1                                        10 December 2019

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Minutes of an ordinary meeting of the Hutt City Council held in the Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt on

 Tuesday 10 December 2019 commencing at 2.03pm

 

 

 

PRESENT:

Mayor C Barry (Chair)

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

 

Cr D Bassett

Cr J Briggs

 

Cr K Brown

Cr B Dyer

 

Cr S Edwards

Cr D Hislop

 

Cr C Milne

Cr A Mitchell

 

Cr S Rasheed

Cr N Shaw

 

Cr L Sutton

 

 

APOLOGIES:                  There were no apologies.

 

IN ATTENDANCE:       Ms J Miller, Chief Executive

Mr L Allott, Chief Information Officer

Ms A Blackshaw, Acting General Manager, City and Community Services

Ms J Livschitz, Chief Financial Officer

Mr G Craig, Divisional Manager, City Growth (part meeting)

Mr B Hodgins, Strategic Advisor, City and Community Services (part meeting)

Mr M Mercer, Divisional Manager, Community Hubs (part meeting)

Mr J Scherzer, Manager Sustainability and Resilience (part meeting)

Mr M Sherwood, Divisional Manager, Parks and Recreation

Mr H Wesney, Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy (part meeting)

Mr G Carson, Traffic Asset Manager (part meeting)

Mr C Agate, Traffic Engineer – Network Operations (part meeting)

Mr D Dews, Contracts Solid Waste (part meeting)

Mr N Geard, Environmental Policy Analyst  (part meeting)

Mr S Keatley, Strategic Assets & Project Manager (part meeting)

Mr D Grocott, Commercial Events Developer (part meeting)

Ms J Randall, Programme Lead - Planning and Reporting (part meeting)

Ms C Allen, Neighbourhood Precinct Place Maker (part meeting)

Ms C Ellis, Senior Communications Advisor – Media  (part meeting)

Ms K Stannard, Divisional Manager Democratic Services  (part meeting)

Ms J Stevens, Contractor  (part meeting)

Ms D Male, Committee Advisor

Ms H Clegg, Minute Taker

 

 

PUBLIC BUSINESS

 

 

1.       OPENING FORMALITIES - Karakia Timatanga 

Kia hora te marino

Kia whakapapa pounamu te moana

He huarahi mā tātou i te rangi nei

Aroha atu, aroha mai

Tātou i a tātou katoa

Hui e Tāiki e!

May peace be wide spread

May the sea be like greenstone

A pathway for us all this day

Let us show respect for each other

For one another

Bind us together!

 

2.       APOLOGIES 

 There were no apologies.

3.       PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate.

Public comment was adjourned at 3.47pm.

Public comment resumed at 5.33pm for comment on item 21 relating to Report back on the Voice of the Community on options for Naenae Pool and the vision for the town centre.

Public comment was completed at 6.19pm.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Briggs)                                       Minute No. C 191(2)01(a)(3)

“That the time period for public comment be extended to allow for all public comment speakers to be heard.”

 

 

4.

Mayoral Statement (19/1372)

Mayor Barry delivered his Mayoral Statement. He asked that members note the amendment to add Glenda Barratt to the Acknowledgement of past elected members section.

The amended Mayoral Statement is attached at page 40 of the minutes.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                    Minute No. C 191(2)01(3)

“That the Mayoral Statement be adopted.”

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Edwards)                                   Minute No. C 191(2)02(3)

“That Council:

(i)       confirms its support for Central Government funding of the Melling Interchange; and

(ii)     supports the Mayor’s approach of formally putting a case forward for the Melling Interchange to be included in the Government’s recently signalled spend on infrastructure.”

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Dyer)                                          Minute No. C 191(2)03(3)

“That Council passes on its thoughts and prayers to the communities and those involved in the White Island tragedy.”

5.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS

          Cr Sutton noted that all members had a conflict for item 10 relating to Elected Member Remuneration and Reimbursement of Expenses.

          Cr Milne declared an interest in Hutt Valley Tennis for item 18 relating to Annual Plan 2020/2021 and Long Term Plan Amendment - Financial Aspects.

          Cr Dyer declared a conflict of interest in Highlight Festival for item 18 relating to Annual Plan 2020/2021 and Long Term Plan Amendment - Financial Aspects.

6.

Amendment to Hutt City Council's Standing Orders (19/1379)

Memorandum dated 28 November 2019 by the Contractor

 

The Contractor elaborated on the memorandum.

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manager, Democratic Services advised that there was sufficent resources to undertake the proposed amendements to Standing Orders.

The Chief Executive advised that it was proposed to change the annual meeting schedule to eight week meeting cycles.  She believed the proposed new system would operate smoothly. 

In response to questions from members, the Divisional Manager, Democratic Services confirmed that Community Boards would be included in the Standing Orders amendments. She agreed that the list of public comment speakers, would be displayed at the start of each meeting.  

In response to a question from a member, the Contractor advised that Councillors typically received their order papers by the end of a working day. She noted that the order papers were available on Council’s website the following morning.

In response to a question from a member, the Contractor advised that public holiday days were accounted for in advance and order papers would be available a day earlier for members.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Milne)                                        Minute No. C 191(2)04(3)

“That Council adopts the amendments to Standing Orders outlined in sections 8 and 13 of the memorandum.”

 

7.

Committee Structure 2019-2022 (19/1355)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/231 by the Contractor

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr M Shierlaw requested an independent chair be appointed to the Audit and Risk Subcommittee to ensure fully informed decisions were made.  He also requested that a comprehensive review of the Treasury Management Policy be undertaken by the new Subcommittee, to ensure it was fit for purpose.  He agreed to provide officers with the information he had emailed to the Chair prior to the meeting.

The Chair elaborated on the report.  He noted that the structure would be reviewed in 12 months' time. He said the review would investigate the workloads and relationships with the Traffic Subcommittee and the Regulatory Committee.

The Chief Executive advised that treasury management and delegations were the responsibility of the Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee, whilst the Audit and Risk Subcommittee dealt with the governance.  She added that the comments of the public speaker and that his requests would be assessed.

In response to a question from a member, the Chair advised that the appointment of an independent chair for the Audit and Risk Subcommittee was a new undertaking, in response to best practice models around New Zealand.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                    Minute No. C 191(2)05(3)

“That Council:

(i)    notes the committee structure for the 2019-2022 triennium, attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii)   adopts the Terms of Reference, attached as Appendix 2 to the report; and

(iii)  delegates authority to the Mayor and Chief Executive to finalise and undertake minor changes to the Terms of Reference, which will then be circulated to members.”

 

For the reason that the committee structure proposed promotes development of Council’s plans, policies and budgets in a manner that promotes consideration of the social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of the local community in the present and for the future.

 

8.

Membership of Committees of Council (19/1380)

Memorandum dated 28 November 2019 by the Mayor

 

The Chair elaborated on the memorandum. He added he had confidence in all appointed roles and thanked members for their engagement in the process.  He believed there were opportunities for all members to grow and learn in their political roles.

Deputy Mayor Lewis acknowledged the work of the Chair and the clear process undertaken to reach the membership of Committees. 

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Sutton)                                       Minute No. C 191(2)06(3)

“That Council:

(i)    notes and receives the memorandum; and

(ii)   notes the appointments of the Chairs, Deputy Chairs and members of the committees and subcommittees of Council for the 2019-2022 triennium as follows:

Regulatory Committee: Cr Hislop (Chair), Cr Mitchell (Deputy Chair),Cr Brown, Cr Briggs, Cr Dyer, Cr Edwards, Cr Rasheed, Cr Shaw, Cr Sutton and Mayor Barry (ex-officio);

Community and Environment Committee: Deputy Mayor Lewis (Chair), Cr Briggs (Deputy Chair), all Councillors and Mayor Barry (ex-officio);

Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee: Cr Edwards (Chair), Cr Brown (Deputy Chair) , all Councillors and Mayor Barry (ex-officio);

Long Term Plan/Annual Plan Subcommittee: Mayor Barry (Chair), Deputy Mayor Lewis (Deputy Chair) and all Councillors;

Traffic Subcommittee: Cr Sutton (Chair), Cr Dyer (Deputy Chair), Cr Briggs, Cr Brown, Cr Mitchell, Cr Shaw, Cr Hislop (Alternate), Deputy Mayor Lewis (Alternate) and Cr Rasheed (Alternate);

Audit and Risk Subcommittee: Independent Chair, Mayor Barry (Deputy Chair), Cr Bassett, Cr Briggs, Cr Milne, Cr Mitchell and Cr Shaw;

District Licensing Committee: Cr Edwards (Chair), Cr Rasheed (Deputy Chair), list members Cr Rasheed and Cr Brown;

Chief Executive’s Employment Subcommittee: Mayor Barry (Chair), Deputy Mayor Lewis (Deputy Chair), Cr Briggs, Cr Edwards and Cr Hislop; and

Code of Conduct Subcommittee: Mayor Barry (Chair) and three community members.”

 

9.

Appointments to External Committees, Organisations and Advisory Groups (19/1382)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/107 by the Committee Advisor

 

The Chair elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive advised that the terms for the representatives on Council Controlled Organisations would commence on the expiry of the previous membership.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Briggs)                                        Minute No. C 191(2)07(3)

“That Council:

(i)    notes that at the beginning of each triennium Council makes appointments to external committees, organisations and advisory groups;

(ii)   notes that the Mayor is a member of the following by virtue of his office:

(a)  Wellington Regional Amenities Fund Joint Committee; and

(b)  Manaaki Ability Trust;

(iii)  notes at its meeting held on 4 November 2019 it made appointments to the Hutt Valley Services Committee, Hutt Valley Flood Management Subcommittee and the Wellington Regional Waste Minimisation and Management Joint Committee;

(iv)  agrees to alter its resolution relating to Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/221 and parts (v), (viii) and (xi) of Minute No. C 19105(2) attached as Appendix 1 to the report to read as follows:

(a)      Hutt Valley Services Committee: Cr J Briggs (Chair), Cr B Dyer, Cr S Rasheed and Cr N Shaw, alternate Cr L Sutton;

(b)      Hutt Valley Flood Management Subcommittee: Deputy Mayor T Lewis and Cr S Edwards; and

(c)       Wellington Regional Waste Minimisation and Management Joint Committee: Cr A Mitchell and alternate Cr S Edwards;

(v)   notes the reasons for the alterations to the resolution are that:

(a)      for part (iv)(a) to make a change to representatives to allow another interested Councillor a position on the joint committee and allow the previous representative to focus on another joint committee;

(b)      for part (iv)(b) Greater Wellington Regional Council has asked Council to reduce its appointments to two representatives and confirmed that no alternate member is required; and

(c)       for part (iv)(c) to make a change to the representatives in line with the Keep Hutt City Beautiful Executive Committee representative;

(vi)  agrees appointments to the external committees, organisations and advisory groups, as follows:

(a)    Wellington Water Committee: Cr Bassett and Deputy Mayor Lewis (Alternate);

(b)    National Emergency Management Agency (Wellington Region): Mayor Barry and Deputy Mayor Lewis (Alternate);

(c)    Wellington Regional Amenities Fund Joint Committee: Mayor Barry and Cr Shaw (Alternate);

(d)   Hutt Minoh House Friendship Trust: Cr Mitchell;

(e)    Keep Hutt City Beautiful Executive Committee: Cr Mitchell;

(f)     Lender of the Last Resort Trust Board: Cr Sutton;

(g)   Petone 2040 Group: Deputy Mayor Lewis and Cr Dyer (Alternate);

(h)   Cycleways Project Group: Cr Brown;

(i)     Safe Hutt Valley Governance Group: Mayor Barry, Cr Dyer and Cr Rasheed;

(j)     Property Working Group for Advancing Strategic Projects: Mayor Barry (Chair), Deputy Mayor Lewis, Cr Hislop and Cr Edwards; and

(k)    Epuni Care and Protection Facility: Cr Briggs and Cr Rasheed; and

(vii) agrees appointments to the Council Controlled Organisation as follows:

(a)      Hutt City Community Facilities Trust: Cr Shaw

(b)      Seaview Marina Limited: Cr Milne; and

(c)       Urban Plus Limited: Cr Brown.”

 

10.

Elected Member Remuneration and Reimbursement of Expenses (19/1377)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/233 by the Contractor

 

The Chair advised that the remuneration levels by the Remuneration Authority and it was Council’s responsibility to allocate the full pool. 

In response to a question from a member, the Chair confirmed that remuneration for Council appointments on the Council Controlled Organisations did not come from the pool.

The Chair advised that the appointment of an independent Chair to the Audit and Risk Subcommittee would require additional funding.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Dyer)                                          Minute No. C 191(2)08(3)

“That Council:

(i)    approves the distribution of the remuneration pool as follows, for submission to the Remuneration Authority:

(a) Councillor salary - $60,519 per annum;

(b) Deputy Mayor/Chair of Standing Committee – additional $40,000 per annum;

(c) Chair of Standing Committee – additional $20,000 per annum;

(d) Chair of Traffic Subcommittee - additional $7,000 per annum;

(e) Chair of Hutt Valley Services Committee – additional $7,000 per annum; and

(f) Wellington Water Committee member – additional  $7,000 per annum;

(ii)   approves annual remuneration of up to $20,000 for the Independent Chairperson of the Audit and Risk Subcommittee, and delegates authority to the Mayor and Chief Executive to determine the final figure based on the skills and experience of the preferred candidate; and

(iii) adopts the Elected Members’ Expenses Policy attached as Appendix 1 of the report.”  

 

11.

Schedule of Meetings for 2020 (19/1374)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/232 by the Committee Advisor

 

The Chair highlighted that the Community and Environment Committee in meeting cycle 2 had been moved to Wednesday, 4 March 2020.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Dyer)                                          Minute No. C 191(2)09(3)

“That Council:

(i)    adopts the schedule of meetings for 2020 attached as Appendix 1 to the report, with an amendment to the Cycle 2 meeting of the Community and Environment Committee date to meet on Wednesday 4 March 2020, and subject to approval by the Community Boards in respect of its own meeting dates;

(ii)   agrees that the venue for the meetings of Council, its committees and subcommittees, other than Community Boards, be the Hutt City Council Chambers, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt;

(iii)  agrees to a commencement time of 2.00pm for Council, standing committee and subcommittee meetings; and

(iv)  delegates authority to the Chief Executive in consultation with the Mayor or Subcommittee/Committee Chair to alter the date, time or venue of a meeting, or cancel a meeting, should circumstances require this.”

For the reason that the Local Government Act 2002 requires that a local authority must hold meetings that are necessary for the good government of its district.

 

12.

Proposed New Street Name: Subdivision of 38 Manor Park Road, Lower Hutt (19/603)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/234 by the Contracts Officer

 

The Traffic Asset Manager elaborated on the report. He advised paragraph 5 contained in the officer’s report should read “- after a client’s great, great grandmother”.

Cr Milne left the meeting at 4.18pm.

In response to a request from a member, the Chair confirmed that the Reserved Street Name List could be added to. He also confirmed that names not used could be added to the list to ensure they were not lost for future consideration.

Cr Briggs requested the background stories to all street names be made publicly available, to prevent the pieces of history being lost.  The Chief Executive advised it would be appropriate to have the back stories available after a final decision by Council had been made on each street name.

Cr Hislop noted that an informative booklet on the history of many Lower Hutt street names had already been published. 

Cr Milne rejoined to the meeting at 4.21pm.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Sutton)                                       Minute No. C 191(2)10(3)

“That Council approves the name for the new public road off 38 Manor Park Road, Manor Park, Lower Hutt, attached as Appendix 1 to the report, as Martha Turnell Crescent.”

For the reason that the development may proceed to completion as a variety of utility connections and other administrative bodies require individual street addresses in order for the necessary connections to be provided.

 

Resolved:  (Cr Dyer/Mayor Barry)                                          Minute No. C 191(2)11(3)

“That Council:

(i) asks that officers review the Reserved Street Names List;

(ii) asks that officers publicise the background of new street names when the decision is made by Elected Members; and

(iii) asks that officers review publicising the background of existing street names.”

 

13.

Proposed New Street Name: Subdivision of 79 Copeland Street, Lower Hutt (19/1368)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/235 by the Contracts Officer

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr J Deal expressed support for the name Ron Deal Way. He gave a brief history of his late father’s local authority achievements, adding that the family would be honoured to have a street named after him.

The Traffic Asset Manager elaborated on the report.

Cr Bassett expressed support for the name Ron Deal Way.  He advised that Mr Deal had taken a leading interest in supporting all local authorities and had a special interest in young people making a career in local government. 

Cr Dyer advised Mr Deal’s name had previously been suggested for a new street in Petone.  He expressed support for the name.

 

Resolved:  (Cr Bassett/Cr Sutton)                                            Minute No. C 191(2)12(3)

“That Council approves the name of the new private road off 79 Copeland Street, Lower Hutt, as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report, as Ron Deal Way.”

For the reason that the development may proceed to completion as a variety of utility connections and other administrative bodies require individual street addresses in order for the necessary connections to be provided.

 

14.

Huia Street - Proposed Temporary Road Closure: Sanitarium Weet-Bix Kids TRYathlon - March 2020 (19/1370)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/236 by the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

 

The Traffic Engineer - Network Operations elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations confirmed there were no objections received to the proposed closure.

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations advised that the event was supported by Council’s Events Team and was part of a nationwide event series.  He said that participant numbers varied each year and that last year’s event attracted approximately 4,000 entrants.  He confirmed the event was on the School Sports Association calendar.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Rasheed)                                    Minute No. C 191(2)13(3)

“That Council:

(i)    notes and receives the report;

(ii)   notes that recommendations in this report should not be amended without first carrying out further consultation with affected parties and verification from Council’s Traffic Engineer that the amendment is not likely to cause unreasonable impact on traffic;

(iii)  approves the proposed Temporary Road Closure (to vehicles) set down for Thursday, 12 March 2020 from 7:00am to 6:00pm, for the Sanitarium Weet-Bix TRYathlon Event, as shown attached as Appendix 2 to the report, as follows:

(a)   Huia Street (between Laings Road and Myrtle Street); and

(b)   Huia Place (length of);

(iv)  agrees to temporarily rescind all existing parking restrictions and impose ‘No Stopping – except for Authorised Vehicles’ on Thursday, 12 March 2020 from 7:00am to 6:00pm, as shown attached as Appendix 2 to the report, as follows:

(a)   Huia Street (both sides of the road, from Laings Road to Myrtle Street); and

(b)   Huia Place (length of);

(v)   agrees making this event subject to:

(a)   the conditions listed in the Proposed Temporary Road Closure Impact Report, attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(b)   receiving the results of consultation by Friday, 14 February 2020; and

(c)   the transport division receiving a compliant temporary traffic management plan from a registered contractor thirty (30) days prior to the event.”

For the reason that the proposed road closures are necessary to ensure participant and public safety during the event.

 

15.

Bellevue Road - Proposed Temporary Road Closure: Six60 'Saturdays' Concert - January 2020 (19/1371)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/237 by the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

 

The Traffic Engineer - Network Operations elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Commercial Events Developer advised that people would enter the event in staggered times. He highlighted that additional traffic management personnel were available to control the pedestrian crossings on Bellevue Road and Penrose Street.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                    Minute No. C 191(2)14(3)

“That Council:

(i)    notes and receives the information;

(ii)   notes that recommendations in this report should not be amended without first carrying out further consultation with affected parties and verification from Council’s Traffic Engineer that the amendment is not likely to cause unreasonable impact on traffic;

(iii)  approves the proposed Temporary Road Closure (to vehicles and cycles) set down for Saturday, 25 January 2020 from 10:00pm to 11:59pm, for the Six60 'Saturdays' Concert, as shown attached as Appendix 2 to the report, as follows:

(a)   Bellevue Road (between Woburn Road and Hautana Square);

(iv)  agrees to temporarily rescind all existing parking restrictions, and impose ‘No Stopping ‘ on Saturday, 25 January 2020 from 6:00pm to 11:59pm, as shown attached as Appendix 2 to the report, as follows:

(a)   Bellevue Road (both sides of the road between Woburn Road and Hautana Square);

(b)   Ludlam Crescent – Slip Lane (both sides of the road between Bellevue Road and Penrose Street);

(v)   agrees making the event subject to:

(a)   the conditions listed in the Proposed Temporary Road Closure Impact Report, attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(b)   receiving the results of the consultation by Tuesday, 24 December 2019; and

(c)   the transport division receiving a compliant temporary traffic management plan from a registered contractor thirty (30) days prior to the event.”

For the reason that the proposed road closure is necessary to ensure public safety for patrons leaving the event after the concert.

The meeting was adjourned at 4.31pm and resumed at 4.39pm.

16.

Private Plan Change Request 53 - Stratton Street, Normandale (19/1358)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/229 by the Environmental Policy Analyst

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr J Beban representing Urban Edge Planning explained the Private Plan Change (PPC) requested the rezoning of three parcels of land from Rural to Rural Residential.  He noted that the land was surrounded by this zoning.  He added that a fourth parcel of land was not included in the PPC, as the owners had chosen not to join the proposal.  He further added the main reason for the rezoning was to enable the development potential, which could be between 16 and 24 additional large lots.  He advised that consultation with iwi, Greater Wellington Regional Council and utility providers had uncovered no significant concerns.

Speaking under public comment, Mr P Matchem of Friends of Belmont Regional Park (the Friends) expressed concerns with the documentation forming part of the PPC application.  He added the Friends did not object to the rezoning. They believed there was not adequate weight placed on the adverse effects on the potential loss of amenity values, biodiversity, visual values and water courses.  He added concerns included the amount of earthworks required and incorrect assumptions within the officer’s report.

The Chair advised that many of the concerns could be raised at the resource consent stage.

Cr Brown rejoined the meeting at 4.41pm.

The Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Environmental Policy Analyst advised that a section 32 report had accompanied the PPC application, which had included ecological information.  He added that under the current Lower Hutt District Plan requirements there was no ecological or vegetation protection on privately owned land.  He said that any earthworks proposing to move more than 50m3 of soil or changing the height of the land by more than 1.2m required a resource consent.

In response to a question from a member, the Environmental Policy Analyst advised that there were many variables with a PPC process.  He was uncertain if the Environment Court decision regarding significant natural areas (SNAs) would be received before the PPC process commenced.  He added if the PPC was accepted or adopted by Council, if the process commenced immediately and if no submissions were received, a final decision could be considered at the first Council meeting in 2020.  He further added that if submissions were received, the process would be extended and could take many months.

In reponse to a question from a member, the Environmental Policy Analyst advised that all costs would be borne by the applicant if Council accepted the PPC and that all costs would fall to Council if it adopted the PPC.  He added that if there were no submissions, the costs could be a few thousand dollars, but that if submissions were received, the costs would escalate.

In response to a question from a member, the Environmental Policy Analyst confirmed that officers were aware the fourth property owner was not a party to the PPC.

Cr Mitchell highlighted that some of the land had been identified as a SNA and that with no current protection, it could be cleared now.

In response to a question from a member, the Environmental Policy Analyst advised that officers had not investigated historical zone changes and the effects on the land that these may have had 30 years on.

Cr Milne advised that there had been a lot of opposition to the rezoning and development of the “Cottle” block of land 30 years ago as submitters had believed all biodiversity would be lost.  He added the opposite had occurred and the area was thriving with flora and fauna.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                    Minute No. C 191(2)15(3)

“That Council:

(i)    notes that Urban Edge Planning Ltd on behalf of Judy and Neville Bannister has lodged a private plan change request, attached as Appendix 1 to the report, seeking amendments to the zoning of three properties at Stratton Street, Normandale; and

(ii)   accepts the private plan change request in whole and notifies the request under clause 26 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.”

 

17.

High Level Plan and Approach to 2020-2021 Annual Plan and 2018-2028 Long Term Plan Amendment (19/1356)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/226 by the Divisional Manager, Strategy and Planning

 

The Programme Lead – Planning and Reporting elaborated on the report.

In response to questions from members, the Programme Lead – Planning and Reporting advised that the document would include financial costs of the three items of focus, the Naenae Pool, Waste Management Services review and the Rates Policy review.

In response to questions from members, the Contractor advised that further information regarding each of the focus items would be available on Council’s website.  She noted that a similar tool for public engagement used for the 2019 Annual Plan consultation would be used.

The Chief Executive advised that further engagement concerning the Waste Management Services review would follow from the decisions made at this meeting. 

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive confirmed there were no items being deleted.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Mitchell)                                    Minute No. C 191(2)16(3)

“That Council:

(i)    notes the process and timeframe for the development of the 2020-2021 Annual Plan and the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan (LTP) amendment;

(ii)   agrees to the proposed consultation document topics;

(iii)  notes that a full review of the Long term Plan including community outcomes will be progressed as part of the development of the 2021-2031 Long Term Plan; and

(iv)  notes that the 2021-2031 Long Term Plan will be the first step towards developing a long term City Plan that will form the basis of the Long Term Plan 2024-2034.” 

The meeting was adjourned at 5.03pm and resumed at 5.33pm.

18.

Annual Plan 2020/2021 and Long Term Plan Amendment - Financial Aspects (19/1363)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/227 by the Chief Financial Officer

 

Cr Milne declared an interest in relation to Hutt Valley Tennis and took no part in voting on the matter.

Cr Dyer declared a conflict of interest in relation to the Highlight Festival held in previous years.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr G Baird and Ms B Hood representing Hutt Valley Tennis (HVT) acknowledged the significant financial pressures of Council. Mr Baird stressed that HVT was not a private members club, but a significant sporting hub for the Hutt Valley.  Mr Baird explained that HVT was concerned at the officer recommendation to remove funding and added that to do so would result in HVT closing down.  He noted Council had already agreed to the $500,000 funding request.  He added that there were over 60,000 affiliated tennis members; that five years of work had occurred to get to the current proposal; that Council had initiated the financial situation of HVT by supporting the squash club to move; that credibility issues with contractors were at risk if monies were not forthcoming; that further delays in funding would result in escalating costs; that the club was disappointed not to receive formal notification of the recommendations; that there were no other options to be explored; that HVT was contributing 50% of the cost of the project; that the pavilion work was urgent as it was a public safety issue, akin to the situation at Naenae Pool; and that the procrastination had occurred for long enough.

The Chair advised that no funding decisions would be made at this meeting.

In response to questions from members, Mr Baird agreed that HVT was aware of the caveat put on funding.  He advised that the 60,000 affiliated membership included interclub and tournament players and did not include spectators.  He explained that the squash club had moved to Fraser Park Sportsville and that the portion of the tennis pavilion which was most at risk from earthquakes was the squash courts. 

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr T Purchas representing HVT explained he was involved in the Rejuvenation of Tennis project, with a goal to make tennis more affordable and accessible to all.  He advised that much of his work with youth had occurred with pacifica ethnicities and that much hidden tennis talent had been uncovered.  He further explained the development pathways HVT had in place and to develop further, an all weather facility was required to prevent the costly drive into the Wellington Renouf Tennis Centre.  He concluded that the physical activity of tennis had positive effects on the heath and wellbeing of all participants. 

In response to a question from a member, Mr Purchas confirmed the Mitchell Park facility was fully used most days of the week.  He noted that non-members could also access the courts on a hire basis.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Baird advised that squash would not return to the centre and that HVT proposed to remove two of the five squash courts, leaving three for casual players.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Baird explained HVT had not reapproached officers as it had been assured no funds would be released.  He added that architectural plans had already been drawn and engagement with the grants community had already occurred.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Baird explained the Crown owned the land the squash courts sat and it was leased to Council who sub-let it to HVT.  He added that the building was owned by the Hutt Valley Tennis and Squash Association and that ownership was now problematic, given that the squash club no longer occupied the building.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Baird acknowledged there was no ethnicity information and that approximately youth made up 50% of all members.  Mr Purchas added that the total number of youth playing tennis was significantly more, as many were not paid members of any club.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr J Ryall and Mr N Wilkins representing Living Wage Hutt Valley encouraged Council to become a full Living Wage employer with all contractors paid the Living Wage. Mr Ryall asked that the tendering process for contracts included the Living Wage as a requirement. He advised that Living Wage Hutt Valley would continue to work with Council.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Ryall advised that the minimum wage was set by central government. He added that the Living Wage was set by analysing the cost for a family to have a reasonable standard of living and participate in community activities. He futher added that every five years a commission worked to assess that cost and in the years between the average wage movement through New Zealand statistics were used.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr D Sears and Ms Z Struthers representing Hutt Valley Gymsports and Ms M Russell representing Gymnastics New Zealand requested the proposed $2M for the project remain in the budget.  Mr Sears explained that Hutt Valley Gymsports had achieved all requirements of Council to date and that they catered for 770 full members and 4,300 casual members.  He added that the Incorporated Society also ran free or low cost programmes to areas of high deprivation and had recently conducted a schools festival for Wainuiomata schools.  He further explained the club could not expand further in its current facilities, that its current lease ended in two years time and that it was in active talks with the management of Fraser Park Sportsville.  He further explained that a benefit of moving to Fraser Park was that it would be able to host major competitions. He highlighted that if it could not move there, the club would be forced to hire more expensive, not fit for purpose commercial facilities to continue to operate.

Mr Sears advised that to date the club had raised $50,000, with plans to raise another $200,000 over the next few years.  He concluded that bringing Hutt Valley Gymsports to Fraser Park would strengthen that facility.

The Chair reiterated his earlier comments that no funding decisions were being made at this meeting and that Council would direct officers to undertake further work.

In response to questions from a member, Mr Sears advised that there was currently a waiting list of 65 children and the club had to regularly turn down the ability to host regional competitions due to a lack of facilities.  He added that there was a current Memorandum of Understanding between Hutt Valley Gymsports, Fraser Park and Council and that currently Hutt Valley Gymsports was paying $70,000 in annual rent.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Sears advised the Hutt City Community  Facilities Trust (CFT) would own any new building at Fraser Park.

In response to questions from a member, Ms Struthers advised that Hutt Valley Gymsports would pay approximately $85,000 in annual rent to Fraser Park.

 

Speaking under public comment, Cr K Laban and Mr D Head in relation to Wainuiomata Sportsville advised there was no objection to the removal of funding for the Sportsville, on the provision talks continued with the Sportsville Board to find a way to cater for the many sports clubs in Wainuiomata in the future. 

Cr Laban advised he had been present at the first Wainuiomata Sportsville concept launch 17 years ago, where concerns had been raised then about the state of sports club facilities.  He acknowledged the passage of time and the declining state of the assets along with declining volunteer base in the intervening time.

Mr Head asked for continued collaboration with the Wainuiomata Sportsville Board with a view to securing a positive outcome for all sports in Wainuiomata in the future.

In response to a question from a member, Cr Laban explained the benefits of a multi-sports centre and that such a centre was vital for the continuation of all sports in Wainuiomata.  Mr Head added that a multi-sports centre should have multi-purpose facilities and surfaces.

In response to a question from a member, Cr Laban explained that the Wainuiomata Sportsville was requesting the project not be completely removed from the Long Term Plan and that it be revisited in one to two years time.

In response to a question from a member, Cr Laban acknowledged initial teething problems with the Ricoh Sport Centre and that the modern facility was outstanding.  He said that a sportsville needed to reflect its community.  Mr Head added that there were many sportsville models throughout the country.  He added that the Board had been in talks with the Kilbirnie Sports Hub Board with a view to better understanding how that model operated.  He further added that the model could suit the Wainuiomata community better.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr E Monu, Board Member, Wainuiomata Sportsville Board said the sportsville model previously presented to the Wainuiomata Rugby Club (the Rugby Club) was not viable for the Rugby Club. He added that the club welcomed further discussions concerning different sportsville models.

In response to questions from members, Mr Monu stated the Rugby Club agreed with the comments from Cr Laban and Mr Head. He added that the Rugby Club would like to be involved in all future Wainuiomata sportsville discussions.

 

The Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer elaborated on the report.

Discussion on the matter was adjourned at 6.25pm to consider items 19, 20 and 21 on the order paper.

Discussion on the matter resumed at 8.21pm.

 

The Chair directed the members attention to Table 6: Known budget changes proposed to be included in the draft Annual Plan, on page 204 of the order paper and discussed each item.

Members agreed to Item 1 – Bulk water cost increases from Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC).

Members agreed to Item 2 – Urban Growth Strategy Stimulus Package.

Members agreed to Item 3 - Community facilities – seismic strengthening.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive explained there was no existing seismic assessment information or a seismic register for all Council owned buildings. She highlighted that a full review of all assessment management plans was programmed for this triennium.

Members agreed to Item 4 – District Plan Review.

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy advised that preliminary costings had been based on work to date.  The Chief Executive added that the cost was provisional.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive advised that she had spoken with the Chief Executive of Upper Hutt City Council regarding possible joint works for both cities District Plan reviews. She noted that a report back would be forthcoming.

Members agreed to Item 5 - Insurance increases.

Members agreed to Item 7 - Water Supply and Waste Water.

In response to a question from a member, the Strategic Advisor, City and Community Services advised that Wellington Water Ltd (WWL) was working on a proposal involving additional operational expenditure to employ teams to locate water issues.

In reponse to a question from a member, the Chief Financial Officer advised that the detailed figures for the Uniform Annual Charge had yet to be evaluated. She added that leakage investigations cost approximately $250,000, which would have a direct but very small impact on rates.

 

The Chair directed the members attention to Table 7: Budget matters requiring Council review and decisions, on page 205 of the order paper and discussed each item.

Members agreed to Item 1 - Digital transformation. 

Members agreed to Item 2 - Climate change.

In response to questions from members, the Chief Executive agreed that if no action was taken, the costs in the future would significantly increase.  She advised that officers were in the process of bringing together a Zero Carbon Reduction Plan and more information would be available in February 2020.

Members agreed to Item 3 - Wellington Regional Growth Framework.

The Divisional Manager, City Growth advised the item included the Wellington Regional Investment Plan.  He said that the $50,000 budgeted for the item would most likely increase in the future.

Members agreed to Item 4 - Community engagement - centralised approach.

The Chief Executive advised that there was currently no budget for community engagement and that the item was a direct response to Council’s direction to officers to prioritise this.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive agreed that investment costs in community engagement may decrease in time, as officers became more skilled in this area.  She said that this would result in fewer consultants needing to be contracted.  She added that the goal was to enter into long term partnerships with consultants and to have a transfer of skills to officers.

Members agreed to Item 5 - Melling Interchange and RiverLink.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive advised discussions were ongoing with GWRC and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) to revisit the share of the total budget for the whole project.

The Chief Financial Officer added that property purchases related to land required for local roads.  The Divisinal Manager, City Growth added that properties on the city side of the river had been purchased for local roads integrated with cycleways. 

Members agreed to Item 6 - Cross Valley Transport Connections project.

In response to questions from members, the Chair advised that the project was still alive and was a vital resilience project.  He advised that if monies were not budgeted for projects, then the projects would not occur.  He agreed that the Petone to Grenada project could link with the Cross Valley Connection project.  He added it was not best practice to have certain projects and hypothetical projects included in the budget. 

The Chief Financial Officer added that further information would be available in the first quarter of 2020 for the item. She noted that the budgets needed to reflect the intention of carrying out projects, assuming NZTA funding was in place.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive advised that work was currently progressing on a Wellington Integrated Transport Plan and that details would become available over the next 12 months.

In response to a question from a member, the Chair advised that Council’s contribution would be 50% of the total cost of the project and that currently that amount was between $90M and $140M.

Members agreed to Item 7 Active Transport – Cycleways Project.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive clarified that the Beltway project was designed to bring connections into the central city. She agreed to email members with details about the project.  She added that the proposed changes to the timeframe of the project would not alter work programmes.

The Chair added that NZTA funding of approximately half of the $15M should be forthcoming.  Deputy Mayor Lewis added that NZTA tended to support projects which Councils had committed funding to.

Members agreed to Item 8 - Events and promotions.

Members discussed options which included staging a smaller version of the Highlight Festival or moving it to a different location.  Some members expressed concern that in the years it had been operating, significant cost overruns had occurred and that the amount of these was increasing.  It was noted that no guarantees had been received that future events could operate within budget.  It appeared the Highlight Festival did not generate increased sales and activity in the CBD.  Members agreed that pausing the event for a year whilst a review occurred would be prudent.

In response to questions from members, the Chief Executive advised that security and assurance items appeared to be the highest overspend and that there appeared to be no rigorous oversight to prevent budget blowouts. 

Members agreed to Item 9 - Community Boards and Panels.

Members agreed to Item 10 - Community funding.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Financial Officer confirmed the increase to this budget was $30,000 over 10 years.

Item 11 – Flare at Silverstream landfill

Members noted that due to budgetary pressures in other areas and a lack of technical information or a strong business case.  Members agreed to defer this item for 12 months.

Members asked officers for more detail to be reported to the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan Subcommittee meeting to be held in February 2020.

Item 12 - Wainuiomata Dog Park

Members noted this item was self funding from dog registration fees, with no impact on rates.  The Chief Executive agreed to email members with a programme timeframe.

 

Item 13 – Hutt Valley Tennis (HVT)

The Chair advised that Council had previously committed to a minimum of $500,000.  He added that given the current financial situation, a further $850,000 was unlikely to be available.  He said that officers should be directed to continue talks with HVT on further funding options.  He asked officers to report back in February 2020, when a final decision could be made for items to be included in the Annual Plan.

Cr Bassett explained that HVT was an important tennis centre for the city and that it was struggling with the continual delays to a commitment from Council.  He added that project costs were continually increasing in the current economic climate and that full investment by Council would be advantageous in the long run.  He asked that the full budget cost be included in the Annual Plan consultation, noting that HVT had accepted a hold on funding for all projects until a decision on the Naenae Pool had occurred.  He further noted that HVT had been in talks with officers for several years.

Cr Hislop expressed concern that the financial situation of HVT had directly resulted from decisions of Council.  She considered that Council’s initial $500,000 commitment should be honoured for the regional facility.

Cr Sutton expressed support for committing the full amount requested by HVT.

In response to a question from a member, the Chair advised that a sum of $500,000 for HVT had been agreed by Council and that HVT had then requested an additional $850,000. 

Cr Milne clarified that the $500,000 would ensure the pavilion was earthquake strengthened and that the additional monies were for the covering of several courts to result in an all weather/all year round facility. 

The Chief Executive advised that HVT was aware the commitment of any funding from Council was dependent upon a final decision on the Naenae Pool project.  She added that for other sports developments, Council had acted as a guarantor, with the sports clubs raising significant amounts of monies themselves.  She further added that the requested $1.3M in total was for an unsupported business model.  She advised a more detailed report would be presented to the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan Subcommittee meeting to be held in February 2020.

Deputy Mayor Lewis expressed sympathy for the situation and requested detailed discussions between HVT and officers occur as a matter of urgency.  She added that Council’s model for funding sports clubs required an urgent review, as the current sytem was confusing and flawed.

Cr Edwards expressed sympathy for the situation.  He believed Council had not broken any promises as any funding was always dependent on the funding requirements of the Naenae pool project.  He requested the item remain in the Draft Annual Plan for public consultation to give it one last attempt.

Cr Milne clarified that the $500,000 was to make the pavilion earthquake safe and that the additional monies would enable the covered courts facility to be constructed, which would enable more revenue to be generated to replace the $50,000pa. lost when the squash club relocated. 

Cr Mitchell noted that the current funding system encouraged sports clubs to fight amongst themselves for Council funding.

Cr Shaw noted HVT was effectively a regional facility.

 

Item 16 – Improvement to resource recovery at Silverstream landfill transfer station

Members acknowledged that members of the public were currently charged for attempting to recycle at the landfill.  The Chief Executive agreed an investigation into the situation would occur.

 

Resolved: (Mayor Barry/Cr Brown)                                        Minute No. C 191(2)17(3)

“That Council considers the budget matters as detailed in table 7 and agrees that officers continue with work on items 1 to 10 and item 16 as detailed in table 7 of the officer’s report,in the preparation of the Draft Annual Plan 2020/21.”

 

Item 14 – Hutt Valley Gymsports facility

The Chair advised members that $2M was unlikely to be available and that more investigations into alternatives were required.

Cr Sutton noted that the situation had been occurring for some time, with Hutt Valley Gymsports being a casualty of the abandoned Petone Sportsville.

Cr Shaw questioned Hutt Valley Gymsports’s ability to fundraise any substantial amounts of money.

Deputy Mayor Lewis sympathised with the situation and noted tough decisions were required by Council.

Item 15 – Wainuiomata Sportsville and Wainuiomata Hub

The Chair advised members that he agreed with the officer recommendation to remove $2.7M from the current budget. He highlighted that a budget in 2026 of $2.2M remained while officers continue work with the Wainuiomata Sportsville Board.

Cr Shaw expressed support with the Chair’s comments.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive explained a full review of the Leisure and Wellbeing Strategy and the Long Term Integrated Facilities Plans was required.  She noted that there remained issues concerning overspending and costs at the Ricoh Centre.  She agreed to report back with a work plan.  She further agreed to provide detailed information in the Council Controlled Organisation half yearly report, to improve visibility and transparency for Councillors.

Members expressed frustration at the lack of progress to date, the many instances of fundings being pushed further back and queried why a Sportsville and Hub had been joined together into the one project.  It was noted Wainuiomata was the city’s fastest growing suburb, but that it had recently lost many services and that urgent reinvestment in the commercial area was greatly needed. 

Cr Mitchell supported more community involvement to ascertain a sportsville model which reflected the wishes of the Wainuiomata community.

Deputy Mayor Lewis requested a Waiunuiomata Spatial Plan be developed with full community consultation, to ensure the correct facilities were located in the correct locations.

The Chair advised it was feasible to have a sum included in the Long Term Plan (LTP) to further the Wainuiomata Hub concept, including options and priorities.  He highlighted that the amount would be considerably less than $8M due to budgetary pressures.

Members agreed that a sum of $4M be left in the LTP for the Wainuiomata Sportsville and Hub projects.  The Chief Executive advised that a detailed preliminary study would ascertain priorities and timelines and could be prepared for the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan Subcommittee meeting to be held in February 2020.

Cr Hislop noted some of the current budget items were to tend to deferred maintenance and that the focus should be on all the positive facilities which have been completed.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Dyer)                                          Minute No. C 191(2)18(3)

“That the direction to officers be that the $2.7M be removed from the 2020/21 AP and that the $2.2M be retained and that officers work with the Wainuiomata Sportsville Board and leave the door open for options in the future.”

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Rasheed)                                    Minute No. C 191(2)19(3)

“That Council asks officers to work with Hutt Valley Gymsports, on the basis that an additional $2M was unlikely to be available in the form of a direct grant, given the budget pressures and priorities faced by Council.”

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Mitchell)                                    Minute No. C 191(2)20(3)

“That Council acknowledges the history of the Hutt Valley Tennis (HVT) proposal, and that in part, Mitchell Park Squash leaving for Fraser Park Sportsville has led to this position. Council still supports $500k as originally agreed and directs officers to work with HVT on a solution – on the basis that an additional $805k is unlikely to be available in the form of a direct grant, given the budget pressures and priorities faced by Council.”

Crs Bassett and Sutton voted against the motion.

Cr Milne abstained from voting on the matter.

 

The Chief Financial Officer requested the $300,000 on hold for the Te Whiti Park redevelopment be released and that a memorandum related to the project had been circulated to members that morning.  The Chief Executive added that the sports organisations had committed to funding one third of the project.

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manager, Parks and Recreation advised the Te Whiti Park Changing Rooms were refurbished two years ago and a multi-purpose room was consented, but not constructed.  He added the funds would provide for the room to be built.

Deputy Mayor Lewis left the meeting at 10.00pm.

In response to a question from a member, the Chair advised the project had already had the due dilligence work completed and the community had already raised funds.  He noted that this had resulted in the project being able to be immediately acted on, in response to the community need.  He added that other projects discussed at the meeting had not progressed this far.

Deputy Mayor Lewis rejoined the meeting at 10.02pm.

The Chief Financial Officer asked that the $250,000 for the Ignite Sports project at Bell Park be released to allow for the project to proceed.  She added that a memorandum related to the project had been circulated to members.

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manager, Parks and Recreation advised that Ignite Sports had purchased the former Lower Hutt Football Clubrooms itself and was currently financing the complete $600,000 refurbishment of the building itself through fundraising efforts.  He added that the $250,000 requested was for the development of an all weather hardcourt surface outside the building, on Council land and that the courts would be available for public use when Ignite Sports was not utilising them.  He confirmed the building was also on Council land and was leased from Council.

The Divisional Manager, Parks and Recreation further advised that Ignite Sports had currently raised over $1M itself.  The Chief Executive advised that the Te Whiti Park management had raised a third of its project cost.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Dyer)                                          Minute No. C 191(2)21(3)

“That Council directs officers, to release the amounts which were put on hold in light of the Naenae pool, $300,000 for Te Whiti Park and $250,000 for Ignite Sports for Bell Park to progress the projects.”

Cr Hislop abstained from voting on the matter.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                    Minute No. C 191(2)22(3)

“That Council asks that officers prepare information for Council to consider what budget amount should be considered for the Wainuiomata town centre in light of the Progressive development plan, on the understanding that the amount will be significantly less than $8M.”

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Sutton)                                       Minute No. C 191(2)23(3)

“That Council:

(i)      notes the draft Annual Plan 2020/21 and Long Term Plan (LTP) amendment financial information;

(ii)     notes that a further update on the draft Annual Plan 2020/21 and LTP amendment information will be presented to Council in February 2020 ahead of finalising the consultation material for the formal special consultative procedure;

(iii)    approves the proposed LTP amendment to consider the Naenae pool and fitness redevelopment, as detailed in paragraphs 12 and 13;

(iv)    approves the proposed LTP amendment to consider changes to how waste services are delivered in the city, subject to the outcome of the early engagement process, as detailed in paragraphs 14 to 19;

(v)     approves the proposed LTP amendment to consider changes to rating policy following the three yearly general revaluations of properties, as detailed in paragraphs 20 to 22;

(vi)    approves the proposed base assumptions for Draft Annual Plan 2020/21 annual increase in total rates income as detailed in table 4;

(vii)   approves the proposed base assumptions for operating and capital expenditure for the Draft Annual Plan 2020/21 as detailed in the report;

(viii)  approves the recommended changes to budgets as detailed in table 6 being “known budget changes which are unavoidable“; and

(ix)    notes the legislative requirement to prepare a balanced budget and that this will be a consideration in finalising the overall rates increase for 2020/21.”

The Chair gave precedence to items 21 and then 20 prior to item 19.

The items are recorded in the order in which they were listed on the order paper.

19.

Silverstream Landfill Budget (19/1385)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/238 by the Contracts Solid Waste Manager

 

The Contracts Solid Waste Manager and the Acting General Manager, City and Community Services elaborated on the report.

In response to questions from a member, the Contracts Solid Waste Manager advised that a dangerous health and safety issue existed, with the confusing intersection at the landfill and the surface often turned to mud in winter.  He added that the project needed to also be future proofed.  He confirmed there had been several near miss accidents and the proposed changes would streamline the entrance.

In response to a question from a member, the Contracts Solid Waste Manager advised that substantial road construction was required, including the ability of the surface to sustain trucks with heavy loads.  The Chief Executive advised that it was an identified health and safety risk area and the monies would be brought forward from future projects.  The Acting General Manager City and Community Services added that future projects would not be put in jeopardy if the requested funding was released, as costs savings over five years may be possible in other areas.

In response to a question from a member, the Contracts Solid Waste Manager advised that the landfill had another 40 years of life and the proposal was to make safe a dangerous intersection at the operation.  The Acting General Manager City and Community Services acknowledged the concerns of members, adding that it was anticipated recycling would increase in the future.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Mitchell)                                    Minute No. C 191(2)24(3)

“That Council:

(i)    approves work to make safety improvements to the intersection at the entrance to the general waste and resource recovery area at Silverstream Landfill in this financial year; and

(ii)   agrees that a maximum of $650k is brought forward from the future planned capital expenditure budget over the next five years to fund this.”

The meeting was adjourned at 8.14pm and resumed at 8.21pm.

20.

Waste Review Outcomes and Next Steps (19/1365)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/230 by the Manager, Sustainability and Resilience

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr D Jones expressed concern at the amount of waste going to the Silverstream Landfill, which was a significant contributor to Council’s carbon emissions.  He said that there was a need to extend the life of the landfill to avoid having to create a new one and welcomed the report and proposals for kerbside recycling.  He suggested improvements that could be made.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr F Vickers believed that the officer’s report was missing Council declaring of a climate emergency.  He said that recyclables did affect the environment but did not contribute to global warming.  He added that there were vast quantities of methane produced at the Silverstream Landfill and asked that the decision made included climate change.  He reiterated that methane production was high and emission needed to be reduced.  He asked that the figures be reviewed as it was based on a 10 year old study.  He added that an opt-in green waste bin should be included in the proposal, as diverting as much waste from the landfill would extend the life of the landfill.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr M Hodgson said that the present recycling system was broken and the cost of changing from one system to another would be $2.2M.

The Chair commented that keeping the status quo would be more expensive going forward.

Mr Hodgson said that the $2.2M spread between 46k ratepayers would be a one off cost to each individual ratepayer of $50.  He added that there may be an offset cost and questioned what variable costs would result from the change.  He believed that the current smaller bins were easier to manage by collectors and the proposed larger bins could be difficult to handle and increase costs due to extra time taken by the contractor.  He highlighted his observation in the neighbourhood of recycling blown around by the wind.  He asked that Council encourage the community to address the situation themselves.

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms T While expressed concern that more information was not available for informed decisions to be made.  She highlighted concerns that there was no overarching vision or direction for the city and facilities on catering for waste and recycling in the future.  She wanted more figures and statistics in relation to the proposed recycling changes.  She said there would be a 110% increase in costs for a single person household which made up 24% of households in Lower Hutt and 31% were two person households.  She asked that more information be released.

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms D Dunlop expressed support for becoming more sustainable, with a priority on composting.  She highlighted the benefits of composting for gardens and reducing the amount of methane created by food waste at the landfill.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Dunlop advised that the garden waste collection conducted by an independent contractor did not collect food waste.  She urged Council not to put aside considering composting for a later date.  

Cr Sutton left the meeting at 3.35pm and rejoined the meeting at 3.38pm.

Deputy Mayor Lewis left the meeting at 3.38pm and rejoined the meeting at 3.43pm.

 

Cr Sutton left the meeting at 7.11pm and rejoined the meeting at 7.13pm.

The Manager, Sustainability and Resilience elaborated on the report.

Cr Bassett left the meeting at 7.14pm and rejoined the meeting at 7.15pm.

The Manager, Sustainability and Resilience advised a Miramar Peninsula food composting pilot project was waiting to proceed.  He agreed that significant investment into food composting facilities would be required. 

In response to questions from members, the Manager, Sustainability and Resilience advised that all options were being investigated in relation to bin sizes, collection frequency and repurposing the current recycling crate.

In response to questions from members, the Manager, Sustainability and Resilience advised that it was not possible to quantify an economic figure for the environmental impacts and a full cost benefit analysis was not available at this point.  He added that consultants had liaised with other Councils in relation to its waste and recycling arrangements.

Cr Hislop left the meeting at 7.35pm.

In response to question from a member, the Manager, Sustainability and Resilience advised that an opt-out option was not provided in relation to recycling.  He added that this would be of assistance in situations of properties let to tenants.

Cr Hislop rejoined the meeting at 7.38pm.

In response to questions from members, the Manager, Sustainability and Resilience acknowledged the Waste Minimisation Plan obligations and the possibility of regional solutions and liaising with Kāpiti Coast District Council on the recycling only provision.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive advised that the public consultation document was extensive and the option chosen could not be implemented immediately due to the lead in time with contractors.

In response to a question from a member, the Manager, Sustainability and Resilience advised about options relating to renting bins from the contractor and charging a fee through the rates.  The Chief Executive added that officers would be investigating all options.

The Chair acknowledged it was a complex issue and that the current kerbside collection model was no longer viable.  He added that public consultation was vital.

Cr Sutton left the meeting at 8.01pm and rejoined the meeting at 8.02pm.

Cr Brown thanked officers for the work completed to date.  She expressed support for fortnightly collections and consulting with other local authorities.

The Chair commented on the importance of Council prioritising the environment and the importance of a communication plan relating to options and any changes.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Briggs) UNANIMOUS             Minute No. C 191(2)25(3)

“That Council:

(i)      notes and receives the contents of the report;

Hazardous household waste

(ii)     notes that officers are working on the establishment of a permanent drop off facility at the Silverstream transfer station, to be funded from waste minimisation levy funds. To this end, officers are planning to include such a permanent drop off facility in the upcoming procurement process for an operator for Silverstream landfill in order to confirm cost effectiveness, to be undertaken early in 2020;

Resource recovery for re-usable items

(iii)    notes that officers propose to make improvements to the existing facility at Silverstream transfer station. One-off capital costs are estimated at approximately $326,000, which could be funded from Council’s ring-fenced waste minimisation reserve fund. Whilst this would avoid relying on rates to fund these improvements, Council would still need to assign funds to the relevant capital budget as part of the annual plan process;

(iv)    agrees that officers make an application to the Government’s Waste Minimisation Fund, in order to secure part of the funds to help realise these improvements;

(v)     agrees that the resource recovery improvements be included in the draft Annual Plan capital improvements for 2020/21 of $326,000, to be funded from Council’s waste minimisation levy funds and/or any grant funding received from the Government’s Waste Minimisation Fund;

Kerbside collection services

(vi)    notes that a recommended change to a two-stream recycling service and changes to a rates funded bin service will require investment and an amendment to the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan;

(vii)   agrees that officers engage with the community, as soon as possible and before the commencement of the formal Annual Plan and Long Term Plan amendment consultation process in 2020, regarding their feedback on the potential service changes and additional features, such as offering recycling in schools, and offering an opt-in green waste service;

(viii)  agrees that officers conduct an open competitive procurement process to identify suitable suppliers to deliver the identified service changes, in parallel to community engagement and the Annual Plan (and Long Term Plan amendment) process; and

(ix)    asks that officers approach Upper Hutt City Council formally on exploring a joint service for waste and recycling kerbside collection services.”

 

21.

Report back on the Voice of the Community on options for Naenae Pool and the vision for the town centre (19/1310)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/228 by the Acting General Manager City and Community Services

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr V Tamihere believed tough decisions needed to be made regarding the pool and the community was suffering as a result of the cumulative effects of the loss of the supermarket, banks, community hall and the pool.  He added that it appeared sporting codes across the city were all competing for money, rather than working together.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Tamihere suggested that partnership models between sporting codes and Council could be implemented.

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms T Kells, joint Deputy Chair and Mr L Evison, member, representing the Hutt City Youth Council (the Youth Council) expressed concern that the public consultation conducted thus far for the Naenae Pool may not have been reflective of the entire user population of the pool.  They requested that the Youth Council be used to help ensure the 12-25 years old demographic was included.  They asked for clarification concerning the wording “visit to the site” used in the Consultation Document.

Ms Kells and Mr Evison advised that the Youth Council was opposed to asset sales to fund developments, with a preference for rates increases as a more sustainable and long term solution.  They added that revenue loss could be an unintended consequence of asset sales, which would equate to a loss to the community.  They stated that the Youth Council preferred Options D and F, within the officer’s report, with Option F being more appealing as it had the greatest potential to revive Hillary Court and the community. 

In response to a question from a member, Ms Kells and Mr Evison acknowledged the intergenerational debt that could occur, depending on the final decisions made.

 

Public comment was adjourned at 3.47pm and resumed at 5.33pm.

Speaking under public comment, Mr T Murphy asked Council to consider building apartments above and adjacent to the new pool, as he believed this could help to alleviate the shortage of affordable housing and help revitalise Hillary Court.  He added that a green roof could be incorporated for a community garden space and that a pedestrian way could be created between the pool and Hillary Court.  He urged Council to think outside the box and install stormwater retention tanks and a Maori inspired sculpture.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Murphy acknowledged the apartment concept had not been costed.

Cr Sutton rejoined the meeting at 5.34pm.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr G Hume-Cook representing researchers at Victoria University, advised that the Hub was regarded as the existing town centre and that rejuvenation of the space was important.  He added they endorsed Options D and F, within the officer’s report and stressed that communication of the spatial plan participation process was vital and that the overall process should not focus on just the Naenae Pool replacement.

Mr Hume-Cook requested that the consultation to date be used as a template for future Council consultation exercises.

Cr Bassett rejoined the meeting at 5.38pm.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Hume-Cook believed the redevelopment did not require a theme-park approach.  He added that the new pool and comprehensive modernisation of the unique historic design of the area could become a national or international attraction. 

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr G Rutherford advised of the work undertaken by the original public advisory group concerning updating Hillary Court.  He asked that the ideas suggested be revisited, including Maori welcoming gates.  He also suggested that Council utilise existing vacant shops in Hillary Court adjacent to the existing Naenae Library for the proposed Hub.

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms M Stevens-Goffe asked for a timeline for building works and asked that the public voice be listened to, including the special needs volunteers who work in the community.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr H Hodgson questioned the cost of the proposals, stating it could equate to as much as an extra $3,400 per ratepayer.  He added there may be a mitigating factor if apartments were added to the design.  Mr Hodgson questioned whether a pool at Naenae was an essential service, and if it was, that an uncovered pool would be less prone to earthquakes.  He asked for careful analysis of the entire proposal.

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms E Richter advised that she was raised in the era of Walter Nash, Trevor Young and Percy Dowse, when the pool was referred to as the Olympic Pool, she added that the pool was actually six inches too short to be an official olympic pool.  She further advised that Naenae was built on swamp land and was prone to liquifaction, meaning any new building would have to be specifically designed akin to the base isolators of Parliament.  She expressed concern for the safety of children accessing the railway underpass to get to schools and asked that a road tunnel be constructed.  She also suggested that if Hillary Court was not redeveloped, a retractable roof could be investigated.

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms E Innes asked that Council think outside the square and look back as well as forward.  She stated Naenae was a central player in 20th century urbanism and that if Council valued the built heritage of Naenae, it needed to investigate ways to protect it.  She suggested the Naenae centre should be protected in a similar way to Jackson Street and the Civic Precinct and that an overall spatial plan was urgently required.  She requested an Historical Architect assess the existing façade of the pool as she believed it was worth saving.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Innes acknowledged the façade could be replicated for a new building and that it was vital experts in this field were engaged.

 

Speaking under public comment, Miss E Norton advised she missed the Naenae swimming pool and had enjoyed many birthday party celebrations there, along with school swimming lessons.  She asked that a new pool be built as soon as possible and that it be earthquake safe and energy efficient.  She also requested the Naenae Library be retained.

Cr Brown left the meeting at 6.08pm.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr C Norton expressed support for the matters itemised in paragraph 24 of the officers’ report.  He expressed support for recommendation (vii) of the officers’ report and urgent instigation of work on a spatial plan.  He noted the officers’ report included recommendations for the 2018 Trust and acknowledged all groups involved in the Naenae Pool Project needed to work collaboratively.  He agreed with others that a Hub would operate in a better way if it was not housed all in one building, that heritage was important and that a zero waste approach to sustainable events held in Naenae was a good idea.

Cr Brown rejoined the meeting at 6.11pm.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Z McCormick believed the best way to provide sports assets was in partnership with sports clubs and that they should not be fully Council funded.  He questioned whether the proposed $50M spend for the Naenae Pool was a priority and whether the money could be better spent elsewhere.  He requested a full cost benefit analysis be conducted and that a Spatial Plan be developed.  He also requested all sports clubs associated with the pool be fully involved in the entire process.

Speaking under public comment, Mr J Ross advised of his work history with Naenae Pool.  He stated that Council needed to help fund a new pool and that it remained actively engaged in facilitating community facilities.

 

Public comment was completed at 6.19pm.

 

The Acting General Manager City and Community Services and the Strategic Projects Manager elaborated on the report.

Deputy Mayor Lewis left the meeting at 6.26pm and rejoined the meeting at 6.28pm.

In response to questions from a member, the Strategic Projects Manager advised that once the preferred action was decided by Council, the design phase of the project could take up to 12 months.  He added that the issue of the community space and hall could be solved by the creation of the spatial plan.

In response to a question from a member, the Acting General Manager, City and Community Services advised that the re-strengthening option was assessed and whilst it was the cheapest option, it was decided it did not meet the community’s needs especially in relation to links with the town centre, it would not have indoor/outdoor flow, had limited accessibility and would not provide value for money, longevity or sustainability.  The Strategic Projects Manager added that that option would not necessarily be a quicker rebuild.  The Acting General Manager City and Community Services added that as a result, officers were no longer pursuing the option.

In response to a question from a member, the Strategic Projects Manager advised all options relating to the building were being explored, including the heritage elements, with the design phase refining projected costings.  He stressed that the preliminary cost estimates received by Council in July 2019 were estimates only, based on concept drawings and not on detailed designs.

 

In response to a question from a member, the Strategic Projects Manager advised the extent of cost over-runs may become more apparent after the design phase, with architect and quantity surveyor input.  The Acting General Manager, City and Community Services advised there were other variables to also consider, including the long-term sustainability of the construction process and of the final building.

 

In response to a question from a member, the Acting General Manager, City and Community Services agreed the wider community should also have input into the project, as it was ratepayer funded.  The Strategic Projects Manager added that few people requested more than what was already being provided by the pool, with a common thread being improved accessibility and pool dimensions to accommodate different water sports.

In response to a question from a member, the Acting General Manager, City and Community Services advised final costings would be reported to Council once detailed investigations had occurred. She added that in the past other Council funded construction projects had had a varied outcome with regards to cost overruns, for a variety of project specific reasons.

In response to a question from a member, the Strategic Projects Manager was not aware if a swimming pool could be placed on base isolators and that the design phase would provide specific structural details.

 

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manager, Parks and Recreation advised that the operational model would be based on the final agreed design and he could not provide an operational budget until then.  He agreed the operating costs of a 25m pool would greatly differ from a 50m with wave pool facility.

The Chief Executive reminded members that officers had undertaken work provided in the report in response to a direction from Council.  She added the largest cost to running a pool was the heating and that there may be ways of having the pool heated by itself.  She further added officers were investigating partnering with the Callaghan Institute, with other initiatives being investigated.  She agreed that an initial higher project cost may be offset by reduced operational and long term costs and benefits. 

In response to questions from members, the Strategic Projects Manager advised that even though a final decision for Naenae Pool would not occur until June 2020, officers could still work on developing the preferred option that was recommended at the meeting.  He added the proposed timeframe for the creation of a spatial plan was 12 months, with consultation occurring alongside the draft Annual Plan consultation process.  The Acting General Manager City and Community Services advised that the spatial plan would cover much more than the pool area and would investigate all suggestions.

The Chair advised that Council needed to provide a clear direction for officers to continue work on the Naenae Pool and spatial plan projects and that if the community preferred another option, final costs may have to be revised.

 

The Chief Executive advised that with the detailed work of officers, trust was being rebuilt with the community and the project was beginning to feel like a joint endeavour.

The Chair thanked all the public for their input to date, reiterating the project was a top priority for Council.  He repeated a final decision would be made in June 2020 and that the establishment of a community group, with expertise assistance if required, to fully participate in the entire process was important.  He acknowledged that all the Naenae community had been impacted by the issue and that he was excited to get the project moving.  He explained consulting on one preferred option provided clarity for officers and the community and enabled some detailed work to commence.

The Chief Executive advised that Council was seeking to achieve an outcome with the recommendations,and that if the desire was to retain the historic façade of the pool building, but that the location of the swimming pool was to be altered, then the façade may have to be recreated.

 

Cr Mitchell suggested some amendments to the recommendations.

Cr Hislop thanked and acknowledged the people who had attended the meeting and for being informed of the history of Naenae.  She maintained it was incredibly important to retain the heritage of the area and that development of a spatial plan was very important.  She added the rebuilding of the facility would bring people back to Naenae and looked forward to the future.

Cr Briggs thanked the community and the officers involved in the project.  He acknowledged the long timeframes and stresssed it was important for Council to be realistic and honest.  He applauded the recent community support initiatives for Hillary Court and stressed the importance of continuing to support the area whilst consultation and then construction was underway.

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Hislop)  UNANIMOUS            Minute No. C 191(2)26(3)

“That Council:

(i)      notes and receives the contents of this report;

(ii)     notes that any investment decision will require an amendment to the 2018-2020 Long Term Plan (LTP);

(iii)    notes the findings of the Voice of the Community project;

(iv)    notes that the project findings indicate there is a desire for the pool to be returned quickly, and that there is a desire for Council to support the development of a lively, functional town centre, with multiple spaces, places and facilities that are separate, but feel connected;

(v)     agrees to progress to next year’s Annual Plan (2020/21)/LTP amendment process the recommended approach (as outlined in paragraph 64) of designing  and building a new stand-alone pool on or adjacent to the current site, with a project cost of $52M (excluding inflation);

(vi)    notes that public consultation on funding for the pool will take place as part of the Annual Plan/LTP amendment process

(vii)   directs officers to urgently start work on a spatial plan for the wider Naenae town centre and Walter Mildenhall Park;

(viii)  retains the $9M already budgeted for a community hub in Naenae to invest in other facilities in the town centre, as determined by the spatial plan in relation to options (d) and (f);

(ix)    agrees to the establishment of a community-led, officer facilitated Naenae group to be involved in the spatial plan and facility design projects;

(x)     makes further investment decisions after the completion of the spatial plan and review of priorities in the 2021-31 Long Term Plan;

 (xi)   acknowledges the approach to engagement taken by officers and that this be a starting point for future consultations;

(xii)   endorses paragraph 85 in the officers’ report and asks that updates are provided through this process as funding options are explored; and

(xiii)  asks that officers engage a heritage architect to consider the potential for the retention of heritage elements.”

  

22.    MINUTES

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                  Minute No. C 191(2)27(3)

“That the minutes of the meeting of the Inaugural Council meeting held on Wednesday, 23 October 2019, be confirmed as a true and correct record.”

23.     QUESTIONS

          Cr Sutton asked what was the premium to be paid by Council to pay the Living Wage to Council contractors?

          The Chief Executive advised that the previous Council’s Community Plan Committee had considered the Living Wage at its meeting held in June 2019.  She added that paragraph 23 of the report to the Committee explained the monetary implications of paying a Living Wage and that it was resolved that cleaners, as Council contractors, be paid the Living Wage as soon as practicable.

The Chief Executive advised a report in February 2020 would provide more detail concerning the exact costs of what a full Living Wage for all contractors may incur.

          In response to a further question from Cr Sutton, the Chair advised consultation with the community concerning paying a Living Wage to contractors would occur.

24.

Sealing Authority (19/1287)

Report No. HCC2019/1(2)/17 by the Executive Assistant, Corporate Services

 

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Brown)                                       Minute No. C 191(2)28(3)

“That Council:

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

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

SCHEDULE 1 - General Sealing Authority

Subdivision related documents – including Easements to Council

Standard easements and related requirements granting rights to Council as part of the subdivision process:

a)         Hutt City Council and Nigel Paul Webster
53 Kaitangata Crescent, Lower Hutt
L19/315

b)         Hutt City Council and Aidan Keith Bognuda, Antonio Maurice Bognuda and Malcolm Leonard Coleman
57 Wakefield Street, Lower Hutt
L19/310

c)         Hutt City Council and Housing New Zealand Limited
26 Galway Street, Lower Hutt
L19/316

d)         Hutt City Council and Steven Patrick Kilduff
197 Oxford Terrace, Lower Hutt
L19/328

e)         Hutt City Council and Manor Park Property Development Limited
Manor Park Road & Ford Road, Lower Hutt
L19/309
(partial surrender of easement and easement instrument)

f)          Hutt City Council and UPL Limited Partnership
79C Copeland Street, Lower Hutt
L19/335

g)         Hutt City Council and Tocker Investments Limited
23 and 23A Tocker Street, Lower Hutt
L19/337
Agreement dated 5 June 2018

h)         Hutt City Council and Tocker Investments Limited
23 and 23A Tocker Street, Lower Hutt
L19/339
Title plan 537180 for creation of easements

Encumbrance Removal

i)          Hutt City Council R Ravji and H Ravji
276 Jackson Street Petone, Lower Hutt
L19/218

j)          Hutt City Council and Bruce Norman Currie and Lynne Marie Frances Currie
351A Wellington Road, Wainuiomata,  Lower Hutt
L19/275

k)         Hutt City Council and F.L.Y Building Limited
4 Lindis Lane, Lower Hutt
L19/317

Replace Encumbrance with Land Covenant

l)          Hutt City Council and Patricia Holdings Limited
1 and 2 Patricia Grove, Naenae , Lower Hutt
L19/311

Sale and Purchase Agreement

m)        Hutt City Council and Mary Gabrielle, Christopher John and Thomas Christopher Lynskey as Trustees of the Mary Lynskey Trust
Area of footpath adjacent to 2 Cheviot Road, Lowry Bay, Lower Hutt
L19/243

Sale of Land

n)         Hutt City Council and IHC New Zealand Incorporated
79B Copeland Street, Lower Hutt
L19/324

SCHEDULE 2

Deed of Renewal

o)         Hutt City Council and Brian Nicholas

Boatshed 19 – Hikoikoi Reserve, Lower Hutt

L19/289

p)         Hutt City Council and Chris Nicholas

Boatshed 15 – Hikoikoi Reserve, Lower Hutt

L19/329

Warrants Approved

Rachel Marr – HCC WARRANT-19-042

1. Local Government Act 2002
Authorised person pursuant to ss171, 173 (powers of entry in general)
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s177 (including additional powers of entry)
2. Building Act 2004
Authorised Officer pursuant to s222
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s371B

Robert Zillwood – HCC WARRANT-189-040

1. Local Government Act 2002
Authorised person pursuant to ss171, 173 (powers of entry in general)
2. Building Act 2004
Authorised Officer pursuant to s222
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s371B

Wayne Joseph Meo – HCC WARRANT-19-043

1. Local Government Act 2002
Authorised person pursuant to ss171, 173 (powers of entry in general)
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s177 (including additional powers of entry)
2. Resource Management Act 1991
Enforcement Officer (noise control only) pursuant to s38(2)

Taylor Vaughan – HCC WARRANT-19-039

1. Local Government Act 2002
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s177 (including additional powers of entry)
2. Building Act 2004
Authorised Officer pursuant to s222
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s371B

Vadim Oussov – HCC WARRANT-19-039

1. Local Government Act 2002
Authorised person pursuant to ss171, 173 (powers of entry in general)
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s177 (including additional powers of entry)
2. Resource Management Act 1991
Enforcement Officer (noise control only) pursuant to s38(2)

Wayne Symonds – HCC WARRANT-19-037

1. Local Government Act 2002
Authorised person pursuant to ss171, 173 (powers of entry in general)
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s177 (including additional powers of entry)
2. Resource Management Act 1991
Enforcement Officer (noise control only) pursuant to s38(2)

 

Skye McConnell – HCC WARRANT-19-041

1. Local Government Act 2002
Authorised person pursuant to ss171, 173 (powers of entry in general)
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s177 (including additional powers of entry)
2. Health Act 1956
Local Authority Officer pursuant to s128
3. Litter Act 1979
Litter Control Officer pursuant to s5
4. Resource Management Act 1991
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s38(1)
5. Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012
Inspector pursuant to s197

Himanshu Parekh – HCC WARRANT-19-045

1. Local Government Act 2002
Authorised person pursuant to ss171, 173 (powers of entry in general)
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s177 (including additional powers of entry)
2. Health Act 1956
Local Authority Officer pursuant to s128
3. Litter Act 1979
Litter Control Officer pursuant to s5
4. Resource Management Act 1991
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s38(1)
5. Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012
Inspector pursuant to s197

Larry Lee – HCC WARRANT-19-044

1. Local Government Act 2002
Authorised person pursuant to ss171, 173 (powers of entry in general)
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s177 (including additional powers of entry)
2. Litter Act 1979
Litter Control Officer pursuant to s5
4. Resource Management Act 1991
Enforcement Officer pursuant to s38(1)”

  

25.     CLOSING FORMALITIES - Karakia WHAKAMUTUNGA

 

Ki a tau ki a tātou katoa te atawhai o tō tatou ariki o Ihu Karaiti,

Me te Aroha o te Atua,

Me te whiwhinga tahitanga ki te wairua tapu,

Ake ake ake

Amine

May the grace of the Lord,

 

and the love of God,

and the fellowship of the Spirit be with you all,

Forever and ever

Amen

 

 

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 10.15pm.

 

 

 

 

 

C Barry

MAYOR

 

 

 

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 24th day of March 2020


Mayoral Statement

Election Day produced one of the most significant shake ups to our governance that we have seen in decades.  It delivered a clear mandate for change in Council priorities and how we do things.  It also delivered the most diverse Council in Lower Hutt’s history, which is something we can all be proud of.

I want to take this opportunity to thank everyone who participated in the Local Body Elections.  While a 43% turnout is still low, it was positive to see an increase of 5.16% on the previous election, particularly when across the country there was a backwards trend, particularly in metro areas.

A new approach

Transparency and accountability must always be at the top of the list in how we operate as a Council.  I am very pleased with the approach the Chief Executive has taken on issues since being appointed and she is clear on how this will be incorporated into council’s operations.

 The detail in today’s agenda paper is a level of transparency we haven’t seen in the past, and again signals a new approach.

I’m also looking forward to having a new approach to the way we engage, consult and empower our communities.  Building a true partnership with mana whenua is very important, and I look forward to reporting on progress in due course.

Planning Hui

A few weeks ago, elected members held a two day planning session where we talked about our individual goals and priorities, and started to form the bones of a collective vision for our City.  What was clear from the session was that we are all on the same page with what we want for Lower Hutt, but may differ occasionally in how we get there – Which is a good thing!

Robust discussion and debate is absolutely paramount in making good decisions, and as Mayor that is something I will always encourage without fear or favour.

While we have some big challenges ahead of us, these challenges also offer opportunities.  I look forward to working alongside all Councillors, Community Board Members, and most importantly our citizens, in making the most of these opportunities.

Naenae Pool

I’m very pleased that Naenae Pool is one of the first items we will consider this tri-annum.  This is a top priority for Council, and we must move with urgency.  Alongside urgency, we must also work hand in hand with Naenae residents, businesses and our wider communities.  I will touch more on this in the report.

Melling Interchange/Riverlink

The Melling Interchange is a crucial project for the future of our City. There is universal support locally that the interchange must be built to ensure the GWRC’s flood protection work isn’t compromised.  Since the 12thOctober I have been communicating with local MPs, Ministers and NZTA about the importance of this project.  With Council’s endorsement, I would like to engage formally with Government on behalf of Council on this matter.  I believe there is a real opportunity and case to be put that the Melling Interchange is part of the Government’s recently signalled spend on infrastructure.

Budget Pressures

As you will be able to see in the Council reports, our budget is under significant pressure.  The Chief Executive has identified a number of basic items that were not budgeted for in Council’s Long Term Plan.  What is clear is that the status quo in how we budget and plan is unsustainable, and we will need to look at a wide range of options and possible changes as we move into 2020. Whatever these options are I am clear that ensuring everyone who has a role that contributes to our city is paid a fair rate for the work that they do. I will be elaborating on this in the council meeting.

Acknowledgements of Awards since election and staff awards

Hutt City Council has been involved in a number of key events and Award ceremonies since 14 October.

A key event was the welcome of the new Mayor and Councillors from 10 local iwi at the Waiwhetu Marae, plus the outstanding Highlights Festival, and the Naenae Proud Event.

Council has also sponsored the Hutt Chamber of Commerce Sustainability Business Excellence Award, been nominated for the Keep NZ Beautiful Award, sponsored the Hutt City Council Science and technology award at the The Wellys, and supported the Wellington Airport Regional Community  Awards.

This year the Hutt City Youth Awards Services to Community Award which recognises young people doing great things for their community was won by Hutt City Youth Council member, Charlotte Lawrence.

Acknowledgement of past elected members

I’d like to take this opportunity to formally acknowledge the service of Council members Ray Wallace, Margaret Cousins, Gwen McDonald, Lisa Bridson, Glenda Barratt and Michael Lulich. 

I’d also like to acknowledge the service of our Community Board representatives Richard Sinnott, Peter Foaese, Mason Branch, Robert Ashe, Anna Sutherland and Liz Knight.  I know I speak on behalf of the whole Council in wishing you the best for your future endeavours.