration by Council’s City Development Committee.

Michelle Ducat (DAP18/177)

Information on emission targets will be prepared for consideration by Council’s City Development Committee.

Wharves Update

Following works commencing on wharves, new information has been shared by consultants regarding costs. Officers are analysing this information and plan to prepare a detailed report outlining all available options to Council. Officers expect to complete this report in the coming months. Officers want to reassure Council that all of the City’s wharves have been maintained to a standard consistent with expert advice. The reality and challenge is the wharves are old. Officers continue to take all practical steps to ensure all the wharves remain safe for current use.

Preparedness and Resilience across the City

Officers will organise a Preparedness, Sustainability and Resilience workshop along with the Lifelines Group. The workshop will include transport links, electricity and the role of wharves.

Wellington Electricity

Officers will facilitate a workshop with Wellington Electricity regarding its investment in the Hutt.

Appendices

There are no appendices for this Memorandum.

Mayor WR Wallace (Chair)
Deputy Mayor D Bassett
Cr G Barratt	Cr C Barry
Cr L Bridson	Cr J Briggs
Cr MJ Cousins	Cr S Edwards
Cr T Lewis	Cr M Lulich
Cr G McDonald	Cr C Milne
Cr L Sutton

Division	Corporate Services - Finance
Date created	2 March 2018
Publication date	6 June 2018
Review period	Every five years (or earlier if considered necessary)
Owner	Chief Financial Officer
Approved by	General Manager Corporate Services

Version	Author	Date	Description
V 1.0	Mark de Haast	28/03/02018	Approved by Council for public consultation
V 2.0	Mark de Haast	6/06//2018	Approved by Council with effect from 1 July 2018.

Asset Type	Description	Forecast Requirement	Current Annual Budget Provision	Forecast Annual Shortfall
Hard Surfaces	Car parks Roads Footpaths Paved areas	$580,000	$150,000	$430,000
Buildings*	Changing rooms Toilets Other	$240,000	$150,000	$90,000
Playgrounds**	Play equipment Skate parks	$350,000	$205,000	$145,000
Park Furniture	Seats Rubbish bins Picnic tables	$150,000	$30,000	$120,000
Tracks	Tracks Structures Firebreaks	unknown	$30,000	unknown
Signs		unknown	$30,000	unknown

A hypothetical range of encroachment areas for each encroachment type
Garage					Option 1	Option 2	Option 3
		Encroachment area (sqm)	Land Value ($/sqm)	Total value of the Enc area ($)	Status quo ($)	Revised flat fee ($)	% of market rent ($)
	UPPER	50	450	22,500	128	271	920
	Median	20.1	330.3	6,622	128	271	271
	LOWER	15	170	2,550	128	271	104

Garden					Option 1	Option 2	Option 3
		Encroachment area (sqm)	Land Value ($/sqm)	Total value of the Enc area ($)	Status quo ($)	Revised flat fee ($)	% of market rent ($)
	UPPER	100	450	45,000	115	780	1840
	Median	53.4	357.1	19,071	115	780	780
	LOWER	20	170	3,400	115	780	139

Drainage Reserve					Option 1	Option 2	Option 3
		Encroachment area (sqm)	Land Value ($/sqm)	Total value of the Enc area ($)	Status quo ($)	Revised flat fee ($)	% of market rent ($)
	UPPER	250	450	112,500	57.5	914	3738
	Median	160.0	171.9	27,506	57.5	914	914
	LOWER	50	100	5,000	57.5	914	166

Pavement					Option 1	Option 2	Option 3
		Encroachment area (sqm)	Land Value ($/sqm)	Total value of the Enc area ($)	Status quo ($)	Revised flat fee ($)	% of market rent ($)
	UPPER	30	1200	36,000	57.5	288	552
	Median	18.4	1022.5	18,813	57.5	288	288
	LOWER	10	700	7,000	57.5	288	107