Agenda of Hearings Subcommittee

7 01 August 2018

Hearings Subcommittee

19 July 2018

File: (18/1250)

Report no: HSC2018/4/104

Proposed Priority Routes and Earthquake-Prone Priority Buildings

Background

At the 22 May 2018 Council meeting the following resolution was passed:

“That Council:

(i) uses the special consultative procedure described under section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 to identify thoroughfares with sufficient vehicular and pedestrian traffic, onto which parts of unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings could fall in the event of an earthquake;

(ii) does not use the special consultative procedure described under section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 to identify strategically important routes which could be impeded by the collapse of buildings in the event of an earthquake; and

(iii) agrees to establish a subcommittee comprising of Cr Cousins, Cr Edwards, and Cr Bridson, with alternates, Cr Lewis and Cr Barry to:

(a) hear submissions on the proposed Priority Routes and Earthquake-Prone Buildings proposal;

(b) recommend the appropriate action to Council for consideration and approval; and

(c) be given delegated authority to approve minor amendments to the Priority Routes and Earthquake-Prone Buildings proposal prior to public consultation.”

The special consultative procedure was undertaken from Tuesday 29 May and closed on Friday 29 June 2018. One submission has been received from Mr David Mancer, who has indicated he does not wish to speck to his submission.

Staff do not have any changes they wish to recommend with respect to the proposed Priority Routes and Earthquake-prone Buildings proposal.

Recommendation

That the report be noted and received.

Information to Assist the Hearing of the Submission.

To assist the Subcommittee with the hearing of the submission attached is the following information:

1. A complete set of the consultation documents: The Summary of Proposal, and the Statement of Proposal.

2. The submission received from Mr David Mancer.

3. A summary of Mr Mancer’s submission along with staff comments.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Summary of Proposal - Priority routes May 2018	8
2 ⇩	Statement of Proposal: Priority Routes and Earthquake-prone Buildings May 2018	10
3 ⇩	APPENDIX I - Sections 133AE and 133AF of the Building Act 2004	19
4 ⇩	APPENDIX II - Priority Buildings Guidance - High Traffic Areas Criterion	21
5 ⇩	Summary of Submissions - Earthquake Priority Buildings - 18 July 2018	23
6 ⇩	SPC18/1 - Submission to The Priority Routes and Earthquake Prone Buildings - David Mancer	29

Author: Graham Sewell

Principal Policy Advisor

Reviewed By: Bradley Cato

General Counsel

Reviewed By: Derek Kerite

Building and Quality Assurance Manager

Reviewed By: Wendy Moore

Divisional Manager, Strategy and Planning

Approved By: Kim Kelly

General Manager, City Transformation

Attachment 1

Summary of Proposal - Priority routes May 2018

summary of proposal:

earthquake-prone Priority buildings

Priority routes are busy roads or footpaths where falling masonry from buildings damaged in an earthquake would pose a high risk to life and public safety. Hutt City Council wants to know which routes you think it should prioritise in Hutt City. The Council intends to consult, using the special consultative procedure, to formally identify those routes.

BACKGROUND

The system for identifying and managing earthquake-prone buildings changed on 1 July 2017 when the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings Amendment Act 2016 became effective.

The new system prioritises identification and remediation of earthquake-prone buildings that either pose a high risk to life safety, or are critical to recovery in an emergency.

There are two criteria for identifying which roads, footpaths and other thoroughfares should be prioritised:

· High number of vehicles and pedestrians using the route

· The risk of unreinforced masonry buildings falling in an earthquake

Council seeks your feedback on proposals for roads, footpaths and other thoroughfares that should be prioritised. The Council also seeks your views on whether there are any other routes that should be included.

COMMENT

To help facilitate this consultation Council has identified potential roads, footpaths and other thoroughfares in the Statement of proposal attached.

We would welcome your response to the following questions:

· Do you agree with the thoroughfares identified for prioritisation?

· If not, which thoroughfares do you disagree with and why?

· Are there any other thoroughfares that meet the criteria but are not listed?

Also attached is a submission form that you may wish to use to prepare your submission.

PROCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPOSED POLICY AND BYLAW

Council is seeking submissions on this proposal. The full statement of proposal, along with a submission form is attached to this summary of information. It is also available at the Hutt City Council Building, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt, Libraries and on the Council Website www.huttcity.govt.nz

Submissions open on Tuesday 29 May 2018 and close at 4.00pm on Friday 29 June 2018.

If you have any questions concerning this matter please contact:

Patrick Sweetensen

Seismic Assessment Officer

patrick.sweetensen@huttcity.govt.nz

04 570 6869

Chris Hoddinott

Seismic Assessment Officer

chris.hoddinott@huttcity.govt.nz

04 570 6804

Please send submissions to:

Graham Sewell

Hutt City Council

Private Bag 31 912

LOWER HUTT 5040

Attachment 2

Statement of Proposal: Priority Routes and Earthquake-prone Buildings May 2018

Statement of proposal:

earthquake-prone Priority buildings

Consultation on which roads, footpaths or thoroughfares should be identified for prioritisation because of the risk of an unreinforced masonry building falling in an earthquake.

BACKGROUND

The system for identifying and managing earthquake-prone buildings changed on 1 July 2017 when the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 became effective. The new system prioritises identification and remediation of earthquake-prone buildings that either pose a high risk to life safety, or are critical to recovery in an emergency. Certain hospital, emergency and education buildings that are earthquake-prone will be ‘priority buildings’. Other earthquake-prone buildings may be priority buildings due to their location and the potential impact of their failure in an earthquake on people. These buildings must be identified with community input. Priority buildings must be identified and remediated in half the usual time, to reduce the risks to life safety more promptly.

Council seeks your feedback on proposals for roads, footpaths and other thoroughfares that should be included. Council also seeks your views on whether there are any other routes that should be included.

Following consultation Council will make a decision about which roads, footpaths and other thoroughfares are identified.

This consultation is undertaken in accordance with section 133AF (2) (a) of the Building Act 2004, which requires Council to identify certain priority buildings.

THE PROPOSAL

Council is proposing that the following roads, footpaths and other thoroughfares are identified as having sufficient vehicular and pedestrian traffic to warrant prioritization, and have the potential for part of an unreinforced masonry building to fall onto the thoroughfare:

· Jackson Street, Petone (That part of Jackson Street between Cuba Street and Petone Avenue)

· Cuba Street, Lower Hutt (That part of Cuba Street between Emmersons Street and Montague Street)

· High Street, Lower Hutt (That part of High Street between Daly Street and Melling Road)

· Bunny Street, Lower Hutt

· Everest Avenue, Naenae

· Hillary Court, Naenae

· Rimu Street, Eastbourne

Refer to High Traffic Area maps below for an overview of the listed streets. The individual streets are shown as yellow lines, and each corresponding area is shown as a green box in an overview of the Hutt City.

Jackson Street Area includes Jackson Street; Cuba Street Area includes Cuba Street; Hutt Central Area includes High Street and Bunny Street; Naenae Area includes Everest Avenue and Hillary Court; and Eastbourne Area includes Rimu Street.

Background Information:

1. NEW SYSTEM FOR MANAGING EARTHQUAKE-PRONE BUILDINGS

The Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings)Amendment Act 2016 came into force on 1 July 2017. It changes the current system for identifying and remediating earthquake-prone buildings.

The new system ensures the way buildings are managed for future earthquakes is consistent across the country and provides more information for people using buildings, such as notices on earthquake-prone buildings and a public register. Owners of earthquake-prone buildings will be required to take action within certain time frames depending on the seismic risk their building is located in. Affected owners will be contacted by the Council.

More information about the new system can be found at:

https://www.building.govt.nz/managing-buildings/managing-earthquake-prone-buildings/how-the-system-works/

2. PRIORITY BUILDINGS POSE A HIGH RISK TO LIFE SAFETY, OR ARE CRITICAL TO RECOVERY IN AN EMERGENCY

The new system prioritises identification and remediation of earthquake-prone buildings that either pose a high risk to life safety, or critical to recovery in an emergency. These buildings are called ‘priority buildings’. Priority buildings must be identified and remediated in half the time allowed for other earthquake-prone buildings, to reduce the risks to life safety more promptly.

This means that Council must identify potentially earthquake-prone buildings in this district by the end of 2019, and building owners must strengthen or demolish earthquake-prone buildings within 7.5 years from the date the earthquake-prone building notice was issued.

Further guidance on priority buildings is available at: https://www.building.govt.nz/building-code-compliance/b-stability/b1-structure/priority-buildings-earthquake-prone/

3. WHY WE ARE CONSULTING

Your input is required to identify some priority buildings

To determine which other buildings may be priority buildings, Council must identify which thoroughfares have sufficient vehicular or pedestrian traffic to warrant prioritisation, if part of a unreinforced masonry building were to fall onto them in an earthquake.

This consultation is in accordance with section 133AF(2)(a) of the Building Act 2004, which requires Council to use the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 to identify these priority buildings.

4. HAVE YOUR SAY

Council is seeking submissions on this proposal. The special consultative procedure will end 5.00pm on Friday 29 June 2017.

Copies of the Summary and Statement of Proposal is available at the Hutt City Council Building, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt, Libraries and on the Council Website www.huttcity.govt.nz

We would welcome your response to the following questions:

· Do you agree with the thoroughfares identified for prioritisation?

· If not, which thoroughfares do you disagree with and why?

· Are there any other thoroughfares that meet the criteria but are not listed?

Attached is a submission form that you may wish to use to prepare your submission.

If you choose not to use the submission form please ensure you indicate in your submission if you wish to speak to your submission or not.

5. PROCESS FOR IDENTIFICATION OF PRIORITY BUILDINGS

Anyone can make a submission about the proposals described in this document. Council encourages anyone with an interest in the issues raised in this proposal to make a submission.

Hearings and meetings on the proposal will be open to the public, and people may speak to their submissions at the relevant committee meeting.

An analysis of all submissions will then be presented to the relevant council committee for consideration. The proposal with any proposed amendments will then be referred to the Council for consideration and adoption.

______________________________________________________________________________

Attachment 3

APPENDIX I - Sections 133AE and 133AF of the Building Act 2004

appendix I:

Section 133 AE of the Building Act 2004 - Meaning of priority building

(1) In this subpart, priority building means any of the following that are located in an area of medium or high seismic risk:

(a) a hospital building that is likely to be needed in an emergency (within the meaning of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002) to provide—

(i) emergency medical services; or

(ii) ancillary services that are essential for the provision of emergency medical services:

(b) a building that is likely to be needed in an emergency for use as an emergency shelter or emergency centre:

(c) a building that is used to provide emergency response services (for example, policing, fire, ambulance, or rescue services):

(d) a building that is regularly occupied by at least 20 people and that is used as any of the following:

(i) an early childhood education and care centre licensed under Part 26 of the Education Act 1989:

(ii) a registered school or an integrated school (within the meaning of the Education Act 1989):

(iii) a private training establishment registered under Part 18 of the Education Act 1989:

(iv) a tertiary institution established under section 162 of the Education Act 1989:

(e) any part of an unreinforced masonry building that could—

(i) fall from the building in an earthquake (for example, a parapet, an external wall, or a veranda); and

(ii) fall onto any part of a public road, footpath, or other thoroughfare that a territorial authority has identified under section 133AF(2)(a):

(f) a building that a territorial authority has identified under section 133AF(2)(b) as having the potential to impede a transport route of strategic importance (in terms of an emergency response) if the building were to collapse in an earthquake.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a) and (b), the likelihood of a building being needed in an emergency for a particular purpose must be assessed having regard to—

(a) any national civil defence emergency management plan made under section 39 of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002; and

(b) the civil defence emergency management group plan approved under section 48 of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 that covers the district in which the building is situated.

(3) If only part of a building meets the criteria set out in subsection (1), only that part of the building is a priority building.

(4) Whether a building is a priority building affects—

(a) the deadline by which a territorial authority must identify whether the building or a part of the building is potentially earthquake prone (see section 133AG); and

(b) the deadline for completing seismic work on the building or a part of the building, if it is subject to an EPB notice (see section 133AM).

Section 133AE: inserted, on 1 July 2017, by section 24 of the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 (2016 No 22).

Section 133 AF of the Building Act 2004 - Role of territorial authority in identifying certain priority buildings

(1) This section applies to a territorial authority whose district includes any area of medium or high seismic risk.

(2) The territorial authority,—

(a) for the purpose of section 133AE(1)(e) (prioritising parts of unreinforced masonry buildings), must use the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 to identify any part of a public road, footpath, or other thoroughfare in an area of medium or high seismic risk—

(i) onto which parts of an unreinforced masonry building could fall in an earthquake; and

(ii) that has sufficient vehicle or pedestrian traffic to warrant prioritising the identification and remediation of those parts of unreinforced masonry buildings; and

(b) for the purpose of section 133AE(1)(f) (prioritising buildings that could impede a strategic transport route),—

(i) may, in its discretion, initiate the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 to identify buildings for that purpose; but

(ii) must not identify buildings for that purpose other than in accordance with the special consultative procedure.

(3) However, a territorial authority is not required to act under subsection (2)(a) if there is no reasonable prospect of any thoroughfare in its district satisfying the criteria set out in subsection (2)(a)(i) and (ii).

(4) If a territorial authority is required by subsection (2)(a) or decides under subsection (2)(b) to use the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002, it must use the procedure within a time frame that enables the territorial authority to meet the applicable time frame under section 133AG(4) for identifying potentially earthquake-prone priority buildings in its district.

Section 133AF: inserted, on 1 July 2017, by section 24 of the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 (2016 No 22).

Attachment 5

Summary of Submissions - Earthquake Priority Buildings - 18 July 2018

Appendix 2.

Summary of submissions to Earthquake Priority Buildings consultation.

We received one submission from David Mancer of Wainuiomata. He did not wish to speak to his submission. Below is a summary of his submission, and Council Officers comments.

Submission

Staff comment

Question 1

Generally agrees with the identification of thoroughfares.

No comments.

Question 2

Refer to Questions 3 & 4.

No comments.

Question 3

Council should consider the “bigger picture” in adopting earthquake resilience policy:

a) Council should be consulting with the relevant industry and technical experts to ascertain the best approach for identifying priority routes

b) Prioritise routes/thoroughfares that would be used by emergency services and access to hospitals, civil defence hubs, education facilities, public shopping malls, supermarkets, and areas set aside for emergency supplies and critical infrastructure.

c) That the public be made aware of these findings and the subsequent policy be made publically available.

a) Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) have prescribed specific criteria for Councils to identify priority routes. Officers worked with Road and Traffic department, GIS teams, and Emergency Management staff in implementing the criteria.

b) There was an option to consult on strategic routes of importance that would cover most of these aspects. However, the criteria issued by MBIE required that there be no alternate routes available to access these locations/areas. Council Officers identified multiple alternate routes and therefore decided not to publically consult on this type of priority route.

It was also considered that the wider response to an earthquake event will be addressed by Councils Emergency Management department in the Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Plan.

c) Once the CDEM Plan has been finalised it will published and be available to the public.

Question 4

a) There was an omission of the wider subject of earthquake-prone buildings.

b) Council should consider what is right for the district, instead of just adopting central legislation.

c) Does the Council have current/archived engineering reports relating to all the Lower Hutt building stock, specifically regarding loadings stability? And is this information available to the public? Information should include historical information and all building codes and guidance documentation, to ensure Council are doing their due diligence.

d) If there is no current information regarding a buildings seismic performance Council should have an IEP undertaken.

e) How does Council know what building stock is earthquake-prone or potentially earthquake prone?

f) Is there any chance the building stock was compromised by the Kaikoura earthquake?

g) It is suggested that Council take a different approach to assessing buildings seismic performance in terms of ground acceleration information, with specific focus on geotechnical testing.

h) What other measures can be undertaken to ensure hazards are identified with respect to building and public safety. Specifically, non-structural elements.

i) It is suggested that there be site specific geotechnical surveys for land use developments and intensification.

j) The requirement of current information available in both hard copy and web based formats. For example, currently available Council policy "Earthquake-prone Building Policy 2016" in the Policy section – it is assumed this is now redundant since the introduction of the Building Act Amendments?

a) This was a deliberate omission as to not confuse the consultee about what we were consulting on. This was specifically to identify priority routes on which priority earthquake-prone buildings would be located.

The broader earthquake-prone buildings provision in the Building Act addresses the wider building stock in Hutt City using profile categories. This targets the building stock that MBIE has identified as potentially having structural discrepancies with today’s compliance standards. Council Officers have until July 2022 to identify all profile category buildings. If a building fits within a profile category it is identified as potentially earthquake-prone. The owner of the building then has 12 months to provide Council with an engineer’s report. If there is no report provide by the deadline, or the report confirms the building is earthquake-prone then an earthquake-prone building notice will be issued requiring seismic work be done to the building within a certain timeframe.

b) In addition to the process outlined in a) above, we also have contracts in place with consulting engineers to assess buildings that do not fall within the profile categories mentioned above. This is a continuation of the program implemented under the pre-existing Hutt City Council Earthquake-prone Building Policy, which was replaced by the Amendment Act 2016.

c) Council records all engineering reports received from the owner/interested parties of buildings. In accordance with the Building Act, Council Officers review those reports to check they meet the requirements of Parts A, B and/or C of The Seismic Assessment of Existing Buildings: Technical Guidelines for Engineering Assessments July 2017.

Under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act all information on buildings are publically available on request, apart from personal information under the Privacy Act.

d) See a) and b) above – which outlines the legal process we must follow

e) See a) and b) above – which outlines the process we must follow.

f) There were rapid building assessments and targeted damage evaluations on a number of large commercial and some residential buildings post-earthquake. Some of these have undergone seismic strengthening/retrofit as a result.

g) Under the Building Amendment Act 2016 Council are required to assess buildings in accordance with the EPB Methodology, which makes reference to The Seismic Assessment of Existing Buildings: Technical Guidelines for Engineering Assessments July 2017.

Council relies on central government legislation to determine what it needs to do. MBIE provide the technical expertise and the wider engineering society/earthquake science community also contribute to determine the best practise for assessing seismic performance of buildings. Local Government can also contribute by providing practical advice based on their experience working at the local level with building owners etc.

Council can require geotechnical testing on a case by case basis, depending on the location and nature of the development. For example any new builds or substantial alterations in the Wellington Fault study zone requires geotechnical testing under the District Plan.

h) Council Officers ensure that buildings comply with the Building Act and Building Code through regulatory processes such as building consents. As part of the building consents approval process the proposed building works are assessed against all the relevant hazards to ensure the requirements of the Code are met.

i) Resource Consents Officers may request geotechnical reports as part of the consenting processes. This is on a case by case basis, but will consider the natural hazard risk assessment during the process.

j) We maintain a HCC administered register of all earthquake-prone buildings in Hutt City. There is a national register which we are in progress of migrating all our current earthquake-prone building data to.

All legislation changes and policy changes are made available on our website, and we include links to the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment website where downloadable documents can be found. The Hutt City Council Earthquake-prone Building Policy was replaced by the Building Amendment Act 2016 and has now been removed from the Council website.