HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_BLACK_AGENDA_COVER

 

 

Eastbourne Community Board

 

 

16 June 2020

 

 

 

Order Paper for the meeting to be held in the

East Harbour Women's Clubrooms, 145 Muritai Road, Eastbourne,

on:

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 23 June 2020 commencing at 7.15pm

 

 

 

 

 

Membership

 

Virginia Horrocks (Chair)

Murray Gibbons (Deputy Chair)

Belinda Moss

Bruce Spedding

Frank Vickers

 

Deputy Mayor Tui Lewis

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For the dates and times of Council Meetings please visit www.huttcity.govt.nz

 

Have your say

You can speak under public comment to items on the agenda to the Mayor and Councillors at this meeting. Please let us know by noon the working day before the meeting. You can do this by emailing DemocraticServicesTeam@huttcity.govt.nz or calling the Democratic Services Team on 04 570 6666 | 0800 HUTT CITY9

HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_SCREEN_MEDRES
 


community boards – functions and delegations 

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

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

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

These delegations are based on the following principles:

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

·                Efficient decision-making should be paramount;

·                Conflicts of interest should be avoided and risks minimised;

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

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

These delegations:

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

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

(c)        are subject to any other statutory requirements that may apply to a particular delegation;

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

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

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

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

DELEGATIONS

Decide:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consider and make recommendations to Council on:

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

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

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

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

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

GENERAL FUNCTIONS

Provide their local community’s input on:

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

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

·             Changes or variations to the District Plan.

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

·             The disposal or acquisition of significant assets.

·             Road safety including road safety education within its area.

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

·             Review Local Community Plans as required.

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

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

Co-ordinate with Council staff:

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

 

Maintain:

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

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

Develop:

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

Grant:

·             Local community awards.

Promote:

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

·             Arts and crafts in its area.

Appoint:

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

Endorse:

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


EASTBOURNE

A STATEMENT OF BASIC  PRINCIPLES

The Eastbourne Community Board, representing the people of Eastbourne;

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Further:

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Eastbourne Community Board

 

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

 Tuesday 23 June 2020 commencing at 7.15pm.

 

ORDER PAPER

 

Public Business

 

1.       APOLOGIES 

2.       PUBLIC COMMENT

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

3.       Mayor's Statement (20/589)

4.       Presentation

          Presentation by Local Councillor from Greater Wellington Regional Council (20/56)

Verbal presentation by Local Councillor from Greater Wellington Regional Council.

5.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS 

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.   

6.       Minutes

Eastbourne Community Board, 18 February 2020                                                 9    

7.       Committee Advisor's Report (20/516)

Report No. ECB2020/4/47 by the Committee Advisor                                      20

8.       Community Engagement Fund 2019-2020 - Round 2 (20/510)

Memorandum dated 3 June 2020 by the Acting Committee Advisor                22

9.       Adoption of Standing Orders (20/544)

Report No. ECB2020/4/9 by the Contractor                                                       25

10.     Community Board Functions and Delegations (20/542)

Report No. ECB2020/4/10 by the Contractor                                                   135

11.     Chair's Report (20/594)

Report No. ECB2020/4/54 by the Committee Advisor                                    168

12.     Days Bay Pedestrian Crossing Delay (20/332)

Report No. ECB2020/4/125 by the Traffic Asset Manager                              171

13.     Information Item

Maire Street Trial Mini Shared Path (20/546)

Memorandum dated 8 June 2020 by the Traffic Asset Manager                      177 

14.     Reports from representatives on local organisations

a)      Okiwi Trust (20/547)

Verbal update from the Chair

b)      Educating Residents Around Trapping Steering Group (20/548)

Verbal update from Mr Vickers

c)       Days Bay Wharf Steering Group (20/549)

Verbal update from the Chair

d)      Eastbourne Youth Workers Trust (20/550)

Verbal update from Mr Spedding

e)      Community Emergency Response Group (20/551)

Verbal update from the Chair and Mr Spedding

15.     QUESTIONS

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

 

 

Toi Lealofi

COMMITTEE ADVISOR

            


unconfirmed minutes                                                                       9                                          18 February 2020

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Eastbourne Community Board

 

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

 Tuesday 18 February 2020 commencing at 7.15pm

 

 

PRESENT:

Ms V Horrocks (Chair)

Mr M Gibbons (Deputy Chair)

 

Ms B Moss

Mr B Spedding

 

Mr F Vickers

 

 

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

 

                                          

APOLOGIES:                  There were no apologies.

 

IN ATTENDANCE:        Mayor C Barry (part meeting)

                                           Ms J Miller, Chief Executive, (part meeting)

                                           Mr K Chitham, Head of Museums (part meeting)

                                           Mr D Burt, Sustainability and Resilience (part meeting)

                                           Mr G Sewell, Principal Policy Advisor (part meeting)

                                           Mr D Simmons, Traffic Asset Manager (part meeting)

                                           Ms T Malki, Traffic Engineer (part meeting)

                                           Mr A Marsh, Team Leader Parks (part meeting)

                                           Ms K Stannard, Head of Democratic Services

                                           Ms H Clegg, Minute Taker

 

 

PUBLIC BUSINESS

 

1.       APOLOGIES 

There were no apologies.

2.       PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate.

 

3.

Precedence of Business

 

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                Minute No. ECB 20201

“That, in terms of Standing Order 10.4, precedence be accorded to item 15 dealing with the Williams Park Tennis Court Refurbishment.”

 

This item is recorded in the order in which it was listed on the order paper.

 

 

4.

Update from the Chief Executive, Hutt City Council (20/97)

The Chief Executive gave an overview of her seven months in office.  She explained her initial findings of a review of the organisation.  She added that it appeared that Council tries to solve problems rather than work alongside communities.  She advised the current organisation restructure of Council should be finalised by mid March 2020.

With regard to the Williams Park Tennis Court Refurbishment, the Chief Executive acknowledged that a thorough consultation process had not occurred.  She suggested officers assist in organising the parties to have a conversation to ensure all the information was presented.  She added she was in favour of ensuring access to public places was not complicated.  She further added that Sport Wellington’s assessment of tennis facilities in the region concluded there was an overabundance of such facilities.  She reminded members there was not enough money in the budget to help everyone.

The Chief Executive summarised the Draft Annual Plan 2020/21 and Long Term Plan Amendment item 5 a) on the order paper.  She explained the intention was to hold an honest conversation about the “state-of-the-nation” with the public.  She added that for the past 18 years the city had had the second lowest level of rates rises in the country and that the budget did not balance.  She highlighted the investment needed for the infrastructure.  She further added the proposed 7.9% rates rise would begin the process of achieving a balanced budget over time.  She concluded that the future brought opportunities for change especially in terms of Council assisting communities to achieve things in a better way.

With regard to nesting birds and shags, the Chief Executive advised she had requested a full review of the recent situation.  She acknowledged officers had made a mistake and she was endeavouring to ensure a similar situation did not occur in the future.  She committed to discussing the draft review report with the Board for its input prior to it being reported to Council.

With regard to the Eastern Bays Shared Pathway, the Chief Executive acknowledged the 200 submissions received by Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) for the resource consent application.  She explained that GWRC had recently halted proceedings to allow for full discussions to be conducted with all submissions in opposition.  She hoped that the concerns raised in those submissions could be resolved, enabling the whole consent process to proceed unopposed.   She advised that whilst the original costings for the project had been $14M, the recent costings were $25M, of which Council was required to contribute 51%.  She added that the process for estimating project costs was under review, and that for this project.  Council was continuing to lobby New Zealand Transport Authority to bring the project forward.  She acknowledged the project had been in the wings for a number of years.

Mayor Barry advised that officers were currently investigating the pedestrian crossing at Days Bay with full consultation.  He added that officers needed to assess the issues and costs and possible solutions.

 

 

 5.        Presentations

a)

Draft Annual Plan 2020/21 and Long Term Plan Amendment (20/94)

The Chief Executive spoke to this item under item 4 on the order paper.  She added that further information could be found on Council’s website.    

b)

Presentation by Local Councillor from Greater Wellington Regional Council (20/56)

Cr Prue Lamason was an apology for the meeting.

c)

Update: Council's Museums Division (19/1336)

Mr Karl Chitham, Council’s Head of Museums gave an overview of his area of responsibilities.  He added that Council’s Community Arts Advisor was currently meeting with all communities to assess their requests.  He stated that, generally, the arts across the city were relatively strong with many groups working well together.  He encouraged the Board and members of the public to make contact with him if they had any questions concerning the arts. 

6.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS  

The Chair declared a conflict stating that she owned a property adjacent to the Williams Park tennis courts.  Members noted that the issue was a broad one and considered that she could continue to chair and participate in discussion and voting on the Williams Park Tennis Court Refurbishment item.

7.       Minutes

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Mr Gibbons)                                Minute No. ECB 20202

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

 

8.       Reports referred for Board input before being considered by COMMITTEE/Subcommittee of Council

a)

Unlicensed Public Use of Council Land - Encroachments (20/48)

Memorandum dated 29 January 2020 by the Principal Policy Advisor.

The Principal Policy Advisor elaborated on the memorandum.  With regard to the 90cm footpath encroachment, the Principal Policy Advisor advised there were no changes proposed.

In response to a question from a member, the Principal Policy Advisor confirmed the 90cm was a blanket allowance but that footpaths needed to remain accessible for all.  He advised that officers took the width of the existing footpath into account when granting such encroachments.  The Traffic Asset Manager advised the minimum accessible width of a footpath was 1.5m.

In response to a question from a member, the Principal Policy Advisor confirmed planting encroachments under 10m2 were exempt.

In response to questions from  members, the Principal Policy Advisor advised that currently there was a notice on Council’s website reminding owners to remove or trim back overhanging vegetation.  He acknowledged there may be instances where existing vegetation overhang resulted in less than 1.5m of footpath being available.  He highlighted that sandwich boards were covered by the Public Places Bylaw and were not subject to the Encroachment Licence Policy.

Deputy Mayor Lewis commented that the Petone Community Board had requested more time to consult with Petone retailers regarding this matter.

 

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Mr Vickers)                       Minute No. ECB 20203

“That the Board:

(i)    considers the attached draft report “Unlicensed Public Use of Council Land – Encroachments”; and

(ii)   provides comments and feedback that will be forwarded to Council’s Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee meeting to be held on 3 March 2020.”

 

 

b)

Cheviot Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (20/55)

Report No. ECB2020/2/30 by the Traffic Engineer.

 

 

 

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Engineer advised there had not been any reported accidents in the area.  Ms Moss added that useful consultation had occurred and there was clearly an issue in traffic safety posed by the situation.  She believed that the solution was sensible.

 

 

 

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Mr Spedding)                    Minute No. ECB 20204

“That the Board endorses the recommendations contained in the report.”

For the reasons the proposed restrictions would improve the safety within the street for the benefit of all road users; would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004; support Council’s Parking Policy 2017; and are supported by majority of the local residents who responded to the consultation documents.”

 

9.

Chair's Report (20/50)

Report No. ECB2020/2/20 by the Chair

 

The Chair elaborated on the report.

Mr Vickers advised that in relation to the sand issue at Kauri Street, a recent public meeting had been attended by 25 people and board members.  He further advised that officers had agreed to investigate the matter as it was an environmental, aesthetic and safety issue.  He added that most people agreed with returning the unpolluted sand to the beach and with continued dune planting.  He further added plants were to be supplied by Council.

Mr Gibbons commented that the issue had been ongoing for many years.

 

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Ms Moss)                                     Minute No. ECB 20205

“That the report be noted and received.”

 

10.

Committee Advisor's Report (20/39)

Report No. ECB2020/2/31 by the Head of Democratic Services

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Benjamin Priest, Electric Vehicle Product Manager at Meridian Energy, updated members on his investigations into the installation of two charging stations for electric vehicles.  He advised the preferred locations were at Williams Park, Days Bay (two chargers) and another site close to the Eastbourne shopping area.  He added that the Board would be kept updated on progress.

 

Mr Gibbons commented that as the instigator of the discussions with Meridian Energy, he was pleased to see progress with the proposal.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Owen Symmans requested the location of the proposed electric vehicle charging station inside Williams Park be re-investigated.  He noted that the carpark area was heavily used and congested and that to restrict parking in the area would cause more traffic issues.

 

In response to a question from a member, the Head of Democratic Services advised the invoices for the use of the meeting venue had not been received. 

 

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Mr Gibbons)                                Minute No. ECB 20206

“That the Board notes and receives the report.”

10.

UPDATE ON PLANNED COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WORK REGARDING CLIMATE CHANGE (20/81)

Report No. ECB2020/2/32 by the Manager, Sustainability and Resilience

 

The Manager, Sustainability and Resilience elaborated on the repor.

 

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                Minute No. ECB 20207

“That the Board receives and notes the contents of the report.”

 

11.

Community Engagement Fund 2019-2020 (20/2)

Memorandum dated 6 January 2020 by the Community Advisor - Funding and Community Contracts

 

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Mr Gibbons)                                Minute No. ECB 20208

“That the Board:

(i)    notes that the Community Engagement Fund closed on 14 November 2019 and one application had been received;

(ii)   agrees retrospectively that the application was considered according to the merits of the application criteria and priorities of the fund;

(iii)  agrees retrospectively to Lowry Bay Residents Association being granted $1,188.00 towards the purchase of heavy duty shelving to be installed with their new civil defence container; and

(iv)  agrees that $1,178.00 is available for a second round in 2020, with decisions to be made at its June 2020 meeting.”

12.

Appointments to Local Organisations (20/54)

Memorandum dated 29 January 2020 by the Head of Democratic Services

 

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Mr Spedding)                             Minute No. ECB 20209

“That the Board:

(i)      notes that appointments from the Board are required to be made on local organisations for the 2019/2022 triennium; and

(ii)     appoints members/trustee of the Board on the following local organisations:

a.    Okiwi Trust (Chair);

b.    Educating Residents Around Trapping Steering Group (Mr Vickers);

c.     Days Bay Wharf Steering Group (Ms Horrocks)

d.    Eastbourne Youth Workers’ Trust (Mr Spedding);

e.     Eastbourne and Bays Community Trust (Mr Gibbons and Mr D Wilshere); and

f.     Community Emergency Response Group (Ms Horrocks and Mr Spedding).”

 

13.

Schedule of Meetings for 2020 (20/40)

Report No. ECB2020/2/23 by the Committee Advisor

 

Resolved: (Ms Horrocks/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                Minute No. ECB 20210

“That the Board:

(i)    approves the meeting dates for 2020 in respect of its own meetings, attached as Appendix 2 to the report;

(ii)   notes that the Chair will set the dates for informal get-togethers of the Board as the need arises; and

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

14.     QUESTIONS   

There were no questions.

15.

WILLIAMS PARK TENNIS COURT REFURBISHMENT (20/120)

Memorandum dated 10 February 2020 by the Team Leader Parks

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms Diane Cheyne, Chair of the Days Bay Residents Association (‘the Association’),  expressed the Association’s concerns with the proposed Williams Park Tennis Courts refurbishment.  She stated the Association did not believe true consultation had occurred.  She highlighted that the early February meeting between themselves, Council officers and Wellesley College representatives had an underlying principle that the proposal was already approved.  She expressed other concerns with the logistics of reinstalling tennis equipment after school hours and how the public could use all the courts including the proposed booking system.  She added residents were concerned that if electricity was connected, flood lights could be installed.  With regard to the resurfacing, she questioned the need for the full resurfacing proposal and the allocation of costs.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Blake Fieldes expressed strong concern with the Williams Park Tennis Courts refurbishment.  He explained the proposal would be to the detriment of public access to the courts.  He questioned the logistics of the booking system, curtain wall netting, replacement of nets, need for resurfacing and future liability costs for Council.  He requested that the status quo be retained.

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms Amelia Manson representing Mr David Reid expressed concern with the lack of meaningful consultation.  She also expressed concern with the lack of investigation of the status quo, the need for private use of public courts for multiple sports codes, durability and logistics of the net curtain wall and the need for resurfacing.  She requested the situation be revisited in a transparent way.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Hamish Morison representing Mr Graham Thompson explained the historic journey of the original 18 courts (12 grass and six asphalt), to the four grass and three asphalt courts in existence today.  He asked that careful consideration be given to the alienation of the courts for the public and that the private use of courts not be permitted.  He highlighted Council’s neglect of the area over time. 

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Warren Owen, past Principal of Wellesley College, expressed the difficult position he found himself in.  He advised he was responsible for setting up the original lease arrangement of three courts for Wellesley College which he acknowledged, overtime, became known as the “College courts”.  He added that Wellesley College had regularly maintained those three courts which he stated had always remained for public use outside of school hours.  He was shocked to find out about the current proposal as he believed no public consultation had occurred.  He expressed concern with the proposed resurfacing and the curtain net wall and asked that a “win-win” solution be found for the benefit of all.  He acknowledged Wellesley College was investigating ways to increase its roll, but that privatising the courts was not acceptable.  

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Owen Symmans expressed concern with the proposed privatisation of the courts.  He acknowledged that the original intent of Wellesley College using the three courts only during public hours had changed to a public perception and that those courts were not for public use apart form through a costly booking system.  He stated all the courts were a public asset.

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms Meshantha Thaver requested that the wider public view be sought concerning the Williams Park Tennis Courts.  She stated that the proposal seemed to add value to a specific group at a cost to others.  It catered specifically to the needs of Wellesley College and did not consider the wider public.  She requested more thorough consultation occur before a final decision was made.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Rob Ashe explained he used to travel from Hutt City to Days Bay specifically to play tennis.  He was disappointed when three of the public courts were lost to Wellesley College.  He highlighted the loss of several other courts within the city and requested all the Williams Park tennis courts be retained for public use.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Thomas Brooks spoke of his frequent spontaneous use of the tennis courts.  He questioned how a booking system would operate.  He requested all the courts be retained for public use.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Matt Hayes agreed with the proposed refurbishment of the tennis courts for a multiple of sports codes.  He expressed concern at the lack of public consultation to date.  He opposed having only three courts available for public use  and requested six courts be available for the public outside of school hours (three during school hours).  He asked that the needs of the community be considered.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Peter Dowell, current Wellesley College Board of Trustees, explained the court surfaces were nearing their “use-by” date.  He advised that all six courts were currently available for public use with Wellesley College able to book the three courts adjacent to their campus during school hours.  He further advised the proposal included a renewal of the 21 year lease to Wellesley College for the continued use of those three courts.  He added that Wellesley College would contribute 80% of the cost of resurfacing the three public courts adjacent to the campus.  He noted that the existing booking system, which was very infrequently used, would continue. 

 

The Team Leader Parks elaborated on the memorandum.  He acknowledged the public consultation undertaken could have been better and that engagement with the public should have occurred sooner.  He clarified that the public was currently not excluded from any of the courts.  He added that the proposal included Wellesley College being able to book all six courts during school hours (for a fee) with the proviso that at least one court was always available for public use during school hours.  He added Wellesley College would be responsible for reinstallation of all nets and the divider after Wellesley College’s use of the courts had finished.  With regard to similar agreements for other public courts/turfs/surfaces, he advised the proposal for Williams Park tennis courts was similar to other arrangements throughout the city. With regard to the booking system, he explained the system was not proposed to be altered from the current situation which appeared to be used only by large groups wishing to use the courts eg. other schools.  He concluded that Wellesley College was proposing to pay 80% of the cost of upgrading a public facility.

 

In response to a question from a member, the Team Leader Parks confirmed Wellesley College would be charged a pro-rata fee for the hourly use of the courts they booked during school hours.  He also confirmed this was in line with rates charged and the systems used for other public sports grounds eg rugby training and game times.  He highlighted that no electricity was proposed around the courts and that no lighting was proposed resulting in no night use of the courts being possible.  With regard to the management of the courts, he confirmed Council would manage the courts.  He considered it was preferable to provide a surface which allowed for as many activities as possible.  He added there were several public tennis courts available in the wider Eastbourne area, as well as the Tennis Club facilities.

 

In response to questions from members, the Team Leader Parks confirmed the courts would not be locked and that clear signage explaining the use of the courts would be installed.  He advised that had Wellesley College not approached Council, only the perimeter nets would have been replaced and remarking of the existing surfaces would have occurred.

 

In response to a question from a member, the Team Leader Parks advised an artificial turf court surface generally lasted approximately 12-15 years whilst an asphalt surface had a life of 20 years.  He added the type of use also influenced the life of a surface, and that the proposed turf surface was more suited to tennis than other sports, but that other sports could be played upon it.

 

In response to a request from a member for clarification regarding the booking system, the Team Leader Parks reiterated that the system was not altering from the one currently in existence, and acknowledged the concerns of the community regarding this issue.

The Chief Executive advised that conversations regarding the lease between Council and Wellesley College were ongoing and had yet to be finalised.   She suggested all interested parties should meet to air all concerns as soon as possible.

 

Resolved: (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Ms Moss)                       Minute No. ECB 20211

 “That the Board asks officers to urgently facilitate a conversation between the appropriate representatives of Wellesley College, Hutt City Council, Days Bay Residents Association and Eastbourne Community Board before matters are finalised on the proposed refurbishment of the asphalt tennis courts at Williams Park.”

 

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 9.21 pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

V Horrocks

CHAIR

 

 

 

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 23rd day of June 2020

   


                                                                                      20                                                            23 June 2020

Eastbourne Community Board

04 June 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/516)

 

 

 

 

Report no: ECB2020/4/47

 

Committee Advisor's Report

 

 

 

 

Purpose of Report

 

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

Recommendation

That the Board notes and receives the report.

 

2.    Council’s current consultation and community engagement

 

Thanks for having your say on Council’s draft Annual Plan - feedback closed on Friday 22 May.  For more information on the Feedback received, Documents and information, these can be viewed on the Council website: http://www.huttcity.govt.nz/Your-Council/Have-your-say/Consulting-on/

 

New rubbish and recycling system

Formal consultation on the kerbside collection changes has been delayed due to Covid-19. Council is expecting this will get underway around July 2020.


 

 

3.    2019/20 Administration and Training Budget

The Board is allocated $8,000 per annum, comprised of:

-     Miscellaneous Administration         $5,000

-     Training                                             $3,000

The following is the Board’s expenditure as at 22 June 2020.

 

Miscellaneous Administration

Training

Balance remaining

 $3,208.99

$3,000.00

Expenditure from 27 January 2020 to 22 June 2020

-          venue hire             $675.00

-          advertising            $608.38

-          miscellaneous        $299.00

-$1,865.35

-

Balance remaining

$1,343.64

$3,000.00

 

Appendices

There are no appendices for this report.    

 

Author: Toi Lealofi

Committee Advisor

 

 

Approved By: Kathryn Stannard

Head of Democratic Services

 


MEMORANDUM                                                  22                                                            23 June 2020

Our Reference          20/510

TO:                      Chair and Members

Eastbourne Community Board

FROM:                Debbie Hunter

DATE:                03 June 2020

SUBJECT:           Community Engagement Fund 2019-2020 - Round 2

 

Recommendations

That the Board:

 

(i)      notes that this is the second round of funding;

 

(ii)     notes the Community Engagement Fund closed on 16 June 2020 and two applications had been received;

(iii)    determines the funding to be granted to the applications outlined in paragraph 6 of the memorandum;

 

(iv)    agrees that the applications were considered according to the merits of the application criteria and priorities of the fund; and

(v)     agrees that the organisations granted funding will be required to attend a meeting of the Board once the project has been completed.

 

 

Purpose of Memorandum

1.    For the Board to assess and determine the funding to be granted to the eligible Community Engagement Fund applications.

Background

Community Engagement Fund

2.    Hutt City Council agreed through the Long Term Plan to contribute $48,850 for 2019/2020 for the Community Engagement Fund. 

3.    The Eastbourne Community Board is allocated $2,256.00 per annum.  This is for local activities and events that directly benefit the communities concerned.

4.    The fund was promoted through Hutt City Council’s grants system, and through contacts/networks via elected members of the Community Board.   

5.    The Board at its meeting in December 2019 allocated $1,188.  There is $1,178.00 available to allocate.

6.    Four applications were received under the Eastbourne Community Board Community Engagement Fund requesting a total of $2,127.00.  They are as follows:

No.

Organisation

Description

$Request

1

Point Howard Association Inc

Establishment of a Point Howard Community Garden – for purchase of seedlings, garden shed, materials.

First time applicant ECBEF.

840.00

2

Muritai Yacht Club

Purchase of a MYC3 propellor for junior sailing rescue boat.

This organisation has received the following grants from the ECB engagement fund: 2012 = $460 – trailer tyres, 2015 = $1,500 for NZ Laser National Championships, 2016 = $669 for rescue boat VHF, 2018 = $1,066 for rescue boat cloathing, 2018 = $635 for Learn Sail Helmets. 

            0.00

$0 amount at the time of the closing of the fund.

3

Point Howard Playcentre

First Aid training to each of their duty team contributors. To ensure that the facilities and care givers meet basic safety standards for local children and their families.  

First time applicant to the ECBEF.

930.00

4

The Eastbourne Scout Group

For the purchase of a retreat compass Hub from Kathmandu. This will be used as a shelter tent for scouts to gather in when they are away on camps.  To be used across the whole of the Eastbourne Scout Group (ages 5-18).  

First time applicant to the ECBEF.

357.00

 

 

TOTAL REQUESTS

$2,127.00

 

7.    At the request of Community Board members, and due to COVID-19, the closing date for the fund was extended to 5pm on 16th June 2020. 

8.    The Chair and Deputy Chair were the only members to receive the applications to assess. 

9.    The funds need to be allocated by end of June 2020. 

10.   Any organisations granted funding will be required to attend a meeting of the Board once the project has been completed.

 

 

 

Appendices

There are no appendices for this Memorandum.    

 

 

Author: Debbie Hunter

Community Advisor Funding and Community Contracts

 

 

Approved By: Melanie Laban

Head of Community Projects and Relationships

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


                                                                                      25                                                            23 June 2020

Eastbourne Community Board

08 June 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/544)

 

 

 

 

Report no: ECB2020/4/9

 

Adoption of Standing Orders

 

 

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek adoption of Standing Orders for the conduct of meetings for use throughout the current triennium.

Recommendations

That the Board:

(i)    receives the information contained in the report;

(ii)   notes the requirement to achieve the agreement of at least 75% of members present at a meeting to adopt (and amend) the Standing Orders; and

(iii)  adopts Hutt City Council’s Standing Orders, attached as Appendix 1, for use throughout the 2019-2022 triennium.

 

Background

2.    Section 51 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) expressly provides that a Community Board is not a local authority, nor a Council committee, but an incorporated body. The role of the Community Board is primarily to represent, and act as an advocate for, the interests of its community. Its powers are those delegated to it by Council.

3.    Although Community Boards do not form part of a council, certain provisions of the LGA relating to councils (contained in Schedule 7 of the LGA) are expressed to apply equally to Community Boards “with all necessary modifications as if they were local authorities”.

4.    In particular, clause 27(1) of Schedule 7 states that “a local authority must adopt a set of standing orders for the conduct of its meetings and those of its committees”.

5.    Standing Orders require the agreement of at least 75% of members present at a meeting to adopt (and amend) the Standing Orders.

Discussion

6.    In December 2016 Council adopted new Standing Orders based on the LGNZ Territorial Authority Standing Orders and also included Standing Orders specific to Hutt City Council. The city’s Community Boards adopted these Standing Orders in February 2017.

7.    LGNZ has updated its Territorial Authority Standing Orders to primarily address employment law and Public Records Act 2005 requirements. In addition a number of administrative amendments have been made to improve wording, grammar and punctuation, and correct any minor errors. A number of other wording changes have been made and these are outlined in sections 6 (a) to (v) of Appendix 2, the report presented to Council on 26 May 2020.

8.    Officers had highlighted the need for amendments to Standing Orders in a number of areas, and these are outlined in sections 7 (a) to (d) of Appendix 2.

9.    On 26 May 2020 Council adopted the Standing Orders attached as Appendix 1, which include the amendments outlined above. These amendments generally improve the overall quality and readability of the document, and have no particular impact on Community Boards.

10.  The Standing Orders comprise constitutional and legislative matters as well as meeting procedures. A number of Standing Orders address the sections of the Local Government Act 2002, Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and other Acts of Parliament that are relevant to the conduct of meetings, and therefore contain mandatory provisions.

11.  While it is legally possible for a Board to develop its own Standing Orders, from a practical point of view it is desirable for the Board to adopt Council’s Standing Orders in order to achieve an element of consistency across all meetings throughout Council’s meeting cycles.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

12.  Climate change considerations are not considered relevant to this report, which deals with an administrative matter.

Consultation

13.  No consultation is required on this matter. The adoption of Standing Orders for use at meetings is a matter to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the LGA.

14.  The adopted Standing Orders will be made available on Council’s website and copies will be provided to all elected members. In addition, further training on Standing Orders will be offered to all elected members over the coming months.

Legal Considerations

15.  The adoption of Standing Orders requires in every case a vote of not less than 75% of the members present. The Appendices, as an attachment to the Standing Orders, do not require a vote of 75% of the members present, but rather a majority vote.

Financial Considerations

16.  There are no financial considerations in respect of the adoption of Standing Orders.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 - HCC Standing Orders 2019-2022 - Adopted 26 May 2020

28

2

Appendix 2 - Report to Council on Adoption of Standing Orders

130

 

 

Author: Joyanne Stevens

Contractor

 

 

Reviewed By: Kathryn Stannard

Head of Democratic Services

 

 

Approved By: Bradley Cato

Chief Legal Officer


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 - HCC Standing Orders 2019-2022 - Adopted 26 May 2020

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Attachment 2

Appendix 2 - Report to Council on Adoption of Standing Orders

 

Hutt City Council

07 May 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/395)

 

 

 

 

Report no: HCC2020/3/102

 

Adoption of Standing Orders

 

 

 

 


 


Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek adoption of Standing Orders for the current triennium.

 


Recommendations

That Council:

(i)      notes the requirement for local authorities to adopt Standing Orders for the conduct of their meetings and those of their committees;

(ii)     notes the amendments made to the Standing Orders as highlighted in Appendix 1 to the report;

(iii)    notes the requirement to achieve the agreement of at least 75% of members present at a meeting to adopt Standing Orders; and

(iv)    adopts the Standing Orders attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

For the reason that adopting procedures for the conduct of meetings will provide a framework within which to promote the social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of local communities in the present and for the future.

 


Background

2.    Local authorities are required to adopt Standing Orders for the conduct of their meetings under clauses 27(1) and (2) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA). Standing Orders reflect the requirements of the LGA, the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and other legislation concerning the conduct of meetings. The amendment and adoption of Standing Orders requires the agreement of at least 75% of members present at a meeting. Council can amend the Standing Orders at any time. 

Discussion

3.    Council adopted its current Standing Orders on 15 December 2016. The Standing Orders are based on the LGNZ Territorial Authority Standing Orders and also include Standing Orders specific to Hutt City Council, including those relating to Tangata Whenua and Taura Here, which are covered in Memoranda of Understanding with these partners.

 

4.    Council amended the Standing Orders on 10 December 2019 to provide for agendas for Council, Standing Committee, Subcommittee and Community Board meetings to be distributed one full week prior to the meeting date.

 

5.    LGNZ has updated its Territorial Authority Standing Orders to primarily address employment law and Public Records Act 2005 requirements. In addition a number of administrative amendments have been made to improve wording, grammar and punctuation, and correct any minor errors. Those minor changes have been incorporated into the updated version of Council’s Standing Orders attached as Appendix 1.

 

6.    LGNZ has incorporated the following amendments to Standing Orders, which are shown as tracked changes in Appendix 1:

a.    Definitions of Emergency Meeting, Internet Site and Public Notice have been added;

b.    The definition of Working Day has been amended to adjust the dates within which extraordinary meetings may be required over the Christmas-New Year period;

c.     SO 4.2 has been amended to provide for a break at meetings after two hours instead of three hours;

d.    SO 6 has been amended to add a note at the end of the section recommending delegations to the Chief Executive covering the period after a triennial election;

e.    SO 7.2 has been amended to add the District Licensing Committee to those committees that do not go out of existence as at the date of a triennial election;

f.     New SOs 9.5 and 9.6 have been added to cover emergency meetings and the process for calling emergency meetings;

g.    SO 9.7 has been amended to cover notice of emergency meetings as well as extraordinary meetings, and some of the previous SOs dealing with extraordinary meetings have been deleted;

h.    Emergency meetings have been added to SO 10.10 dealing with distribution of the agenda;

i.     SO 13.3 regarding leave of absence has been amended to provide for a delegation to the Mayor to approve leave of absence requests;

j.     SO 13.6 regarding absence without leave has been amended to clarify the wording and add reference to emergency meetings;

k.    SO 13.7 has been amended to provide for approved deputations to be made via audio or audio visual link;

l.     SO 17.1 has been amended to provide for petitions to be accepted only if the subject matter falls within the terms of reference of the body being petitioned, and to amend the provisions regarding translation services;

m.   SO 19.6 regarding the recording of votes has been amended to clarify the extent of the information to be recorded in the minutes;

n.    SO 20.2 regarding disrespect has been reworded to address conduct issues;

o.    New SO 23.6 has been added, providing for Chairs to recommend amendments to reports of committees and subcommittees when these are being presented to Council for adoption;

p.    SOs 25.1 and 25.2 dealing with procedural motions have been expanded to provide additional clarification;

q.    SOs 28.1 and 28.4 dealing with minutes have been amended to make provision for electronic copies and digital signatures;

r.     New SOs 29.1 and 29.2 have been added dealing with the maintenance of records, and SO 29.3 regarding inspection of minute books has been reworded;

s.     Appendix 2 has been replaced by a new table covering resolutions to exclude the public;

t.     Appendix 3 has been  expanded into three separate appendices dealing with the three flowchart options covering the process for motions and amendments, and clarifies some of the wording;

u.    Appendix 8, Powers of a Chair, has been amended to incorporate changes made to other parts of the Standing Orders; and

v.    Appendix 11 has been amended to add a requirement for a written record of workshops to be kept.

7.    Officers have highlighted the need for amendments to Standing Orders in a number of areas, and these are shown as tracked changes in Appendix 1:

 

a.    SO 9.3 has been amended to provide for the Mayor or the Chair of a Standing Committee to requisition an extraordinary meeting of Council;

b.    SO 12.4 has been amended to strengthen the provisions regarding the recording of meetings by the public;

c.    SO 23.2 has been amended to strengthen the provisions regarding the requirement for motions and amendments to be submitted in writing; and

d.    Appendix 12 has been amended to add the Chief Executive’s Statement to the order of business for Council meetings.

Options

8.    Council has the options of retaining the current Standing Orders, adopting the amended Standing Orders as presented or requesting further changes. 

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

9.    Climate change considerations are not considered relevant to the consideration of this report, which deals with an administrative matter.

Consultation

10.  There is no requirement for consultation on this matter. The adoption of Standing Orders for use at meetings is a matter to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002.

11.  The adopted Standing Orders will be made available on Council’s website and copies will be provided to all elected members. In addition, further training on Standing Orders will be offered to all elected members over the coming months.

Legal Considerations

12.  The adoption of Standing Orders requires in every case a vote of not less than 75% of the members present. The Appendices, as an attachment to the Standing Orders, do not require a vote of 75% of the members present, but rather a majority vote.

Financial Considerations

13.  There are no financial considerations in respect of the adoption of Standing Orders.

 


Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 HCC Standing Orders 2019-2022

 

2

Appendix 2 - Adoption of Standing Orders - 26 May 2020_1

 

    

 


 


 

 

 

 

 

Author: Joyanne Stevens

Contractor

 

 

Reviewed By: Bradley Cato

Chief Legal Officer

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Kathryn Stannard

Head of Democratic Services

 

 

 

Approved By: Jo Miller

Chief Executive

 

 


                                                                                     137                                                           23 June 2020

Eastbourne Community Board

08 June 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/542)

 

 

 

 

Report no: ECB2020/4/10

 

Community Board Functions and Delegations

 

 

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to advise Community Boards of their delegations for the 2019–2022 triennium as adopted by Council.

Recommendations

That the Board:

(i)    notes the delegations to Community Boards approved by Council (attached as Appendix 4 to the report);

(ii)   notes the requirements for certification under the Making Good Decisions Training, Assessment and Certification Programme for RMA Decision-Makers, as outlined in the report;

(iii)  determines whether it wishes to have one suitably trained member available for selection to sit on the Hearings Subcommittee for notified resource consent applications; and if so

(iv) nominates a member of the Board to fulfil this role.

 

Background

2.    Council at its meeting held on 4 November 2019 adopted interim delegations to Community Boards for the start of the 2019-2022 triennium. This was done in order to provide opportunity for the delegations to be reviewed in consultation with the Community Boards early in 2020. The interim delegations adopted were the delegations made to Community Boards for the 2016-2019 triennium.

Discussion

3.    Attached for information as Appendices 1 to 3 is the report on representation arrangements for the 2019-2022 triennium that was considered by Council on 26 May 2020, along with Appendices 2 and 3 of that report (omitting Appendix 1 which is the interim delegations referred to above).

4.    Sections 12 to 16 of attached Appendix 1 comment on the roles of Community Board members and Councillors appointed to Community Boards.

5.    Sections 17 to 25 of attached Appendix 1 outline the work undertaken over the years regarding the functions and delegations of Community Boards.

6.    Sections 26 to 29 of attached Appendix 1 highlight the changes made to the delegations as a result of this year’s review of the document.

7.    In addition to some minor wording changes, the major changes made are:

a.       The addition of informal engagement with Council through attendance at Briefings and quarterly Chairs meetings with the Mayor and Chief Executive

b.       The addition of informal support by the Corporate Leadership Team and an Elected Member Support officer, and information on the Council work programme from the corporate agenda process

c.       The addition of Standing Order 21.16 which provides for Board Chairs to participate in discussion on matters of interest to their area at meetings of Standing Committees

d.      The ability for Boards to assign portfolios to their members

e.       The ability for each Board to have one suitably trained member available for selection to sit on the hearing for notified resource consent applications, where the Board does not wish to take an advocacy role in its local area or lodge a submission

8.    Council at its 26 May meeting also added a role for the Boards to provide input to officers on parks and reserves and associated public facilities, in addition to the other areas that were already included in the previous delegations.

9.    With respect to item (e) above, the report to the 26 May Council meeting suggested a hearings role in the Board’s area, but Council amended this to provide for suitably trained members to be able to participate in the hearing of any notified resource consent applications city-wide.

10.  The requirements for members sitting on resource management hearings are outlined in Appendix 4. These include the requirement to hold current certification under the Making Good Decisions Training, Assessment and Certification Programme for RMA Decision-Makers, together with ongoing specialist training which is mandatory.

11.  The Making Good Decisions Foundation course is offered in Wellington on 14 and 15 July 2020 at a cost of $2,198.00 per person, exclusive of GST. An assessment is required to be completed prior to attendance, and an assessment completed within one month post attendance. Attendance of Community Board members would be funded from the elected member training budget.

12.  More information on the Making Good Decisions Foundation course is available at www.wspetc.co.nz/making-good-decisions.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

13.  Climate change considerations are not considered relevant to this report, which deals with an administrative matter.

Consultation

14.  The Mayoral Office has undertaken informal consultation with the city’s community boards about their delegated authority.

Legal Considerations

15.  Sections 63 to 66 of attached Appendix 1 outline legal considerations in relation to this matter. The delegations adopted by Council reflect the role and powers of Community Boards as outlined in the Local Government Act 2002.

Financial Considerations

16.  Financial considerations in respect of the attendance of Board members at the Making Good Decisions Foundation course are outlined above. Hearing Commissioners are currently paid $80 per hour spent in hearings and deliberating, and these costs are recovered from applicants for notified resource consents. This figure is proposed to increase to $85 per hour from 1 July 2020 in the Annual Plan 2020-2021.

 

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 - Report on Representation Arrangements for 2019-2022 Triennium

138

2

Appendix 2 - Comparison of HCC with Peer Councils

152

3

Appendix 3 - Possible Delegations to Community Boards 2019-2022

154

4

Appendix 4 - Adopted Community Board Functions and Delegations 2019-2022

161

 

Author: Joyanne Stevens

Contractor

 

Reviewed By: Kathryn Stannard

Head of Democratic Services

 

 

Reviewed By: Bradley Cato

Chief Legal Officer


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 - Report on Representation Arrangements for 2019-2022 Triennium

 

Hutt City Council

11 May 2020

 

 

 

File: (19/1364)

 

 

 

 

Report no: HCC2020/3/101

 

Representation Arrangements 2019-2022 Triennium

 

 

 

 


 


Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to support decision making regarding:

a. Community Board delegations;

b. Community Panels;

c. the development of a new model for representation and participation; and

d. the wider issues of second tier representation

 


Recommendations

It is recommended that Council

(i)         notes the Local Government Commission’s findings and recommendations that a fresh approach to representation in the city is needed as evidenced by efforts through successive representation reviews to address perceived inequities of representation at the community level between the three areas added and the ‘old Lower Hutt’;

 

(ii)        notes that Community Board functions and delegations have been reviewed several times between 2006 and 2019;

 

(iii)       adopts the delegations to Community Boards attached as Appendix 3;

 

(iv)      notes the results of the Community Panels qualitative evaluation;

 

(v)       agrees that Community Panels will continue for this triennium;

 

(vi)      agrees that the role of Community Panels is that of community funders focused on supporting local projects and initiatives and that the terms of reference will be amended to reflect this;

 

(vii)     agrees that the wider issues of second tier representation will be addressed in the next Representation Review;

 

(viii)    agrees that further work is completed on the “new model” including a Council and iwi workshop to:

 

a.    identify communities of interest;

b.    develop an approach for deciding which Councillors will work with each group; and

c.     develop an agreed approach to ensure city-wide and ward Councillors work together with communities to ensure the best outcomes are achieved;

 

(ix)       agrees that the process for appointing Community Panel members will include:

 

a.     advertising for expressions of interest – applicants will need to provide a CV together with support from community (references/support can be written or in person, not formal though);

b.     short list by a subcommittee of council comprised of two city wide and two ward Councillors and the Deputy Mayor supported officers as required;

c.     recommendations to Council OR the subcommittee could be given decision making powers and required to report to Council to             explain the decisions made; and

d.    Community Panel members appointed by full Council with a powhiri; and

 

(x)        agrees that the next Representation Review will take place in the 2022-25 triennium ahead of the 2025 election;

For the reasons that representation is at the core of Council achieving its purpose of promoting the social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of local communities in the present and for the future.

 


Background

Representation Review

2.    Hutt City was constituted in 1989 with the amalgamation of the existing Lower Hutt City, Petone Borough, Eastbourne Borough and Wainuiomata District. The three areas joining the existing city were recognised as communities and Community Boards were established in each area. These Community Boards still exist today.

3.    Hutt City Council (the council) last reviewed its representation arrangements prior to the 2019 local authority elections.  At that time the Council’s initial and final proposals were for Council to continue to comprise the Mayor and 12 Councillors elected from the existing six wards. The proposals also included the retention of the three existing Community Boards with their existing membership. There were two appeals against the Council’s final proposal.

4.    In March 2019, after considering the appeal, the Local Government Commission (LGC) found that the city-wide communities of interest coupled with the nature of Lower Hutt as a relatively compact city, particularly the central valley floor area defined largely by its eastern and western hills and harbour shoreline, provided a strong argument for a more city-wide approach to representation. Their view was that such an approach would help bring the city together even more.

5.    They also stated that the need for this fresh approach could be seen in the repeated efforts through successive representation reviews to address perceived inequities of representation at the community level between the three areas added and the ‘old Lower Hutt’.

6.    They acknowledged the importance of local communities of interest and their view was that these can and should be nurtured, first through explicit recognition of their existence and then through discussion of the most effective means for their representation including through possible groupings with communities with sufficient commonalities.

7.    Their decision was that six city-wide Councillors should be established and the current six ward grouping retained until such time as the Council had the opportunity to give further consideration to the appropriateness or otherwise of the present six wards and, if it so wished, consider changes in time for the subsequent 2022 elections.

8.    The decision to create city-wide Councillors gives Council an opportunity to carefully consider how the new governance approach can help it make the most of the increased opportunities for recognising and involving local communities of interest in decision-making. 

9.    After receiving feedback from Community Board members, officers have reviewed Community Board functions and delegations.  Hutt City Council already has some of the most extensive Community Board delegations in New Zealand.  However, given the consistency of feedback received in a number of reviews of Community Board functions and delegations officers are proposing amended Community Board delegations for Council’s approval.

10.  At the same time, work has been completed on developing a “new model” of representation and participation for Council to consider. This model acknowledges the points the LGC made in respect of increased opportunities for recognising and involving local communities of interest in decision-making.

11.  Officers recommend that further work be completed on the “new model” including a Council and iwi workshop to identify communities of interest (other than geographical), develop approaches for deciding which Councillors will work with each group and ensuring city-wide and ward Councillors work together with communities to ensure the best outcomes are achieved.  Officers recommend that this work on the new model is completed so that a report can be prepared for Council’s meeting on 28 July 2020.

Community Boards - Functions and Delegations for Community Boards

12.  The role of a Community Board member is varied. Being an effective member consists of more than just attending meetings. It also involves a high level of commitment. In order to effectively represent the community a member will need to attend many other meetings and events in their local community. There are two key roles – representative and governance.

13.  Councillors are appointed to community boards under section 19F of the Electoral Act 2001.  This section states that if the local authority’s territory is divided into wards, those appointed must be members of the territorial authority representing a ward in which the community is situated. This means that when Councillors are elected to represent a ward, they have to be appointed to the Community Board in that ward area if there is one.

14.  When the LGC established city-wide Councillors, part of its decision was that one Councillor be appointed to each of the Community Boards.  Councillors are appointed as ordinary members of the Community Board and have no additional functions given to them as part of the appointment. 

15.  Part of a Community Board’s governance role includes carrying out the functions and delegations given to it by Council. Section 32 of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) makes provision for local authorities to delegate responsibilities, duties and powers to community boards, with the proviso that a territorial authority must consider whether or not to delegate to a community board if the delegation would enable the community board to best achieve its role.

16.  Council at its meeting held on 4 November 2019 (Minute No. C 19104(2)) adopted interim delegations to community boards for the start of the 2019-2022 triennium (see Appendix 1). This was done in order to provide opportunity for the delegations to be reviewed for consideration by Council in consultation with the community boards early in 2020. The interim delegations adopted by Council were the delegations made to community boards for the 2016-2019 triennium.

Reviews of functions and delegations

17.  Community Board functions and delegations have been considered several times since 2006. During the 2006 Representation Review Council resolved to review how it could, in the future work with and support those communities without community boards, review the support provided to community boards and ward committees and initiate ways to improve Council, community board/ward committee and officer relationships.

18.  Project teams were established and they worked extensively during 2007 and into 2008, reporting to the Governance Working Group and its successor, the Governance Committee, with recommendations going on to Council.  In broad terms, the work carried out over this period addressed roles and relationships, liaison and support, training, budgets and discretionary funds, processes and delegations, and local community plans and embedded actions relating to these in the Community Board functions and delegations where they remain to this day.

19.  Council’s Code of Conduct was made applicable to all elected/appointed representatives and Standing Orders amended to reflect the status of community boards as the representatives of their communities.  The preparation of a protocol for the development of local community plans was included.

20.  In June 2008 Council adopted:

a.    a Policy on the Functions and Roles of Council, Community Boards and Community Committees;

b.    a Statement of Intention outlining how Council would work with and support the many communities that exist within Lower Hutt city, and

c.     increased delegations to community boards and community committees to take effect from 1 July 2008.

21. In April 2016 the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Wainuiomata Community Board wrote to Hutt City Council’s Chief Executive to ask for a review of the Delegations and Functions of Boards and Committees[3].  Although the delegations and functions at the time were slightly different the feedback is relevant to the functions and delegations discussion. Two workshops were held with Board/Committee members and three members gave feedback by phone.

22. Most people felt the functions and delegations at that time were reasonable and covered what should be done by Board/Committee members.  The key “issue” was the relationship between Boards/Committees and Council and the level of regard that Board/Committee members felt them, their views and their communities were given by Council. This related strongly to the respective level of decision-making authority held by Boards/Committees compared with Council.

23. Hutt City Council already has some of the most extensive Community Board delegations in New Zealand.  Attached as Appendix 2 is a table that provides a comparison of Hutt City Council with eight of its peer councils. Of those councils, four also have community boards, and the delegations made by those councils to their community boards are summarised in Appendix 2.

24. The decision to create city-wide Councillors gave Council the chance to consider how Community Boards would work with Council in the new environment.  With this in mind, the opportunity was taken in mid-March 2020 to ask Community Board members for their views about their functions and delegations. The feedback sees two roles for Board members:

a.       meaningfully contributing to decision-making at a community and Council level; and

b.       having control over service delivery and Council matters in the particular Community Board area.

25. Community Boards expressed a concern that they are unable to represent their community’s interests as well as they might because of a lack of information and involvement in decision-making at a community level about any Council activities, plans and policy decision-making that might potentially cause issues for the people living in their area.  Council officers are sometimes slow to respond to community concerns leaving Board members with few options when faced with addressing those concerns. Making recommendations to Council and having an opportunity to present recommendations to Council is very important.

Discussion

26.  The interim delegations adopted by Council in November 2019 have again been reviewed for the new triennium, and compared with the delegations made by other councils to their community boards.  In light of feedback received, further delegations have been added.

27.  Attached as Appendix 3 are proposed delegations to community boards for the 2019-2022 triennium. Care has been taken to address the LGA requirement for a territorial authority to consider whether or not to delegate to a community board if the delegation would enable the community board to best achieve its role.

28.  The major changes made since the November 2019 adoption of interim delegations are:

a.    The addition of informal engagement with Council through attendance at Briefings and quarterly Chairs meetings with the Mayor and Chief Executive.

b.    The addition of informal support by the Corporate Leadership Team and an Elected Member Support officer, and information on the Council work programme from the corporate agenda process.

c.         The addition of Standing Order 21.16 which provides for Board Chairs to participate in discussion on matters of interest to their area at meetings of Standing Committees.

d.         The ability for Boards to assign portfolios to their members.

e.         The ability for each Board to have one suitably trained member available for selection to sit on the hearing for  notified resource consent applications in the Board’s area, where the Board does not wish to take an advocacy role in its local area or lodge a submission.

29.  These additional delegations meet the majority of concerns more recently expressed by Community Board members and also align with previous views gathered during the various functions and delegations reviews.

Options

30.   Council has the options of retaining the interim delegations, adopting the proposed delegations or making further changes to the delegations. 

Community Panels

31.   In July 2017 Hutt City Council established four Community Panels in the Northern, Eastern, Western and Central wards.  The panels were established as part of the Council’s second-tier representation and cover the areas without Community Boards.  The Community Panels model followed on from the previous system of Community Committees.  The focus was on improving representation by using a more informal model of representation that could potentially make it more inviting for people to come and discuss community issues, in that people may feel more comfortable and therefore more willing to take part. 

 

32.   A senior Council officer was appointed to each Panel to assist them where needed and attend meetings.  Each Community Panel was allocated $114k funding to distribute to community based activities and projects over the triennium.  This funding was previously used to cover the costs of the Community Committees that existed up to 2016.

 

33.   Following the establishment of the panels, a qualitative research study was set up in late-2017/early 2018, with the purpose of benchmarking the views of Community Panel members early in their tenure.  The study provided useful insight and direction for enhancing the effective functioning of the panels as they progressed.

 

34.   In the latter half of 2019, an update study was undertaken to obtain further feedback from panel members to assist with future direction.  The council officers supporting the Community Panels were also asked for their thoughts, to help clarify points and observations made by the panel members.

 

35.    Generally those panel members interviewed (13 out of 17) were positive about their experience.  They collectively felt that the concept of the panels, as intended, was positive and the make-up of the panels was diverse in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, strengths and so on. Good leadership was identified as key to success as was good co-operation between panel members, Councillors and the Council officers appointed to guide the panels.

 

36.    The biggest positive was being able to help their community achieve projects and acquire the amenities it needed.  The Panel also provided the chance to gain experience working in a community role, without having to go through an election process.

 

37.    Some panel members wanted more clarity, from the outset, about the role of the Community Panels and felt that a better connection with Council officers, beyond those appointed to guide the panels, was needed. Also there was a feeling that commitment levels fluctuated. 

 

38.    People wanted clearer guidelines on who to go to and what happens if there is a significant problem or change/s. Some felt that there should be more structure with regard to note taking and communication after every meeting and that there could be more accountability and feedback to the panel members about the projects that are completed.

Future approach with Community Panels

39.   Community Panels fulfilled the role they were given and contributed their time and allocated the community funding they were given by Council. A number of community projects were completed – for example, defibrillators were placed throughout the Western and Eastern wards and the Naenae clock is back and operating.  From an engagement perspective, Panels took approaches that suited their communities through surveys, contact and consultation with community groups, and community days.

 

40.   Council recognises the importance of community funding in providing for community based projects and activities and wants to see this work continue. To this end, Community Panels will be established for the 2019-2022 triennium.

 

41.   Officers suggest a similar process to that followed in 2016 be used to appoint Community Panel members.  This will include:

 

a.      advertising for expressions of interest – applicants will need to provide a CV together with support from community (references/support can be written or in person, not formal though);

b.      short list by a subcommittee of council comprised of two city wide and two ward councillors and the Deputy Mayor supported by officers as required;

c.      recommendations to Council OR the subcommittee could be given decision making powers and required to report to Council to explain the decisions made; and

d.      Community Panel members appointed by full Council with a powhiri.

 

42.   Having city-wide and ward Councillors gives Council opportunities to explore how to introduce more flexibility into representation arrangements for the city and try new engagement approaches. The wider issues of second tier representation are important and should be addressed in a thoughtful and considered way in the future representation review. 

 

A model of representation and participation

 

43. The key to effective political representation and meaningful participation in a democracy at work is to engage all citizens so they feel that they are a part of society and its institutions[4].

 

44. A central issue when considering representation is how best to ensure that all communities of interest – geographical, identity, cultural, social, economic – can contribute to the decision-making process. We all have a responsibility to ensure that our city provides opportunities for everyone living here to thrive.  To achieve that we need to be able to hear their voices.

 

45. Councillors and the Mayor have discussed the role of city-wide and ward Councillors separately with city-wide and ward Councillors in early February and together at the Councillor hui on 17 March 2020.  Councillors supported finding a way to best ensure that all communities of interest can contribute to decision-making – both geographical communities of interest and other types of communities of interest.  There was also support for retaining Community Panels.

 

46. Officers have developed the following model which is built around supporting a new way of working with our communities of interest in the city.  

47. Essentially this proposed model is designed to maximise people’s ability to participate in decision-making processes and support a well-functioning democracy in the city.

 

Mana whenua

 

48. Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty) is the foundation for power sharing between tāngata whenua (the first peoples of Aotearoa), and tāngata Tiriti (all others who have come here). The intention of the Treaty was to establish an on-going relationship of mutual benefit, built on trust and good faith between tāngata whenua and all who were to come.  Mana whenua means the indigenous people (Māori) who have historic and territorial rights over the land. It refers to iwi and hapu (Māori tribal groups) who have these rights in Te Awakairangi/Lower Hutt.

 

49. Previously Council has developed Memoranda of Understanding with iwi groups in the city.  These MoU have generally focused on our legislative obligations to consult iwi on matters relating to issues like the District Plan and the city’s long term and annual plans.  The current MoU’s will soon expire and work is underway to progress revised MoU’s. 

 

50. These MoU’s will reflect the partnership relationship with mana whenua to ensure they are part of the decision-making process from the beginning.  Any framework for engagement must be tailored to the needs of each party. Council will work with mana whenua and urban Māori groups to discuss how best to reflect our relationship through these Memoranda.

 

Geographical communities of interest

51. The ward Councillors work alongside their respective Community Board(s) and Community Panel(s) to engage with their community and work with them to deliver community-based projects and activities. This may be through developing a plan which could include community aspirations, identifying how these could be enabled and delivered, identifying partners already working in the community and how they could be supported/enabled to continue to deliver their mahi (work) and stating how residents can check progress against the plan.  This mahi would be supported by the Neighbourhoods and Communities business group. These local initiatives could feed into the development of the City Plan.

 

City-wide communities of interest

52.   City-wide councillors would, using a portfolio approach, work alongside specific broader community of interest groups to ensure their voice is included in decision-making. These groups could include communities of interest around identity, culture, social or sporting activities, science and technology, and business such as the disability sector, arts and culture, Hutt Valley Chamber and cultural groups. 

 

53.   Each group would work with their Councillor to develop a portfolio plan – a practical approach to working in partnership to deliver desired outcomes and ensuring that the voice of each group is reflected on and considered in decision-making.  This mahi would be supported by the Neighbourhoods and Communities business group.  The voice of city-wide communities of interest would feed into the City Plan.

 

Cross fertilisation

 

54.   This approach increases the involvement of Community Boards and Community Panels at a grass root level, provides support for the ward Councillors and continues the Panels’ community funding role.  The current level of officer support for Councillors, Community Boards and Community Panels will of course continue.

 

55.   It also sees Councillors working directly with city-wide communities of interest and bringing their diverse views to the debate.  The model assumes collaboration between ward and city-wide Councillors to deliver desired outcomes and ensure that the voice of each group is reflected on and considered in decision-making.

 

56.   This model acknowledges the points the LGC made in respect of increased opportunities for recognising and involving local communities of interest in decision-making.  Officers recommend that further work be completed on the “new model” including a Council and iwi workshop to:

 

a.       identify communities of interest;

b.       develop an approach for deciding which Councillors will work with each group; and

c.       develop an agreed approach to ensure city-wide and ward Councillors work together with communities to deliver desired outcomes for the city.   

57. Officers need further direction from Council to fully develop this approach. Officers recommend that Community Panels are re-established with reviewed terms of reference that clarify their role as community funders focused on supporting local projects and initiatives.

 

Representation Review

58. In March 2019 the LGC considered two appeals against Council’s final representation proposal. After considering the appeal their decision was that six city-wide Councillors should be established and the current six ward grouping retained until further work was undertaken and the Council had the opportunity to consider changes in time for the 2022 elections. (See paragraphs 2-8 for a fuller discussion of the LGC’s decision).

 

59. The suggested “new model” of representation is designed to acknowledge the points the LGC made in respect of recognising and involving local communities of interest in deciding and delivering desired outcomes and ensuring that the voice of each group is reflected on and considered in decision-making.  Officers recommend that further work be completed on the “new model” (see paragraph 54).

 

60. There is general agreement that there shouldn’t be a substantive review of representation for the 2022 election and that any review should be completed during the next triennium.  Doing this allows time to bed in a city-wide model and evaluate its effectiveness.  All evaluation material and community feedback will then inform the representation discussion in the 2022-2025 triennium.

Options

61.  Council has the options of:

 

a.     retaining the interim delegations, adopting the proposed delegations or making further changes to the delegations; and

b.     re-establishing Community Panels in a revised role for the 2019-2022 triennium or not re-establishing them.

Consultation

62.  The Mayoral Office has undertaken informal consultation with the city’s three community boards about their delegated authority.

Legal Considerations

63.  Section 52 of the LGA outlines the role of community boards as follows:

The role of a community board is to—

(a) represent, and act as an advocate for, the interests of its community; and

(b) consider and report on all matters referred to it by the territorial authority, or any matter of interest or concern to the community board; and

(c) maintain an overview of services provided by the territorial authority within the community; and

(d) prepare an annual submission to the territorial authority for expenditure within the community; and

(e) communicate with community organisations and special interest groups within the community; and

(f) undertake any other responsibilities that are delegated to it by the territorial authority.

 

64.  Section 53 of the LGA outlines the powers of community boards as follows:

(1) A community board has the powers that are—

(a) delegated to it by the relevant territorial authority in accordance with clause 32 of Schedule 7; …

(3) Despite subsection (1), a community board may not—

(a) acquire, hold, or dispose of property; or

(b) appoint, suspend, or remove staff.

 

65.  Clause 32 of Schedule 7 provides for a local authority to delegate responsibilities, duties or powers to a committee or other subordinate decision-making body, community board, or member or officer of the local authority. Clause 32 (6) requires that a territorial authority must consider whether or not to delegate to a community board if the delegation would enable the community board to best achieve its role. 

66.  The delegations presented for Council consideration reflect the role and powers of community boards as outlined in the LGA.

Financial Considerations

67.  The proposed delegations attached as Appendix 3 include the following new item that has financial implications:

a.    The ability for each Board to have one suitably trained member available for selection to sit on the hearing for notified resource consent applications in the Board’s area, where the Board does not wish to take an advocacy role in its local area or lodge a submission

68.  Any member wishing to become certified under the Making Good Decisions Training, Assessment and Certification Programme for RMA Decision-Makers will be required to complete the Ministry for the Environment training, and it will also be mandatory for members who wish to be hearings commissioners to attend in-house RMA training.

69.  The Making Good Decisions Foundation Course will be offered in Wellington on 14-15 July 2020 at a cost of $2,198.00 per person, exclusive of GST. An assessment is required to be completed prior to attendance, and an assessment completed within one month post attendance. Attendance of community board members would be funded from the elected member training budget.

70.  Any budget allocation made in the current financial year would be treated as a budget variance, and any funding from 1 July 2020 should be included in the Annual Plan for 2020-2021.

71.  Budget allocation for the four community panels was approximately $114k per triennium or $38k per annum. Each Community Panel member received an honorarium of $75 per annum.

72.  Work on the new model will be completed within existing resources.

 


Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 Interim Delegations to Community Boards - November 2019

 

2

Appendix 2 Comparison of HCC with Peer Councils

 

3

Appendix 3 Delegations to Community Boards 2019-2022

 

    

Author: Wendy Moore

Head of Strategy and Planning

 

 

 

Author: Joyanne Stevens

Contractor

 

 

Reviewed By: Jarred Griffiths

Head of the Mayor's Office

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Kathryn Stannard

Head of Democratic Services

 

 

 

Approved By: Jo Miller

Chief Executive

 


Attachment 2

Appendix 2 - Comparison of HCC with Peer Councils

 

HUTT CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY BOARDS – COMPARISON WITH OUR PEER COUNCILS

City or District Council

Population*

Mayor and Councillors

Community Boards

Total number of elected representatives

Distance of communities from main centre

Wellington City

202,737

Mayor & 14 ward crs

2 boards, with 7 and 6 elected members respectively

28

16km, 11km

Hamilton City

160,911

Mayor & 12 ward crs

-

13

n/a

Tauranga City

136,713

Mayor, 6 ward crs & 4 at-large crs

-

11

n/a

Dunedin City

126,255

Mayor & 14 at-large crs

6 boards with 6 elected members each

51

40km, 26km, 17km, 15km

Hutt City

104,532

Mayor, 6 ward crs & 6 at-large crs

3 – 2 with 6 elected members each and 1 with 5 elected members

30

11km, 8km, 3km

Whangarei District

90,960

Mayor & 13 ward crs

-

14

n/a

Palmerston North City

84,639

Mayor & 15 at-large crs

-

16

n/a

Hastings District

81,537

Mayor & 14 ward crs

1 board with 4 elected members, 1  representing each rural subdivision

19

79km, 54km, 21km, 18km

New Plymouth District

80,679

Mayor & 14 ward crs

4 boards with 4 elected members each

31

29km, 18km, 17km, 16km

* Census usually resident population count 2018 Census

The four Councils other than HCC with community boards included in the above table made the following delegations to their community boards for the 2019-2022 triennium:

-      Wellington City Council – authority to make submissions to any organisation in respect of the Board’s area, represent local interests to Council/Committee/Subcommittee meetings, determine expenditure of funds allocated by Council to the Board for specific purposes, consider matters referred by officers/Council/Committees/Subcommittees and make submissions/recommendations, provide input to officers, and have up to two suitably-trained members per Board available for selection to sit on hearings panels on resource management issues where the Board has not made a submission on the matter to be decided.

 

-      Dunedin City Council – authority to make submissions to government and other agencies in respect of the Board’s area, liaise and advocate for the community including adopting a community plan and making submissions to Council on the LTP and Financial Strategy, provide input on parks and reserves matters, make submissions to Council on District Plan/economic development/property sale/acquisition and tourism matters which impact on the Board’s area, have one suitably trained member per Board appointed to the Hearings Committee for notified applications in the Board’s area, establish and operate civil defence coordination centres, make submissions on traffic related matters and propose priorities for road improvement works in the Board’s area, fix priorities and expend funds allocated for discretionary spending in accordance with funding allocation guidelines, recommend policies to the CEO and make submissions on policies affecting the Board’s area and programmes which have effects at neighbourhood level. 

 

-      Hastings District Council – in addition to the statutory role in section 52 of the LGA, authority to appoint a Board member to organisations approved by the Council, make submissions to the LTP/Annual Plan/policies affecting the Board’s area, exercising Council’s powers and functions regarding vehicle crossings/gates and cattle stops/overhanging trees, and exercising Council’s statutory powers in respect of road user behaviour at intersections/controls on stopping or overtaking/controls on turning/pedestrian safety/footpath maintenance and improvements/and accident investigation studies/lighting/other safety works.

 

-      New Plymouth District Council – in addition to the statutory role in section 52 of the LGA, authority to determine temporary road closure applications in the Board’s area.

 

 


Attachment 3

Appendix 3 - Possible Delegations to Community Boards 2019-2022

 

OPTION FOR INCREASED DELEGATIONS TO COMMUNITY BOARDS FOR 2019-2022

 

This document contains the delegations made to Community Boards for 2016-2019, with possible changes for 2019-2022 highlighted in yellow.

Care has been taken to address the requirement contained in Clause 32 of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) for a territorial authority to consider whether or not to delegate to a community board if the delegation would enable the community board to best achieve its role.

The role of the boards as contained in section 52 of the LGA is to—

(a) represent, and act as an advocate for, the interests of its community; and

(b) consider and report on all matters referred to it by the territorial authority, or any matter of interest or concern to the community board; and

(c) maintain an overview of services provided by the territorial authority within the community; and

(d) prepare an annual submission to the territorial authority for expenditure within the community; and

(e) communicate with community organisations and special interest groups within the community; and

(f) undertake any other responsibilities that are delegated to it by the territorial authority.

 

The major changes included in this document are:

·      The addition of informal engagement with Council through attendance at Briefings and quarterly Chairs meetings with the Mayor and Chief Executive.

·      The additional of informal support by the Corporate Leadership Team and an Elected Member Support officer, and information on the Council work programme from the corporate agenda process.

·      The addition of Standing Order 21.16 which provides for Board Chairs to participate in discussion on matters of interest to their area at meetings of Standing Committees.

·      The ability for each Board to assign portfolios to members.

·      The ability for each Board to have one suitably trained member available for selection to sit on the hearing for notified resource consent applications in the Board’s area, where the Board does not wish to take an advocacy role in its local area or lodge a submission.  

 

community boards – functions and delegations 

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

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

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

These delegations are based on the following principles:

·           Issues relevant to a specific community should be decided as closely as possible to that community.  Where an issue has broader implications, i.e. any effects of the decision cross the board boundary, the matter will be decided by Council after seeking a recommendation from the relevant Community Board. This includes any decisions that have strategic importance to the city as a whole, and those that will impact on or create consequences for other parts of the city or the city as a whole. An assessment of issues that fall into this category will be made as part of the corporate agenda process for each meeting cycle. Any uncertainties over interpretation will be referred to the Mayor and Chief Executive to determine in consultation with the relevant Standing Committee and Board Chair;

·           Efficient decision-making should be paramount;

·           Conflicts of interest should be avoided and risks minimised;

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

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

These delegations:

(a)     recognise that the role of Council is to look after the affairs of the city as a whole, and the role of a Community Board is to represent the interests of its community.

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

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

(d)    are subject to any other statutory requirements that may apply to a particular delegation;

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

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

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

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

DELEGATIONS

Engage informally with Council through:

·         Council Briefings - Community Board members are invited to attend all Council Briefings unless the topic is for Council members only and outlined as such on the invitation.

·         Quarterly meetings of the Community Board Chairs with the Mayor and Chief Executive to consider the effectiveness of community representation and the accompanying support mechanisms.

·         Corporate Leadership Team contact, with one senior officer assigned as the contact person to attend each Community Board meeting and provide liaison with Council.

·         Elected Member Support – Democratic Services hopes to establish a position that will provide seamless liaison between Council, staff and Community Boards.

·         Corporate agenda process for each meeting cycle, providing information on the Council’s work programme for the year broken down by cycle.

Provide their local community’s input, through preparing reports or submissions, on:

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

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

·         Changes or variations to the District Plan.

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

·         The disposal or acquisition of significant assets.

·         Road safety including road safety education within its area.

·         The review of Local Community Plans as required.

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

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

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

Standing Order 21.16, Community Board and Youth Council Participation in Meetings of Council and Standing Committees, makes provision for the Chair of a Community Board (or their representative as advised by the Chair prior to the meeting) to participate in discussion on any matters which are of interest to a particular ward area at meetings of the Standing Committees of Council, but there are no voting rights or rights to move or second motions. The rules of debate applicable to members of the Council apply to the Community Board representative. Notification of the intention to exercise speaking rights and identification of the relevant agenda item are to be provided to the Chair prior to the meeting. In exceptional circumstances Board representatives may be invited to participate on specific subjects at meetings of the full Council, at the discretion of the Council Chair.

Co-ordinate with Council staff:

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

Maintain:

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

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

Develop:

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

Promote:

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

·         Arts and crafts in its area.

Grant:

·         Local community awards.

Appoint:

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

·         Portfolio holders who will have responsibility for reporting back to the Board on the topics assigned.

Endorse:

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

Decide:

In the Community Board’s area:

·         Naming new roads and alterations to street names.

·         Official naming of parks, reserves and sports grounds within the provisions of Council’s Naming Policy. Note [5]

·         Removal and/or planting of street trees within the provisions of Council’s Operational Guide for Urban Forest Plan where a dispute arises that cannot be resolved at officer level.  Note [6]

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

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

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

·         The allocation of funding from the Community Engagement Fund in accordance with Council’s adopted guidelines (attached as Appendix 1).

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

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

Resource Management Hearings:

·         Each Community Board may have one suitably trained member available for selection to sit on the Hearings Subcommittee for notified resource consent applications within the Board’s area. This will require the member to hold current certification under the Making Good Decisions Training, Assessment and Certification Programme for RMA Decision-Makers. No Board member shall be eligible for selection if the Board has made a submission on the matter to be decided.

NOTE: The Ministry for the Environment advocates that Councils offer specialist RMA training in areas of law which are difficult to grasp or where mistakes are commonly made. This is to complement the Good Decision Making RMA training that they run (which is an overview and basic summary of decision making, rather than an in-depth training in specific areas of the RMA). Therefore in order to facilitate this, the RMA training run for elected members who wish to be hearings commissioners is mandatory.

Reasons for the importance of the training:

§  Hearings commissioners are kept abreast of developments in the legislation.

§  Legal and technical errors that have been made previously are avoided (many of which have resulted in Environment Court action which is costly, time consuming and often creates unrealistic expectations for the community).

§  The reputation of Council as good and fair decision makers or judges (rather than legislators) is upheld.

 

Consider and make recommendations to Council on:

·         Particular issues notified from time to time by Council to the Community Board, including roading issues within the Community Board’s area.

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

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

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

·         The setting, amending or revoking of speed limits in accordance with the Hutt City Council Speed Limits Bylaw 2015, including the hearing of any submissions.


 

appendix 1 – community engagement fund

criteria

 

The fund is for local activities and events that directly benefit the local community. 

 

To be eligible for funding the organisation must be a charitable trust or an incorporated society and the activity must take place within the Hutt. 

 

Each of the city’s seven wards receive funding according to the number of residents within its boundaries. For each resident there is an allocation of 40 cents. 

The ward allocations are listed below, along with the remaining balances for the 2019/20 financial year:

Ward

Amount

Balance for 2019/20

Eastbourne

$2,366

$1,178

Petone

$6,250

$1.00

Wainuiomata

$8,607

$6,257

Central

$9,320

$5,450

Eastern

$8,461

$5,042

Northern

$7,644

$2,794

Western

$6,201

$6,201

Applications must support the Local Community Plan, if there is one, and also core Council business as identified in the Long Term Plan.

Decisions

Each Community Board decides the funding applications within its area. Boards are free to distribute their funding in a single large allocation or spread it over a number of smaller ones.

What can be funded

·      purchase of office equipment

·      food and catering costs

·      community festivals

·      youth group events and projects run by the elderly or citizens associations

·      art projects that are not part of the core curriculum

·      advertising, promotion costs

What won’t be funded

Activities that:

·      promote an organisation’s religious, ethical, commercial or political views

·      involve buying land or buildings or carrying out maintenance on buildings 

·      duplicate services that are already covered by Council or by government agencies eg, health or education providers

·      have already begun or have already finished

·      involve the redistribution of funds to others at the applicant’s discretion

·      involve fundraising or legal costs

·      involve capital investments or trust funds

·      go towards prize money

·      are operational costs eg, salaries, wages, rent, power

Funding rules

Successful applicants must:

·      use funds only for the approved purpose and in accordance with any terms and conditions set by Council

·      use funds by June 30 of the following year

·      let Council’s funding officer know immediately if any difficulty or potential difficulty arises that may compromise the service or project

·      lay a complaint with Police if any funds are stolen or misappropriated, and then notify Council

·      allow Council to audit the use of the funds should it wish to do so

·      recognise Council’s  support in all publicity material, annual reports and similar publications

·      complete an Accountability Report no later than six weeks after completing the project. This should outline how the funds were used and how the community benefited

·      make a presentation to the funding group showing how the event met its objectives.

Council’s Community Funding Advisor is available to support and assist community groups when making applications through the Council’s online grants system.

 


Attachment 4

Appendix 4 - Adopted Community Board Functions and Delegations 2019-2022

 

 

community boards – functions and delegations 

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

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

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

These delegations are based on the following principles:

·           Issues relevant to a specific community should be decided as closely as possible to that community.  Where an issue has broader implications, i.e. any effects of the decision cross the board boundary, the matter will be decided by Council after seeking a recommendation from the relevant Community Board. This includes any decisions that have strategic importance to the city as a whole, and those that will impact on or create consequences for other parts of the city or the city as a whole. An assessment of issues that fall into this category will be made as part of the corporate agenda process for each meeting cycle. Any uncertainties over interpretation will be referred to the Mayor and Chief Executive to determine in consultation with the relevant Standing Committee and Board Chair;

·           Efficient decision-making should be paramount;

·           Conflicts of interest should be avoided and risks minimised;

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

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

These delegations:

(a)     recognise that the role of Council is to look after the affairs of the city as a whole, and the role of a Community Board is to represent the interests of its community.

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

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

(d)    are subject to any other statutory requirements that may apply to a particular delegation;

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

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

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

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

DELEGATIONS

Engage informally with Council through:

·         Council Briefings - Community Board members are invited to attend all Council Briefings unless the topic is for Council members only and outlined as such on the invitation.

·         Quarterly meetings of the Community Board Chairs with the Mayor and Chief Executive to consider the effectiveness of community representation and the accompanying support mechanisms.

·         Corporate Leadership Team contact, with one senior officer assigned as the contact person to attend each Community Board meeting and provide liaison with Council.

·         Elected Member Support – Democratic Services hopes to establish a position that will provide seamless liaison between Council, staff and Community Boards.

·         Corporate agenda process for each meeting cycle, providing information on the Council’s work programme for the year broken down by cycle.

Provide their local community’s input, through preparing reports or submissions, on:

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

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

·         Changes or variations to the District Plan.

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

·         The disposal or acquisition of significant assets.

·         Road safety including road safety education within its area.

·         The review of Local Community Plans as required.

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

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

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

Standing Order 21.16, Community Board and Youth Council Participation in Meetings of Council and Standing Committees, makes provision for the Chair of a Community Board (or their representative as advised by the Chair prior to the meeting) to participate in discussion on any matters which are of interest to a particular ward area at meetings of the Standing Committees of Council, but there are no voting rights or rights to move or second motions. The rules of debate applicable to members of the Council apply to the Community Board representative. Notification of the intention to exercise speaking rights and identification of the relevant agenda item are to be provided to the Chair prior to the meeting. In exceptional circumstances Board representatives may be invited to participate on specific subjects at meetings of the full Council, at the discretion of the Council Chair.

Co-ordinate with Council staff:

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

Provide input to officers on:

·         Roadworks, water supply, sewerage, stormwater drainage, waste management and traffic management for its local area.

·         Parks and reserves and associated public facilities, recreational facilities and community activities within its local area.

Develop:

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

Promote:

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

·         Arts and crafts in its area.

Grant:

·         Local community awards.

Appoint:

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

·         Portfolio holders who will have responsibility for reporting back to the Board on the topics assigned.

Endorse:

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

Decide:

In the Community Board’s area:

·         Naming new roads and alterations to street names.

·         Official naming of parks, reserves and sports grounds within the provisions of Council’s Naming Policy. Note [7]

·         Removal and/or planting of street trees within the provisions of Council’s Operational Guide for Urban Forest Plan where a dispute arises that cannot be resolved at officer level.  Note [8]

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

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

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

·         The allocation of funding from the Community Engagement Fund in accordance with Council’s adopted guidelines (attached as Appendix 1).

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

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

Resource Management Hearings:

·         Each Community Board may have one suitably trained member available for selection to sit on the Hearings Subcommittee for notified resource consent applications. This will require the member to hold current certification under the Making Good Decisions Training, Assessment and Certification Programme for RMA Decision-Makers. No Board member shall be eligible for selection if the Board has made a submission on the matter to be decided.

NOTE: The Ministry for the Environment advocates that Councils offer specialist RMA training in areas of law which are difficult to grasp or where mistakes are commonly made. This is to complement the Good Decision Making RMA training that they run (which is an overview and basic summary of decision making, rather than an in-depth training in specific areas of the RMA). Therefore in order to facilitate this, the RMA training run for elected members who wish to be hearings commissioners is mandatory.

Reasons for the importance of the training:

§  Hearings commissioners are kept abreast of developments in the legislation.

§  Legal and technical errors that have been made previously are avoided (many of which have resulted in Environment Court action which is costly, time consuming and often creates unrealistic expectations for the community).

§  The reputation of Council as good and fair decision makers or judges (rather than legislators) is upheld.

 

Consider and make recommendations to Council on:

·         Particular issues notified from time to time by Council to the Community Board, including roading issues within the Community Board’s area.

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

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

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

·         The setting, amending or revoking of speed limits in accordance with the Hutt City Council Speed Limits Bylaw 2015, including the hearing of any submissions.


 

appendix 1 – community engagement fund

criteria

 

The fund is for local activities and events that directly benefit the local community. 

 

To be eligible for funding the organisation must be a charitable trust or an incorporated society and the activity must take place within the Hutt. 

 

Each of the city’s seven wards receive funding according to the number of residents within its boundaries. For each resident there is an allocation of 40 cents. 

The ward allocations are listed below, along with the remaining balances for the 2019/20 financial year:

Ward

Amount

Balance for 2019/20

Eastbourne

$2,366

$1,178

Petone

$6,250

$1.00

Wainuiomata

$8,607

$6,257

Central

$9,320

$5,450

Eastern

$8,461

$5,042

Northern

$7,644

$2,794

Western

$6,201

$6,201

Applications must support the Local Community Plan, if there is one, and also core Council business as identified in the Long Term Plan.

Decisions

Each Community Board decides the funding applications within its area. Boards are free to distribute their funding in a single large allocation or spread it over a number of smaller ones.

What can be funded

·      purchase of office equipment

·      food and catering costs

·      community festivals

·      youth group events and projects run by the elderly or citizens associations

·      art projects that are not part of the core curriculum

·      advertising, promotion costs

What won’t be funded

Activities that:

·      promote an organisation’s religious, ethical, commercial or political views

·      involve buying land or buildings or carrying out maintenance on buildings 

·      duplicate services that are already covered by Council or by government agencies eg, health or education providers

·      have already begun or have already finished

·      involve the redistribution of funds to others at the applicant’s discretion

·      involve fundraising or legal costs

·      involve capital investments or trust funds

·      go towards prize money

·      are operational costs eg, salaries, wages, rent, power

Funding rules

Successful applicants must:

·      use funds only for the approved purpose and in accordance with any terms and conditions set by Council

·      use funds by June 30 of the following year

·      let Council’s funding officer know immediately if any difficulty or potential difficulty arises that may compromise the service or project

·      lay a complaint with Police if any funds are stolen or misappropriated, and then notify Council

·      allow Council to audit the use of the funds should it wish to do so

·      recognise Council’s  support in all publicity material, annual reports and similar publications

·      complete an Accountability Report no later than six weeks after completing the project. This should outline how the funds were used and how the community benefited

·      make a presentation to the funding group showing how the event met its objectives.

Council’s Community Funding Advisor is available to support and assist community groups when making applications through the Council’s online grants system.

 


                                                                                     168                                                           23 June 2020

Eastbourne Community Board

12 June 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/594)

 

 

 

 

Report no: ECB2020/4/54

 

Chair's Report

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the report be noted and received.

 

 

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1: Chair's Report June 23 2020

169

 

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1:Chair's Report June 23 2020

 

Chair’s Report June 23   2020

 

Welcome to Level 1 and meeting in person again.

During lockdown the Community Board kept in touch with regular zoom meetings. In the early days our focus was on encouraging streets to form neighbour support groups. This was very successful and we had regular reports of how much people were enjoying the increased contact with neighbours. There was also wonderful support for older people which was greatly appreciated. We hope the closer relationships built up will last now we are free to roam.

 

Maire St trial shared pathway

Over the last few years the ECB has received requests for a safe way for pedestrians and cyclists to navigate the parking area at the end of Maire St. Their main worry is cars backing out making it unsafe for people on bikes, particularly little kids. The ECB has been working with HCC to improve pedestrian and cycle access through the area and separating other users from vehicles is expected to make the area safer for everyone.

ECB’s Facebook presence is proving useful for gauging quick feedback about proposals like this one but the ECB is always aware that not all residents use social media and we talk directly to affected residents where possible.

 

ECB is requesting Council to develop options for a safe shared walking and cycling route with appropriate facilities and development along the foreshore between Windy Point and Burdans Gate.

( See the memorandum on Maire St trial shared pathway later in this agenda)

 

Williams Park tennis courts

The proposal to upgrade and expand the use of the Williams Park tennis courts has aroused community concern about the preservation of the courts for public use and the feasibility of the proposed mesh curtain that is essential to the development.

 

Following the receipt of a report by a professional mechanical engineer, and local resident David Reid, on the proposed mesh curtain the ECB wrote to Hutt City to draw attention to a number of technical concerns in this report. Bucklands Beach Intermediate School, which was referenced as an example of such a curtain, reported that they had found it impractical and abandoned it after a year. A Lower Hutt school, which is investigating a similar mesh curtain, has been advised against it as too difficult to set up and remove and having health and safety issues. David Reid’s report also raised questions about the practicality of such a system in Wellington conditions.

 

Wellesley has welcomed David Reid's report on the design and assured the ECB the issues raised in it will be taken into consideration when their final designs are drawn up and checked by their engineer.  The Board has received an assurance that as land owner, Council also needs to be satisfied that the system is appropriate.

 

Council has also assured the Board that “the proposal has always been to retain tennis as the primary use with the space function broadening.  The tennis nets will be put back in place at the end of each use by Wellesley to ensure the tennis availability is maintained.” 

We have also been given an undertaking “that should the curtain system fail Council will look to replace it with a permanent fence”. This would ensure the preservation of the integrity of the present six tennis courts.

 

Eastern Shared Path

Council is still progressing the resource consent and now have a set of draft conditions that they will be forwarding to GWRC for their information. The revised hearing date has yet to be agreed.

With respect to the shovel ready application, the project has got past the first sift by the Government’s Infrastructure Group (there were over 1900 national projects submitted initially) and along with the remaining 800 projects, is to be considered by Ministers. Stiff competition but we can hope.

 

Day’s Bay Wharf

After the pause during Levels 4 & 3 work on the wharf at Level 2 resumed slowly owing to the need to conform to Covid-19 health requirements. Once we got to Level 3 the pace picked up and the project is now moving forward more quickly. The hope now is that the project will be completed in January or, if all goes very well, by the end of December in time for summer.

 

Dunes

Council has arranged for dunes expert, Jim Dahm, to come to Eastbourne in the next few weeks to give us ideas for a planting programme for the dunes along the esplanade to reduce the sand blowing over the wall and protect the dunes. Once we have a plan volunteers can start planting.

 

Virginia Horrocks

23/06/2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


                                                                                     176                                                           23 June 2020

Eastbourne Community Board

31 March 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/332)

 

 

 

 

Report no: ECB2020/4/125

 

Days Bay Pedestrian Crossing Delay

 

Purpose of Report

1.    To inform the Eastbourne Community Board in relation to traffic delays experienced at the Days Bay Zebra Pedestrian Crossing and options to mitigate those delays.

Recommendations

That the Board notes and receives the report.

 

2.    A Community Board decision is not required to action the proposed traffic management trial.

 

Background

3.    At the Eastbourne Community Board (ECB) meeting held on 18 February 2020, a member of the community raised questions around the traffic delays experienced at the Days Bay Zebra pedestrian crossing, particularly on busy summer afternoons.

4.    ECB requested that officers consult with the Days Bay Residents Association and present a report at the next ECB meeting discussing these issues and outlining mitigation options.

Discussion

5.    The Eastbourne community have raised questions in relation to traffic delays experienced at the Days Bay zebra pedestrian crossing over the past two years or so.

6.    The complaints generally relate to delays experienced by motorists approaching the pedestrian crossing being delayed by high volumes of pedestrians using the crossing.

7.    The complaints usually relate to busy summer afternoons (Saturday and Sunday) when pedestrian volumes accessing the beach, pavilion, shops and associated parking are highest, although some complaints have related to platoons of ferry passengers exiting the Queens Wharf - Days Bay Wharf ferry.

8.    Anecdotal evidence from some complainant’s reports delays of ’30 minutes to an hour’ during these peak summer periods.

9.    Some residents have suggested that the signalisation of the pedestrian crossing would effectively manage the delays experienced.

10.  Officers analysed car GPS trip data for the previous two years to determine the scale of the delay problems and the period to which these delays apply.

11.  The figure below shows the extent of the route over which the travel time was analysed.

12.  The following figures show the summary of the analysis of the GPS trip data.

13.  The figure above shows average vehicle travel times northbound (towards Lower Hutt) over the study section.

14.  The figure above shows 95th percentile vehicle travel times northbound (towards Lower Hutt) over the study section (note that the 6.30am peak has been discounted as data noise).

15.  This data shows:

a.    the normal free flow travel time is around 120 seconds (2 minutes);

b.    on a typical weekday the average travel time peaks at around 150 seconds (2 ½ minutes) between 2pm and 3pm;

c.     over the 2018/2019 and 2019/2020 summer periods, average weekend travel times peaked at around 200 seconds (between 3 to 3 ½ minutes) between 3pm and 4pm;

d.    during these summer weekend periods, average travel times of 180 seconds or more (1 minute delay) were often experienced between 1.30pm and 5pm; and

e.     the highest travel times experienced over both the 2018/2019 and 2019/2020 summer periods was around 500 seconds (8 to 8 ½ minutes) representing delay of around 6 to 6 ½ minutes over free-flow travel time.

16.  The figure above shows average vehicle travel time southbound (towards Eastbourne) over the study section.

17.  The figure above shows 95th percentile vehicle travel times southbound (towards Eastbourne) over the study section (note that the 6.30am peak has been discounted as data noise).

18.  This data shows:

a.    the normal free flow travel time is around 120 seconds (2 minutes);

b.    on a typical weekday this travel time peaks at around 150 seconds (2 ½ minutes) between 2pm and 3pm;

c.     over the 2018/2019 summer period weekend travel times peaked at around 220 seconds (between 3 ½ and 4 minutes) between 1.30pm and 3.30pm;

d.    over the 2019/2020 summer period, weekend travel times peaked at around 175 seconds (around 3 minutes) between 2.30pm and 4pm;

e.     during these summer weekend periods travel times of 180 seconds or more (1 minute delay) were sometimes experienced between 1.30pm and 3.30pm, however the 2019/2020 data does not show average travel times exceeding 180 seconds;

f.     the highest travel times experienced over the 2018/2019 summer period was around 620 seconds (10 to 10 ½ minutes) representing delay of around 8 to 8 ½ minutes over free-flow travel time; and

g.    the highest travel times experienced over the 2019/2020 summer period was around 300 seconds (5 minutes) representing delay of around 3 minutes over free-flow travel time.

19.  Overall, the analysis of travel time data shows that delays of up to around 10 minutes can be experienced by motorists in the vicinity of the pedestrian crossing on busy summer afternoons; however average delays are typically less than 1 minute outside of the period between 1.30pm and 5pm.

20.  During the peak summer afternoon period (1.30pm to 5pm) average delays are between 1 and 6 minutes per vehicle.

Options

21.  Officers considered the following options for mitigation of motorist delays at the zebra crossing:

a.    Signalisation of the pedestrian crossing and the adjacent exit from the Pavilion carpark.

b.    Installation of a central pedestrian refuge island to split the crossing into two separate crossings.

c.     Trialling active pedestrian traffic management (stop/go control) at the busiest summer periods.

22.  Signalisation of the crossing is estimated to cost between $250,000 and $350,000 plus ongoing maintenance costs. The delays experienced at the crossing are not considered significant enough, or over a significant enough period, to warrant prioritisation of this expenditure.

23.  A central pedestrian island would cost around $50,000 and likely reduce delays for motorists, although the magnitude of this reduction cannot be accurately quantified. The island could also result in a reduction in the road safety level of service for pedestrians using the crossing as motorists rush to get through the crossing before pedestrians exit one half of the crossing to the next.

24.  Active pedestrian management through the use of stop/go control would require the approval and execution of a traffic management plan compliant with the Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (CoPTTM). It is estimated that this control would cost around $2,000 per day to operate (or $4,000 per summer weekend). Over the course of a summer, the cost of the traffic control would be around $16,000 to $50,000 depending on the number of weekends when the control is operating.

25.  Officer’s preferred option is to trial the effectiveness of the active pedestrian management over several weekend afternoons during the 2020/2021 summer period to determine whether the benefits gained warrant the ongoing expenditure.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

26.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

27.  Any reduction in vehicle travel times would result in a reduction in carbon emissions from idling vehicles, however a reduction in average and peak travel times could also induce additional vehicles onto the network.  

28.  The quantum of any decrease in carbon emissions has not been estimated.

Consultation

29.  Officers met on site with the Days Bay Residents Association to discuss the travel time data and possible mitigation options.

30.  The representatives present were not universally supportive of the signalisation option, however all felt that trialling the active pedestrian management was a worthwhile exercise.

Legal Considerations

31.  Council would undertake the active pedestrian management trial under a traffic management plan approved in accordance with CoPTTM.

Financial Considerations

32.  The traffic management trial costs would be accommodated within existing council operational budgets.

Appendices

There are no appendices for this report.   

 

Author: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 

Approved By: John Gloag

Head of Transport

  


MEMORANDUM                                                 178                                                           23 June 2020

Eastbourne Community Board

08 June 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/546)

 

 

 

 

Report no: ECB2020/4/21

 

Maire Street Trial Mini Shared Path

 

 

 

 

Purpose of Report

1.    To record the intent of the Eastbourne Community Board to allocate their $3,000 ‘training’ budget to the installation of a trial mini shared path on Maire Street, Eastbourne.

Recommendations

That the Board:

(i)      notes and receives the memorandum;

(ii)     notes that the Mayor and Chief Executive have agreed that Community Boards’ training budgets can be used for small moral boosting ideas/projects on the proviso that this is on a one off basis due to COVID-19; and

(iii)    agrees to allocate its training budget to the installation of a trial mini shared path on Maire Street, Eastbourne.

Discussion

2.    The Eastbourne Community Board has a $3,000 annual budget allocated to training of community board members.

3.    Due to the community lockdown required to manage the CV19 crisis, the Eastbourne Community Board has been unable to spend the allocation for the 2019/ 2020 financial year.

4.    Rather than have the allocation go to waste, Mayor Barry and the Chief Executive have agreed that community boards can reallocate the budget to a small project(s) that will benefit the local community.

5.    The Eastbourne Community Board has identified the need for a shared path through the Maire Street car park as shown in Figure 1.

6.    The shared path will be implemented on a trial basis and allow pedestrians and cyclists to move safely along the beach margin rather than having to negotiate their way through the car park. It will extend the Marine Parade path to join up with the pathway through Shortt Park

7.    Council’s Traffic Asset Manager met with representatives of the community board on site and agreed the scope of the proposed path. A traffic engineer from the Transport Division subsequently designed the dimensions of the path so that a contractor can implement the markings.

Figure 1. Proposed Maire Street Shared Path

8.    Car parking demand in the area is typically low, so the impact of installing the shared path is expected to be less than minor, other than the increased amenity and accessibility for active transport modes.

9.    It is intended that the works be completed before the end of June 2020. In the event that the markings cannot be undertaken in June (due to weather conditions), the budget will be accrued and spent as soon as the weather permits. 

Consultation

10.  Members of the community board met with adjacent residents to discuss the proposal.

11.  While there has been significant support there have also been some concerns raised which will be assessed as part of the trial.

12.  As the impact of the proposed path is expected to be less than minor (with the exception of the benefit to walkers and cyclists), wider consultation is not considered necessary in accordance with Council’s significance policy.



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

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

[3] In 2016, Council Community Committees were appointed as a Committee of Council under clause 30, Schedule 7 of the LGA 2002.  Community Committees were treated the same as Community Boards as both were required to comply with the Delegations and Functions approved by Council. However, technically they were not the same – a Community Board is legislated for and Community Committees were a subcommittee of Council appointed by leave of Council.

[4] https://www.osce.org/odihr/who-we-are

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

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

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

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