community boards – functions and delegations

This document records the delegation of Council functions, responsibilities, duties, and powers to Community Boards.

The Community Boards have been established under section 49 of the Local Government Act 2002 to represent, and act as an advocate for, the interests of their community.

The delegations are expressed in general terms. The delegations shall be exercised with proper regard for the Council’s strategic direction, policies, plans, Standing Orders and its interpretation of its statutory obligations. The delegations are to be read together with the following propositions.

These delegations are based on the following principles:

· Issues relevant to a specific community should be decided as closely as possible to that community. Where an issue has city-wide implications, ie any effects of the decision cross a ward or community boundary or have consequences for the city as a whole, the matter will be decided by Council after seeking a recommendation from the relevant Community Board or (any ambiguity around the interpretation of “city-wide” will be determined by the Mayor and Chief Executive in consultation with the relevant Chair);

· Efficient decision-making should be paramount;

· Conflicts of interest should be avoided and risks minimised;

· To ensure processes are free from bias and pre-determination Community Boards should not adjudicate on issues on which they have advocated or wish to advocate to Council;

· Community Boards should proactively and constructively engage with residents on local matters that affect the community they represent and raise with Council issues raised with them by their community and advocate on behalf of their community.

These delegations:

(a) do not delegate any function, duty or power which a statute (for example section 53(3) and clause 32(1) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002) prohibits from being delegated;

(b) are subject to and do not affect any delegation which the Council has already made or subsequently makes to any other committee, Council officer or other member of staff;

(d) are subject to any notice issued by the Council, from time to time, to a Community Board that a particular issue must be referred to Council for decision;

(e) reflect that decisions with significant financial implications should be made by Council (or a committee with delegated authority);

(f) promote centralisation of those functions where the appropriate expertise must be ensured; and

(g) reflect that all statutory and legal requirements must be met.

DELEGATIONS

Decide:

· Naming new roads and alterations to street names (in the Community Board’s area).

· Official naming of parks, reserves and sports grounds within the provisions of Council’s Naming Policy. Note [1]

· Removal and/or planting of street trees within the provisions of Council’s Operational Guide for Urban Forest Plan where a dispute arises that cannot be resolved at officer level. Note [2]

· The granting of leases and licences in terms of Council policy to voluntary organisations for Council owned properties in their local area, for example, halls, but not including the granting of leases and licences to community houses and centres.

· The granting of rights-of-way and other easements over local purpose reserves and granting of leases or licences on local purpose reserves.

· The granting of leases and licences for new activities in terms of Council policy to community and commercial organisations over recreation reserves subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 and land managed as reserve subject to the provisions of the Local Government 2002, in their local area. (Note: renewal of existing leases and licences will be reported once a year to Council’s City Development Committee).

· The allocation of funding from the Community Engagement Fund in accordance with Council’s adopted guidelines.

· Expenditure of funds allocated by the Council to the Board from the Miscellaneous Budget to cover expenditure associated with the activities of the Board. The Chair to approve expenditure, in consultation with the Board, and forward appropriate documentation to the Committee Advisor for authorisation. Boards must not exceed their annual expenditure from the Miscellaneous Budget.

· The allocation of funding for the training and development of Community Board or members, including formal training courses, attendance at seminars or attendance at relevant conferences.

Consider and make recommendations to Council on:

· Particular issues notified from time to time by Council to the Community Board.

· Roading issues considered by the Mayor and Chief Executive to be strategic due to their significance on a city-wide basis, including links to the State Highway, or where their effects cross ward or community boundaries.

· Parks, reserves and sports ground naming for sites that have a high profile, city-wide importance due to their size and location and/or cross ward or community boundaries.

· Representatives to any Council committee, subcommittee, subordinate decision-making body, working group, or ad hoc group on which a Community Board representative is required by Council.

· The setting, amending or revoking of speed limits in accordance with the Hutt City Council Bylaw 2005 Speed Limits, including the hearing of any submissions.

GENERAL FUNCTIONS

Provide their local community’s input on:

· Council’s Long Term Plan and/or Annual Plan.

· Council’s policies, programmes (including the District Roading Programme) and bylaws.

· Changes or variations to the District Plan.

· Resource management issues which it believes are relevant to its local community, through advocacy.

· The disposal or acquisition of significant assets.

· Road safety including road safety education within its area.

· Any other issues a Board believes is relevant to its local area.

· Review Local Community Plans as required.

Reports may be prepared by the Board and presented to Council Committees, along with an officer’s recommendation, for consideration.

Any submissions lodged by a Board or Committee require formal endorsement by way of resolution.

Co-ordinate with Council staff:

· Local community consultation on city-wide issues on which the Council has called for consultation.

Maintain:

· An overview of roadworks, water supply, sewerage, stormwater drainage, waste management and traffic management for its local area.

· An overview of parks, recreational facilities and community activities within its local area.

Develop:

· Community Response Plans in close consultation with the Wellington Region Emergency Management Office, emergency organisations, the community, residents’ associations, other community groups, and local businesses. The Community Response Plans will be reviewed on an annual basis.

Grant:

· Local community awards.

Promote:

· Recreational facilities and opportunities in its area with a view to ensure maximum usage.

· Arts and crafts in its area.

Appoint:

· A liaison member or, where appropriate, representatives to ad hoc bodies, which are involved in community activities within the Board’s area, on which a community representative is sought.

Endorse:

· Amendments to the Eastbourne Community Trust Deed (Eastbourne Community Board only).

EASTBOURNE

A STATEMENT OF BASIC PRINCIPLES

The Eastbourne Community Board, representing the people of Eastbourne;

Recognises that we are part of a community living in a unique environment,

Believes that we have been entrusted with the care of an environment which is a major asset of the Wellington region,

Desires to conserve and enhance this asset for the enjoyment of future generations of residents and visitors, and therefore;

Acknowledges and promotes the key characteristics of Eastbourne and the Bays as:

1. A community situated on the coast of Wellington harbour, bounded by the sea on the one side and on the other by bush-clad hills;

2. A community comprising a string of smaller communities, with residential areas of low-rise, low-density housing, interspersed with many trees;

3. A community in which the citizens care and respect each other’s differences and right to quiet enjoyment of their surroundings;

4. A community where industry and commerce have developed without detriment to the natural environment;

5. A community where the arts are valued and where participation in theatre, painting, pottery, music, gardening and sports is actively fostered and encouraged ;

6. A community concerned for the welfare of the young and the old where the elderly may retire in dignity, where families have access to facilities to raise their children in an environment which promotes safety and well-being;

7. A community which values and encourages preservation of its heritage and history.

Further:

It is our stated intent that the recognition of these principles and acceptance of the key characteristics will underlie the activities which we as a community and board undertake, and that they will provide the criteria against which, and within which, any district plans, strategic plans or developmental or organisational initiatives may be assessed.

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

Eastbourne Community Board

Meeting to be held in the East Harbour Women's Clubrooms, 145 Muritai Road, Eastbourne on

Tuesday 25 June 2019 commencing at 7.15pm.

ORDER PAPER

Public Business

1. APOLOGIES

An apology has been received from Ms E Knight.

2. PUBLIC COMMENT

Generally up to 30 minutes is set aside for public comment (three minutes per speaker). Speakers may be asked questions on the matters they raise.

3. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS

4. Minutes

Meeting minutes Eastbourne Community Board, 9 April 2019 11

5. Report referred for Board input before being considered by Subcommittee of Council

Double Decker Clearance Infrastructure Eastbourne (19/772)

Report No. ECB2019/3/118 by the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations 18

6. Chair's Report (19/764)

Report No. ECB2019/3/62 by the Chair 24

7. Committee Advisor's Report (19/734)

Report No. ECB2019/3/7 by the Committee Advisor 26

8. Notice of Motion - Declaration of a climate emergency (19/774)

Report No. ECB2019/3/119 by the Committee Advisor 29

9. Tree Maintenance at HW Shortt Park (19/827)

Report No. ECB2019/3/126 by the Team Leader Parks 32

10. Information Item

Report Back on the Community Board Conference 2019 (19/695)

Memorandum dated 28 May 2019 by the Committee Advisor 40

11. Reports from representatives on local organisations

a) Okiwi Trust (19/735)

Verbal update by the Chair

b) Educating Residents Around Trapping (ERAT) Steering Group (19/736)

Verbal update by Ms Sutherland

c) Days Bay Wharf Steering Group (19/737)

Verbal update by the Chair or Mr Ashe.

d) Eastbourne Youth Workers' Trust (19/738)

Verbal update by Ms Knight.

e) Keep Hutt City Beautiful (19/739)

Verbal update by the Chair

12. QUESTIONS

With reference to section 32 of Standing Orders, before putting a question a member shall endeavour to obtain the information. Questions shall be concise and in writing and handed to the Chair prior to the commencement of the meeting.

Judy Randall

COMMITTEE ADVISOR

17 9 April 2019

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

Eastbourne Community Board

Minutes of a meeting held in the East Harbour Women's Clubrooms, 145 Muritai Road, Eastbourne on

Tuesday 9 April 2019 commencing at 7.15pm

PRESENT:	Mr R Ashe	Mr M Gibbons
	Ms L Knight	Cr T Lewis
	Cr M Lulich	Ms A Sutherland (Chair)

APOLOGIES: Ms V Horrocks

IN ATTENDANCE: Mr B Hodgins, Strategic Advisor
Mr Z Moodie, Traffic Engineer

Mr J Gloag, Divisional Manager, Transport

Mr C Lunn, Contracts Manager - Green Assets

Ms J Randall, Committee Advisor

PUBLIC BUSINESS

1. APOLOGIES

Resolved: (Ms Sutherland/Ms Knight) Minute No. ECB 19210

“That the apology received from Ms Horrocks be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

2. PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate.

Speaking under public comment, Mr P Sprey reminded members of the importance of planning for upgrading roads, footpaths and lights in Eastbourne. He said roads beyond the main road were more neglected and a documented plan was needed to ensure they were maintained to a good quality. He considered a plan to progress towards underground power lines was needed. He asked for more detail on the proposed $500,000 spend on William’s Park.

In response to a question from a member regarding the issues raised by Mr Sprey, the Divisional Manager, Transport, advised Council maintained an ongoing plan for maintenance of the roads that determined priority. He advised Wellington Electricity was responsible for the power lines. He agreed to follow up Mr Sprey’s concerns.

The Chair reminded Mr Sprey that residents could use Council’s Report a Problem (RAP) facility to report maintenance issues. She noted Council had been very responsive in dealing with maintenance issues reported to them.

The Strategic Advisor explained the $500,000 provision for Williams Park had not yet been allocated for specific projects. He said the Parks Division would be engaging with residents before the fund was apportioned. He added it was possible the house on the park might be demolished or moved so that area of the park could be better used.

Speaking under public comment, Mayor WR Wallace restated his commitment to the Eastern Bays Shared Path. He advised the assessment of environmental effects had been completed and the consent application had been lodged. He reinforced that Council would continue to work with property owners on local Significant Natural Areas (SNAs). He noted the Environment Court had advised all parties should be involved in the SNA process. He said Council understood the distress caused by the process but also recognised the environment needed protection. He congratulated Board members on the Rona Bay Wharf refurbishment and recognised the wharf could be a crucial lifeline for the city after an earthquake.

In response to a question from a member, Mayor Wallace agreed to keep the Board updated on the progress of the Eastern Bays Shared Path consent. He noted the consent application would be fully notified so that all residents would have the opportunity to have their say.

The Chair acknowledged the Board would liaise with residents on the Eastern Bays Shared Path consent process and encourage residents putting in submissions.

Speaking under public comment, Ms F Maxwell a Maire Street resident, expressed concern at new signs erected at the Maire Street car park to discourage freedom camping. She noted they were intrusive, unnecessary and blocked her sea view. She asked that Council consider removing the unnecessary signs and retaining just one on the lamp post near the junction with Karamu Road.

Ms Maxwell advised a sign prohibiting motorbikes also interfered with her sea views. She noted that legislation did not require signs to be erected at the height of this sign when located off the main road. She added the legislation only required that signs were safe, appropriate, visible and not obstructing pedestrians.

The Divisional Manager, Transport agreed to discuss the matter of the motorbike sign with the Contracts Officer. The Strategic Advisor agreed to discuss the matter of the freedom camping signs with the Reserves Assets Manager. The Chair agreed to update Ms Maxwell on the results of Council officer discussions on these matters.

3. Presentations

Presentation by Local Councillor from Greater Wellington Regional Council (19/225)

Ms R Hewitt, Mr P Blane and Mr R Malcolm, representatives of Greater Wellington Regional Council, along with representatives from Hutt City Council’s Transport Division, advised the following.

The Divisional Manager, Transport, advised that Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) was considering double-decker buses for the Eastbourne 81 and 85x commuter bus routes. He explained this would involve additional road markings, the removal of branches from a number of road-side trees and the removal of three road-side trees. He said the community would be consulted on the plan before it was put in place.

Ms R Hewitt, a representative of GWRC advised she managed bus and cycle networks and infrastructure for GWRC. She explained GWRC wanted to reduce congestion and provide a more efficient service that was better for the environment. She referred to complaints from Eastbourne commuters regarding standing-room only on buses and waiting times. She considered demand for Eastbourne buses was rising and said catering for growth was a challenge. She recognised that adding more buses added to congestion and said the current shortage of bus drivers had made this option additionally problematic. She added additional drivers were only needed at peak times. She said double-decker buses would be more accessible, hold more people, reduce congestion, require just one driver and minimise redundant buses outside of peak travel times.

In response to questions from members, Ms Hewitt said the double-decker buses would be no wider than current buses. She was confident there would be no reduction to services since the double-decker buses would increase capacity. She proposed GWRC could forward members ‘frequently asked questions’ to answer queries about the buses from residents.

The Contracts Manager – Green Assets, advised that three poorly formed trees on Muritai Road would need removal to allow for the double decker buses. He added that these trees would have all been removed at a future date without the introduction of double decker buses since they were poor specimens. He said the trees identified for removal were outside numbers 86, 100 and 331 Muritai Rd. He noted GWRC would deliver letters to affected residents and allow two weeks for comment on the matter. He concluded a number of other trees would need to be pruned to allow for the double decker bus carriage way.

The Traffic Engineer advised road marking changes would be used to define the carriage way and to direct double decker buses around existing trees. He said this was mainly on the road south of Muritai School. He noted some bus stops might need to be moved. He said a broken edge line would be added to the existing gobi blocks to reinforce the road edge. He believed the changes would improve road safety and slow traffic speed.

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Engineer said he did not believe the road markings would encourage higher speeds. He advised that vehicles were more likely to increase their speed on residential roads without markings. He added the changes would not result in the erection of additional road signs.

In response to a question from a member, Cr Lamason, a Councillor from GWRC, said safety risks and benefits of the double-decker buses would be assessed and clearly communicated to reassure local residents.

In response to a question from a member, Cr Lamason agreed that a demonstration double-decker bus in Eastbourne before the plan was in place could be beneficial.

Mr Ashe noted that the Petone Esplanade bus lane was not very effective at 7am on week days. He suggested the ability to turn right at Te Puni Street be removed. Ms Knight asked if buses could be better sequenced to work with the East by West Ferry timetable.

Ms Hewitt agreed to look into these matters.

Mr Gibbons suggested replacement trees were planted elsewhere in Eastbourne, such as near the Bus Barns, to compensate for the removal of trees on Muritai Road.

Resolved: (Mr Ashe/Ms Knight) Minute No. ECB 19211

“That the Board notes the presentation and is supportive of the consultation.”

Days Bay Wharf Refurbishment Update (19/372)

The Strategic Advisor confirmed that the Days Bay Wharf refurbishment contract had been awarded. He noted the start of works had been delayed until the end of April. He advised temporary buildings would be set up near the wharf to house materials and a site office. He further advised the bus stop at the wharf entrance would be relocated 100m north of the wharf for the period of the works. He noted this would reduce car parking along the beach-front by 9-10 carparks and a disabled car park would be relocated. He explained plans would be made for the summer period to ensure the wharf was safe and available for fishers, ferry passengers and jumping. He added the landing point for the ferry would be moved as refurbishment work progressed. He envisaged there would be small periods of time when activity on the wharf would be limited.

In response to a question from a member, the Strategic Advisor said ideas from residents could still be considered for incorporation in the design of the edges of the wharf. He explained that the wharf’s heritage status added extra responsibilities and that an archaeological plan would be needed. He added there were no funds available to upgrade the wharf shelter to a heritage shelter but that it could be considered. He confirmed he could provide updates to the Board as work progressed. He said there was a contingency allowance for a 25% cost increase in the budget. He advised the timber for the wharf piles was sourced from South American rain forests. He explained the end of the Point Howard Wharf would be demolished as far back as the small weatherboard building partway along the inner stem of the wharf. He noted plans for the Petone Wharf refurbishment had been deferred to 2032.

4. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS

There were no conflict of interest declarations.

5. Minutes

Resolved: (Ms Sutherland/Mr Gibbons) Minute No. ECB 19212

“That the minutes of the meeting of the Eastbourne Community Board held on Tuesday, 19 February 2019, be confirmed as a true and correct record.”

6.	Chair's Report (19/361) Report No. ECB2019/2/34 by the Chair
	The Chair elaborated on the report. She noted there had been a number of comments on the Eastern Bays Shared Path in Council’s ‘All Going to Plan’ consultation. She noted there was some local interest in organising a community forum to discuss Climate Change impacts for Eastbourne.
	Resolved: (Cr Lewis/Cr Lulich) Minute No. ECB 19213 “That the Board notes the report.”
7.	Committee Advisor's Report (19/349) Report No. ECB2019/2/3 by the Committee Advisor
	Mr Gibbons was congratulated for attending the Community Board conference in New Plymouth.
	Resolved: (Ms Sutherland/Ms Knight) Minute No. ECB 19214 “That the Board receives the report.”

8. Reports from representatives on local organisations

a)	Okiwi Trust (19/366) The Chair advised there was nothing to report.
b)	Educating Residents Around Trapping (ERAT) Steering Group (19/367)
	The Chair advised there was nothing to report.
c)	Days Bay Wharf Steering Group (19/368) Mr Ashe advised there was nothing to report.
d)	Eastbourne Youth Workers' Trust (19/369) Ms Knight advised that no volunteers had come forward to join the Trust and manage the youth group (the group). She noted the group would re-open in the new term but would advise parents the group would close if no new Trust members were found.
e)	Keep Hutt City Beautiful (19/370) Report No. ECB2019/2/44 by the Chair
	Members noted the Chair’s written report.
f)	Community Response Group (19/401) Report No. ECB2019/2/45 by the Acting Chair
	The Chair elaborated on her report. She confirmed she had met with the Divisional Manager, Regulatory Services and Emergency Management. She acknowledged the Lifeline Plan developed for the region was impressive but noted that time-frames for full recovery were daunting. She said residents needed to be prepared for emergencies. She advised Memorandums of Understanding had been signed to enable emergency supplies for the region. In response to a question from a member, Ms Knight explained the local radio station under development used a private frequency that was only broadcast locally. She advised the radio station was hoping to run along the East Harbour hills to provide good communication with residents in all the bays. In response to a question from a member, Cr Lulich agreed to follow up who would be invoiced for the resource consent for the Lowry Bay emergency shed.

9. QUESTIONS

There were no questions.

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 8.52 pm.

Ms A Sutherland

CHAIR

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 25^th day of June 2019

19 25 June 2019

Eastbourne Community Board

17 June 2019

File: (19/772)

Report no: ECB2019/3/118

Double Decker Clearance Infrastructure Eastbourne

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the realignment of the centreline along Muritai Road, the installation of edge lines along Muritai Road, relocation of a Bus stop along Muritai Road and installation of No Stopping At All Times restrictions, as shown on attached as Appendix 1 and 2 to the report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) approves the realignment of the centreline along Muritai Road, as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii) approves the installation of edge lines along Muritai Road, as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(iii) approves the relocation of a Bus stop along Muritai Road, as shown attached as Appendix 2 to the report; and

(iv) approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times restrictions along Muritai Road, close to corners and bends, as shown attached as Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 to the report.

For the reasons the proposed changes would:

- improve road safety and accessibility on the street for the benefit of all road users;

- promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004; and

- support Council’s Parking Policy 2017.

Background

2. Double decker buses will be rolling out in Eastbourne, Petone and the Lower Hutt city centre to help meet current and future customer demand.

3. Over the next 20 years there will be 20% to 30% more passengers travelling by bus so we have got to find a way to carry more people without clogging up the roads with even more vehicles.

4. Double deckers provide 91 seats compared to large single deckers which only have seating for 43 passengers.

5. With buses departing as often as every five minutes from the Eastbourne terminus, introducing double deckers means we can prepare for current and future demand without running more buses.

6. The extra capacity on double deckers helps minimise bus bunching, reduce blocked driveways, and reduce the number of buses pulling into stops and holding up traffic.

Discussion

7. Introducing double deckers requires some changes: redefining and shifting of the carriageway, relocation of a bus stop; and tree trimming. These changes will also help improve the customer experience for single deckers and other larger vehicles travelling the route too - helping all buses get nearer to the footpath making it easier for people to get on and off the bus.

8. A survey of the trees along the bus corridor has been undertaken by Hutt City Council’s and Greater Wellington Regional Council’s infrastructure teams and we will be undertaking some tree trimming as a result, which you may notice. We will also be implementing changes to the layout of Muritai Road, which is shown in the attached plans.

9. Introducing double deckers on the Eastbourne service should be seen as a first step to accommodating future growth in the Hutt Valley. As housing developments grow over time, we expect demand to be met by double decker buses on other key Hutt Valley bus routes.

10. The proposed No Stopping at all Times restrictions would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 which states that:

6.3 Parking close to corners, bends, etc.

(1) A driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle on any part of a roadway so close to any corner, bend, rise, dip, traffic island, or intersection as to obstruct or be likely to obstruct other traffic or any view of the roadway to the driver of a vehicle approaching that corner, bend, rise, dip, traffic island, or intersection unless the stopping, standing, or parking is authorised by signs or markings maintained by the road controlling authority.

11. A bus stop outside 195 Muritai Road has been identified for relocation as the current location under the two trees is no longer suitable without extensive trimming or removing of the trees. Moving the stop into the carriageway at an intersection is not suitable. It is proposed to move this bus stop to outside 193 Muritai Road as shown on Appendix 2.

Options

12. The options for Muritai Road are:

a. to leave Muritai Road as it is without a defined carriage way and accept the current level of service for road safety and vehicle clearance;

b. install the realigned centreline, edge lines and No Stopping At All Times restrictions to improve the road safety and accessibility level of service; or

c. an alternative solution.

13. Officers recommend option b. for Muritai Road as it will improve the current level of service for road safety and vehicle clearance. As shown in Appendix 1.

14. The options for the bus stop outside 195 Muritai Road are:

a. relocate the bus stop from outside 195 to outside 193;
Extensive trimming or removal of the trees to retain the bus stop location;

b. remove the bus stop; or

c. propose an alternative location for the bus stop.

15. Officers recommend option a. for the bus stop outside 195 Muritai Road as it will improve clearance, safety and accessibility as shown in Appendix 2.

Consultation

16. While this report seeks to more appropriately define the existing roadway and meet compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 by installing associated road markings, there has been no direct consultation. However feedback from the community has been invited via an online link.

17. The Eastbourne Community Board has been kept up-to-date on the proposal and there has been a web page and feedback form created. This will be distributed through the Eastbourne Community Network. The feedback will then be presented to the Eastbourne Community board for their consideration.

18. The Eastbourne Community Board will consider the recommendation at its meeting on 25 June 2019 and the resolution will be tabled at the Traffic Subcommittee meeting on 1 July 2019.

19. Where there was a bus stop that needed to be relocated, direct consultation was carried out with these residents.

a. Consultation documents were delivered to six directly affected properties.

b. Two questionnaires were returned, one in favour of the proposal, and one against.

Legal Considerations

20. These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

21. These changes can be funded from Council’s 2019/2020 road markings and infrastructure budget.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	G127.2018 Double Decker Eastbourne Infrastructure	22
2 ⇩	G127.2018 195 Muritai Rd Bus Stop	23

Author: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: John Gloag

Divisional Manager, Transport

26 25 June 2019

Eastbourne Community Board

04 June 2019

File: (19/734)

Report no: ECB2019/3/7

Committee Advisor's Report

1. Purpose of Report

The primary purpose of the report is to update the Board on items of interest.

Recommendation

That the Board receives the report.

2. Heritage Policy Review

The Heritage Policy Review is ongoing. Engagement took place earlier in the year to assist with drafting the policy, and there will be an opportunity later in the year to provide further input.

3. Council’s Current Consultations

Please see below a list of current proposals Council is consulting on. These can be viewed on Council’s website http://www.huttcity.govt.nz/haveyoursay

Consulting on	Closing date
Double Decker Buses in Eastbourne	21 June 2019
Proposed Alcohol Fees Bylaw	28 June 2019

4. Proposed District Plan Change 43 – Proposed Residential and Suburban Mixed use

A public hearing of submissions for Plan Change 43 will take place later this year. The purpose of the proposed plan change is to provide for greater housing capacity and a wider range of options for housing styles and sizes at medium densities within the existing urban area.

More information and updates are available on Council’s website: http://www.huttcity.govt.nz/pc43

5. 2018/19 Administration and Training Budget

The Board’s Miscellaneous Administration budget for the 2018/19 financial year is $5,000.00. Expenditure to date is $3,563.62

The Board’s training budget for the 2018/19 financial year is $3,000.00. Expenditure to date is $1,552.91

A breakdown of expenditure is attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Eastbourne Community Board expenditure to June 2019	28

Author: Judy Randall

Committee Advisor

Approved By: Donna Male

Acting Divisional Manager, Democratic Services

30 25 June 2019

Eastbourne Community Board

17 June 2019

File: (19/774)

Report no: ECB2019/3/119

Notice of Motion - Ms V Horrocks Declaration of a climate emergency

Purpose of Report

1. To consider a Notice of Motion received from Ms Virginia Horrocks, Chair of the Eastbourne Community Board.

Recommendations

That the Board:

(i) declares a climate emergency in recognition of the urgent need to protect the future of today’s community and those who will follow;

(ii) asks that Council joins other local authorities in declaring a climate emergency; and

(iii) asks that Council makes climate change an integral part of planning and decision making, including specific goals and objectives that are regularly audited.

Background

2. The Acting Chief Executive has received a Notice of Motion from Ms Horrocks within the timeframe specified in Standing Orders.

3. This Notice of Motion is for inclusion on the agenda for the Eastbourne Community Board meeting to be held on 26 June 2019. Ms Horrocks proposes to move the following motion:

That the Board:

(i) declares a climate emergency in recognition of the urgent need to protect the future of today’s community and those who will follow;

(ii) asks that Council joins other local authorities in declaring a climate emergency; and

(iii) asks that Council makes climate change an integral part of planning and decision making, including specific goals and objectives that are regularly audited.

4. Ms Horrocks’ signed Notice of Motion and supporting information is attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Chair's motion and rationale - declaration climate change emergency	31

Author: Judy Randall

Committee Advisor

Reviewed By: Bradley Cato

General Counsel

Approved By: Matt Reid

Acting Chief Executive/General Manager City and Community Services

32 25 June 2019

Eastbourne Community Board

20 June 2019

File: (19/827)

Report no: ECB2019/3/126

Tree Maintenance at HW Shortt Park

Purpose of Report

1. To provide information on a request by a resident to cut back a stand of trees in HW Shortt Park and to propose a way forward consistent with Council policy.

Recommendations

That the Board:

(i) considers the options as outlined in paragraph 16; and

(ii) endorses the officer’s recommendation to proceed with option B, partial removal of trees as outlined in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reasons outlined in the report.

Background

2. Officers received a request from the owner of 28 Maire Street, Eastbourne (the resident) seeking to have the pohutukawa trees located along the southern edge of HW Shortt Park cut back and trimmed (in height and shape) to form a hedge. The reason for the request is to allow more winter sun, and sun generally, into the property.

3. Officers have received a similar request from the resident dating back many years. Approximately four pohutukawa trees were removed some 5-10 years ago due to the poor form and location of the trees - the trees straddled private and reserve land. At the same time, maintenance consistent with Council’s Tree Maintenance Policy, which has now been superseded by the Operational Guide to the Urban Forest Strategy, was undertaken on the remaining trees.

4. While Council does not generally remove or reshape trees for sun and views, the removal in this case was undertaken as the trees were of poor form, and to allow the remaining healthy trees to grow true to form.

5. The trees in HW Shortt Park are maintained (as required) on an annual basis. This usually involves the pruning of low hanging (obstructing) branches, removal of deadwood, clearance from power lines, removal of any overweight branches that are deemed to be structurally unsound, and removal of branches that are unhealthy or create a potential safety issue. Maintenance is undertaken to ensure the tree maintains its natural form and is healthy and safe. Tree pruning can also be considered to improve light where appropriate. The trees along the southern border are considered to be of good quality.

6. The resident has explained that the trees prior to Council amalgamation in 1989 were maintained as a hedge or topped. Officers can find no information to support this notion and as detailed in the report, topping of trees is internationally recognised as poor practice in the arboriculture industry.

7. In lodging this request, the resident is asking Council to moderate its application of current policy, change its maintenance practices, and indeed change established and accepted arboriculture industry practice, by seeking to have the line of trees re-shaped, or removed.

Discussion

8. There are currently 11 established pohutukawa trees along the southern edge boundary of the Park (see Appendix 1) ranging in age upwards from 30 years old. The trees are set back from the residential boundaries by a distance of approximately 5m. The tree canopy has not as yet broken the vertical boundary lines.

9. Officers have been discussing the issues with the resident and proposed a maintenance option in an effort to resolve the resident’s issues. Council’s latest proposal is to remove four trees from the stand and undertake canopy thinning to improve light filtering on the remaining trees. This approach is consistent with Council’s current policy.

10. Of the four trees identified for removal, three are smaller in form and currently suppressed by larger more established trees. The smaller trees are unlikely to grow into quality specimens. The removal of these will encourage growth to the remaining larger specimens. The fourth tree identified for removal has been V-pruned, with significant branch growth leaning toward one residential property. Removal of this tree will improve sight lines and outlook for the resident of 114 Oroua Street. If the V-pruned tree is retained, further branch removal will be necessary to reduce risk of failure in the future.

11. Council’s arborist has provided advice on the effect of trimming back and re-shaping the trees to form a hedge. While the trees will survive a reshape, it is likely that the pohutukawa trees will be of poor form, detract from the amenity value that the trees afford to the Park, and affect Council’s reputation. The trees provide a natural setting and a unique identity to the Park.

12. Topping of trees is internationally recognised as poor practice in the arboriculture industry. To do so creates a dense tree that is not a natural form and creates an on-going more intense maintenance regime. If trees are to be grown as a hedge they should be trained at the time of planting as such and maintained accordingly.

13. The trees provide a functional purpose, in that neighbouring residential properties are screened from balls being hit or kicked and entering the neighbouring properties.

14. Council’s Urban Forest Plan outlines the significance, purpose and value of trees in an urban setting (among other things), as well as providing a guide as to management and maintenance. The Urban Forest Plan identifies the importance of preserving good quality trees for ecological connectivity reasons.

15. Council also employs the Urban Forest Plan – Operational Guide. This is a policy document at a lower level to the Urban Forest Plan and is drafted in a form applicable mainly to trees in the streetscape or street reserve. The principles of this Plan are applicable to the sports park setting and have been applied accordingly.

Options

16. The Board can decide to:

a. Do nothing – this is not an option supported by officers. Officers accept some tree removal is preferred, as explained above.

b. Removal in part (as proposed) – this is the preferred option, as it thins the stand and provides a better space for the remaining trees to flourish. Further maintenance is also proposed on the remaining trees to reduce canopy density and improve filtered sun light. This approach is consistent with current policy, will provide some benefit to the resident while retaining the trees as a feature of the Park and a screen for the properties at this end of the Park.

c. Removal of trees directly impacting the resident and possible replacement with hedge plantings – this option is not supported by officers as it removes a natural ecological feature of the Park. A deviation from policy of this scale is likely to require a Council resolution due to precedence and the potential implications across the City.

Consultation

17. Depending on the outcome of this report, the resident at 114 Oroua Street will need to be informed of the work to be completed.

Legal Considerations

18. The resident is entitled to seek redress through the Courts pursuant to the Property Law Act 2017, should the outcome of this process be unacceptable.

Financial Considerations

19. Any work undertaken on the trees will be completed under operational maintenance costs.

Other Considerations

20. A similar situation existed between Council reserve land and Tui Road in Days Bay where a line of smaller low quality pohutukawa trees partially obscured views of some of the residents. These trees have been topped gradually over time, it is assumed by one or more of the residents, to the point where the remaining stems of the trees will need to be removed completely. Council has not been able to identify the resident(s) responsible (see Appendix 2).

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Tree maintenance HW Shortt Park	36
2 ⇩	Topped trees in Williams Park	38

Author: Aaron Marsh

Team Leader Parks

Approved By: Marcus Sherwood

Divisional Manager, Parks and Recreation

Attachment 1

Board Conference Report June 2019

Report re Community Board Conference 2019

Conference Theme was Community Boards in a Time of Change

1. The first keynote speaker was Darren Pratley on Looking Forward, Encouraging Youth and Talent. He stressed that the world around us is constantly changing faster than ever before – in our families, communities and environments and this all demands greater leadership than ever before. The ‘customer’ of today is changing dramatically. They have less time, they have more information at their finger tips, they are less engaged and they have an opinion they are willing to share. Because of this it is important to consider how we work, consult and engage to develop trust (through credibility and reliability etc).

He said that we must engage young people and re engage our aging talent and that millennials know everything when they could usefully stop and listen and ask for mentorship - so try and create access for them for training and development. In general create access, futuristic thinking and bold leadership.

2. Next up were Puna Wano-Bryant and Wharehoka Wano (both Te Atiawa, Taranaki and Ngati Awa) and Iwi Environmental Manager and CEO respectively of Te Kahui or Taranaki Iwi. They used their own experiences of needing to engage and bring their people with them in e.g. the design of their logo – which was finalised on the 500^th iteration - to stress the importance of engagement. They also stressed that the development of trust through connection and a values based approach is key.

3. Sean Zeiltjes, Project Manager of Taranaki Mounga Project gave a great insight into how a Charitable Company, set up for a life of 10 years, can work. The project area is 34,000ha of alpine, forest and coastal environment and the aim is to eradicate predators and weeds, restore species and revitalise the whole ecology. He described his role as one of knitting together interested groups such as community boards and people, and the project as a perfect storm of ecology, iwi, hapu and community.

4. Malcolm Alexander, CEO of LGNZ, spoke on the Localism Project which is about local government calling for a shift in the way public decisions are made in New Zealand

"Riding the localism wave: Putting communities in charge" is the mantra and it’s about communities and empowering them to take charge of their social, economic, environmental and culture well-being through a much more local approach to decision making. This is a global concept and Switzerland is quoted as being at one end of the spectrum with only 13% of public exenditure being made by central government and New Zealand at the opposite end with central government’s share of public expenditure at 88%.

5. Shay Wright, a Ngati Hine social entrepreneur, spoke about setting the foundations for community development. He talked about how social impact should be part of a social licence for businesses to operate and how we need to hold corporations to the expectations of our communities (and our planet) alongside their profits. He also shared about what he saw as the trends of an aging and browning population and the need to inspire the next generation of leaders plus the need to buy from community enterprises, locally owned businesses, and Maori enterprises and to see each of these as long term allies for community resilience.

He urged community boards to advocate for rules and policies that stimulate local and social enterprises that operate with morality about the planet and climate change and to:

· Treat them as allies

· Support their funding applications

· Support social procurement – get outcomes built in that matter to the community

· Support those who build in employment and training of young people

A key question is how to develop our next generation of community leadership? He suggested working with likely people on the difference between governance and management and teaching them about the history of local government and possible avenues for change.

6. Shay Wright and Sarah Colcord also jointly ran a workshop on how to activate, develop and empower your local youth voice

With everyone seated around very large circular tables people couldn’t hear each other, and sub groups formed and it was obvious that some people tuned out. Key points were about the importance of offering first aid courses and drivers licence training e.g. to young people. Enviro schools were given a plug. The idea of an overarching Youth Voice Group was appealing – as there are ‘heaps’ of church youth groups etc and working together means more can be achieved on making submissions e.g. and a youth voice group could be a platform for all youth networks. Waimakariri was a working example. A question asked was who picks the youth on youth councils? A lot of the youth involvement talked about involved projects with associated funding. Young people can be innovative, futuristic, creative, energetic, and know no boundaries in thinking – all worth encouraging and enabling.

7. The final two keynote speakers were Natalie Jackson and Noa Woollof speaking about the implications of our ageing population and engaging the next generation respectively.

Natalie shared about how NZ in 2018 became an affiliate of the WHO Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities and the importance of local bodies using the related resources to prepare for the increasing ageing population.

8. Overall, the theme and the enactment of it at this conference provided a lot of thought and pointers for the future for any community board members such as:

· Community Boards must start planning/advocating urgently for the effects of climate change

· Community Boards must reach out to Maori

· Community Boards must reach out to younger people

· Community Boards must use new technology but be wary of the side effects

And it was great to be there together: Murray Gibbons (ECB), Pam Hanna and Cr Tui Lewis (PCB) and Sisi Tuala-Le'afa (WCB).

[1] This excludes sites that are considered high profile, significant on a city-wide basis due to their size and location, or where the site crosses ward or community boundaries.

[2] The Operational Guide for Urban Forest Plan is available from Council’s Parks and Gardens Division.

Virginia Horrocks (Chair)	Murray Gibbons
Robert Ashe	Liz Knight
Anna Sutherland (Deputy Chair)
Cr Tui Lewis	Cr Michael Lulich