HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_BLACK_AGENDA_COVER

 

 

 

22 September 2020

 

 

 

Order Paper for Council meeting to be held in the

Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt,

on:

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 29 September 2020 commencing at 2.00pm

 

 

 

Membership

 

 

Mayor C Barry (Chair)

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

Cr D Bassett

Cr J Briggs

Cr K Brown

Cr B Dyer

Cr S Edwards

Cr D Hislop

Cr C Milne

Cr A Mitchell

Cr S Rasheed

Cr N Shaw

Cr L Sutton

 

 

 

 

 

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 CITY


HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_SCREEN_MEDRES
 

 

 


COUNCIL

 

Membership:

13 

Meeting Cycle:

Council meets on a six weekly basis (Extraordinary Meetings can be called following a resolution of Council; or on the requisition of the Chair or one third of the total membership of Council)

POWER TO (BEING A POWER THAT IS NOT CAPABLE OF BEING DELEGATED)1:

        Make a rate.

       Make bylaws.

       Borrow money other than in accordance with the Long Term Plan (LTP).

        Purchase or dispose of assets other than in accordance with the LTP.

        Purchase or dispose of Council land and property other than in accordance with the LTP.

        Adopt the LTP, Annual Plan and Annual Report.

        Adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the Local Government Act 2002 in association with the LTP or developed for the purpose of the Local Governance Statement.

        Appoint the Chief Executive.

        Exercise any powers and duties conferred or imposed on the local authority by the Local Government Act 1974, the Public Works Act 1981, or the Resource Management Act 1991, that are unable to be delegated.

        Undertake all other actions which are by law not capable of being delegated.

        The power to adopt a Remuneration and Employment Policy for Council employees.

 

DECIDE ON:

Policy issues

       Adoption of all policy required by legislation.

       Adoption of strategies, and policies with a city-wide or strategic focus.

 

District Plan

       Approval to call for submissions on any Proposed District Plan, Plan Changes and Variations.

       Prior to public notification, approval of recommendations of District Plan Hearings Subcommittees on any Proposed Plan, Plan Changes (including private Plan Changes) and Variations, on the recommendation of the Regulatory Committee.

 

1       Work required prior to the making of any of these decisions may be delegated.

       The withdrawal of Plan Changes in accordance with clause 8D, Part 1, Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

       Approval, to make operative, District Plan and Plan Changes (in accordance with clause 17, Part 1, Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991).

       Acceptance, adoption or rejection of private Plan Changes.

 

Representation, electoral and governance matters

        The method of voting for the Triennial elections.

        Representation reviews.

        Council’s Code of Conduct for elected members

        Local Governance Statement.

        Elected Members’ Remuneration.

        The outcome of any extraordinary vacancies on Council.

        Any other matters for which a local authority decision is required under the Local Electoral Act 2001.

        Appointment and discharge of members of committees when not appointed by the Mayor.

        All matters identified in these Terms of Reference as delegated to Council Committees (or otherwise delegated by the Council) and oversee those delegations.

        Council‘s delegations to officers and community boards.

 

Delegations and employment of the Chief Executive

Review and negotiation of the contract, performance agreement and remuneration of the Chief Executive.

 

Meetings and committees

        Standing Orders for Council and its committees.

        Council’s annual meeting schedule.

 

Long Term and Annual Plans

        The adoption of the budgetary parameters for the LTP and Annual Plans.

        Determination of rating levels and policies required as part of the LTP.

        Adoption of Consultation Documents, proposed and final LTPs and proposed and final Annual Plans.

 

Council Controlled Organisations

        The establishment and disposal of any Council Controlled Organisation or Council Controlled Trading Organisation.

        Approval of annual Statements of Corporate Intent for Council Controlled Organisations and Council Controlled Trading Organisations.

 

Community Engagement and Advocacy

        Receive reports from the Council’s Advisory Groups.

        Monitor engagement with the city’s communities.

 

Operational Matters

        National Emergency Management Agency matters requiring Council’s  input.

        Road closing and road stopping matters.

        Approval of overseas travel for elected members.

        All other matters for which final authority is not delegated.

 

Appoint:

        The non-elected members of the Standing Committees, including extraordinary vacancies of non- elected representatives.

        The Directors of Council Controlled Organisations and Council Controlled Trading Organisations.

        Council’s nominee on any Trust.

        Council representatives on any outside organisations (where applicable and time permits, recommendations for the appointment may be sought from the appropriate Standing Committee and/or outside organisations).

        The Chief Executive of Hutt City Council.

        Council’s Electoral Officer, Principal Rural Fire Officer and any other appointments required by statute.

        The recipients of the annual Civic Honours awards.

 

    


HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Ordinary meeting to be held in the Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt on

 Tuesday 29 September 2020 commencing at 2.00pm.

 

ORDER PAPER

 

Public Business

 

1.       OPENING FORMALITIES - Karakia Timatanga 

Kia hora te marino

Kia whakapapa pounamu te moana

He huarahi mā tātou i te rangi nei

Aroha atu, aroha mai

Tātou i a tātou katoa

Hui e Tāiki e!

May peace be wide spread

May the sea be like greenstone

A pathway for us all this day

Let us show respect for each other

For one another

Bind us together!

 

2.       APOLOGIES 

3.       PUBLIC COMMENT

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

4.       Mayoral Statement (20/1009)

5.       Chief Executive's Statement (20/1010)

6.       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.

7.       Committee Minutes with Recommended Items

a)      Traffic Subcommittee

1 September 2020                                                                                         11

Recommended Items

Item 4i)     Woburn Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions for the Proposed Median Refuge Islands (20/877)                                            12

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

Item 4ii)    Hautonga Street, Petone - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (20/775)          15

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

Item 4iii)   Muritai Road, Eastbourne - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (20/774)       16

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

Item 4iv)   High Street, Boulcott - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (20/773)    16

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

Item 4v)     Dowse Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (20/776)    17

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

Item 4vi)   Stokes Valley Road - Proposed Bus Stop Relocation and 'No Stopping at All Times' Parking Restrictions (20/298)                                                 18

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

Item 4vii)  Bloomfield Terrace - Revised Time Restricted (P120) and  'No Stopping At All Times' Parking Restrictions. (20/297)                                                19

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

b)      Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee

7 September 2020                                                                                         28

Recommended Items

 

Item 4i)     Letter of Expectation to Urban Plus Limited for its Statement of Intent 2019/20-2020/21 (20/971)                                                                                     30

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

Item 4ii)    Proposed Appearance Industries Bylaw 2020 (20/841)       32

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

c)       Community and Environment Committee

9 September 2020                                                                                         96

Recommended Item

Item 4)       Proposed Sale of Bulding and Lease of Reserve Land at Fraser Park to Hutt Valley Gymnastics (20/772)                                                                97

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

d)      Regulatory Committee

15 September 2020                                                                                     105

Recommended Item

Item 5i)     Updating District Plan to remove minimum car parking rate requirements in accordance with the National Policy Statement-Urban Development (20/885)         107

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

8.       Miscellaneous

a)      Hutt City Council's submission to Greater Wellington Regional Council's draft Toitū Te Whenua Parks Network Plan 2020-2030 (20/1115)

Report No. HCC2020/5/22 by the Senior Advisor Sustainability and Resilience     144

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“that the recommendtation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

b)      Alteration of Council Decision - 80 Parkway, Wainuiomata (20/1030)

Memorandum dated 10 September 2020 by the Head of Democratic Services          151

Mayor’s Recommendation:

That the recommendations contained in the memorandum be endorsed.”

 

c)       Schedule of Meetings for 2021 and 2022 (20/1017)

Report No. HCC2020/5/20 by the Contractor                                        155

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

d)      Appointment of Directors - UrbanPlus Limited (20/916)

Report No. HCC2020/5/214 by the Contractor                                      163

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

     

9.       Minutes - COUNCIL

28 July 2020                                                                                                          167  

25 August 2020                                                                                                    202

15 September 2020                                                                                               208

10.     Committee Minutes without Recommended Items

a)      Regulatory Committee

10 August 2020                                                                                           222

b)      Hutt Valley Services Committee

28 August 2020                                                                                           224

c)       Audit and Risk Subcommittee

17 September 2020                                                                                     231

 

 

d)      Long Term Plan/Annual Plan Subcommittee

          28 and 31 August 2020                                                                              245

11.     Sealing Authority (20/911)

Report No. HCC2020/5/8 by the Executive Assistant Transformation and Resources     301

Mayor’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

  

12.     QUESTIONS

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

13.     EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION:

 

“That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely:

14.     Minutes - Council

          28 July 2020

 

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

 

(A)

(B)

(C)

 

 

 

General subject of the matter to be considered.

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter.

Ground under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes of the Hutt City Council held on 28 July 2020 – Further Information on Agreement to Lease Events Centre and Develop a Hotel.

The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities (s7(2)(h)).

The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) (s7(2)(i)).

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons. (s7(2)(a)).

That the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exist.

 

 

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as specified in Column (B) above.”

 

 

 

 

 

Kate Glanville

SENIOR DEMOCRACY ADVISOR

          


19

 

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Traffic Subcommittee

 

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

 Tuesday 1 September 2020 commencing at 2.00pm

 

 

 

PRESENT:

Cr L Sutton (Chair)

Cr J Briggs

 

Cr B Dyer (Deputy Chair)

Cr A Mitchell

 

Cr N Shaw

 

 

APOLOGIES:                  Cr K Brown

 

IN ATTENDANCE:        Mr D Simmons, Traffic Asset Manager

                                           Mr C Agate, Traffic Engineer – Network Operations

                                 Ms T Malki, Traffic Engineer

                                 Ms K Glanville, Senior Democracy Advisor

                                 Ms J Stevens, Consultant

                                  

                                  

 

 

PUBLIC BUSINESS

 

 

1.       APOLOGIES 

RESOLVED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Dyer)                                            Minute No. TSC20501

“That the apology received from Cr Brown be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

2.       PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate.      

 

RESOLVED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Dyer)                                            Minute No. TSC20502

“That, in accordance with Standing Order 15.2, public comment be extended by 15 minutes.”

3.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS       

          There were no conflict of interest declarations.

4.       Recommendations to Council - 29 September 2020

i)

Woburn Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions for the Proposed Median Refuge Islands (20/877)

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms E McAlister  spoke against the proposal, expressing safety concerns over the proximity of the proposed median refuge island to the corner of Wai-iti Crescent, given the poor visibility in that location and vehicle speeds in the area. She also considered that the proposal would increase congestion due to turning traffic stopping at the island, and that the loss of car parks would exacerbate existing parking issues. She noted that people cross where convenient to them and do not necessarily use the crossings provided. She asked that the island be installed where it was needed most, between the bus stops, near the Bellevue Hotel or near Te Omanga Hospice.

Speaking under public comment, Mr M Hill noted that the proposal would help only those few petitioners who requested it to help them cross the street out of Wai-iti Crescent.  He said it would not help with school children crossing, as they crossed anywhere between the school gate and Wai-iti Crescent.

Responding to questions from members, Ms McAlister advised that she was not aware of any near misses in the area.  Mr Hill added that he had seen wing mirrors hit by vehicles cutting the corner. Ms McAlister considered that a median island would encourage people to cross in that location, and increase the risk of pedestrians being hit by a car.

Speaking under public comment, Mr G Scott advised that he was representing the residents of Woburn Apartments who petitioned Council for a crossing in February 2019. He noted that the proposed island was well located for their use and particularly for access to the Hutt Recreation Ground, with reasonable visibility in both directions, particularly from the west. He commented that New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) guidelines mentioned a resting rail, noting that many residents had poor vision and issues with balance and mobility. He said the installation of such a hand rail would enhance the sense of security when standing in the middle of Woburn Road. He thanked Council for the progress made on this issue in 2020, and urged that construction proceed as soon as possible.

Responding to questions from members, Mr Scott advised that he crossed the road four times per week, a total of eight crossings, and that people with severe mobility issues did not attempt to cross as this required an element of speed. He confirmed that it was usually necessary to cross the road in two stages and wait in the middle of the road before completing the crossing. He was happy with the location betweeen Wai-iti Crescent and the Bellevue Hotel and considered the suggestion for one island further up the road too far away to be useful.  He added he would attempt to cross the road near the Hutt Recreation Ground if the closer option was not approved.

Speaking under public comment, Ms F Neate acknowledged the desire to make a safer crossing for people using Woburn Road.  She expressed concern over visibility for vehicles travelling from west to east and the danger this would pose to pedestrians. She noted that traffic from east to west tended to veer across the white painted line and that the island space was needed to enable them to pull across and turn safely into their driveway, as they had no alternative access. She also noted that the volume of traffic turning in and out of Wai-iti Crescent often needed to use the painted island space as well. She also commented on the proximity of the controlled crossing 150 metres along the road outside Hutt Valley High School, the incidence of illegal parking on broken yellow lines on both sides of the road, and past incidents where speeding cars had lost control on the corner. She advised that one pedestrian had been hit by a car in the 30 years they had lived there. She considered island 2 to be on straight road with good visibility and that a proper pedestrian crossing may be preferable in this location.

Speaking under public comment, Mr A Neate elaborated on the difficulties associated with turning into their driveway, noting that a concrete obstruction would change the angle required for them to access their driveway. He opposed construction of a median island at this busy corner and favoured locating the island by the Bellevue Hotel.

Responding to questions from members, Mr Neate considered it would be impossible with the median island to turn a car and trailer into his driveway, as they would hang out into the traffic.

 

The Traffic Asset Manager elaborated on the report.  He advised that a petition requesting a crossing was submitted on behalf of the residents of the Masonic Village. He noted the two crossing desire lines identified in the appendices attached to the officer’s report indicated that the traffic signals located 150 metres away were too far away.  He noted that zebra crossings had a time and place however tended to decrease rather than increase pedestrian safety as pedestrians depend on motorists to observe them. He advised that refuge islands were preferred in order to minimise the crossing distance for pedestrians.

The Traffic Asset Manager advised that Woburn Road was a wide road with high traffic volumes and many pedestrian users, and that all property accessways were considered when looking for a location for a pedestrian refuge. He indicated that the two locations proposed were the only places that would not prevent access to one or more of the existing accessways, with both locations providing in excess of 50 metres visibility.  This exceeded the NZTA requirement by 10 metres. He noted that these sight distances represented a vast improvement on current sight distances.

The Traffic Asset Manager considered that, if the refuge was not installed, people would continue to cross there. He advised that two cars or a car and trailer could park in the median space and that, prior to installing the island, the location of the island would be marked with cones and hit sticks to allay residents’ fears about being able to turn into their driveways. He noted that the majority of feedback against the proposal was from immediately adjacent residents, and that the school supported the proposal.

The Traffic Asset Manager advised that each of the islands would remove four parking spaces, and car parking loss had been minimised with the proposal.  He acknowledged the level of parking demand near the school at certain times of the day, along with the fact that Council was unable to change the existing parking behaviour. He believed that the loss of four car parks would not significantly exacerbate the current situation.

The Traffic Asset Manager considered that constructing pedestrian islands would halve the crossing distance and tend to funnel pedestrian movements to those locations.  He said this would not make the situation worse and possibly improve the situation.  He indicated that a handrail could be included in the proposal.

The Traffic Asset Manager concluded that the options for the members was to leave the situation as it was or install either or both of the median islands. He noted that the islands could be installed without the no stopping restrictions.  However it was considered preferable for this decision to be made by the members given the previous dialogue on the matter.

Responding to questions from members, the Traffic Asset Manager advised that officers had checked the vehicle tracking to all driveways turning both in and out and had not identified any locations on that stretch of road where a single island solution would be possible. He commented on the sight distances for pedestrians, and considered that the presence of islands in the flush median would make it less likely that cars would drive in that area. He believed that installation of both islands would improve amenity and safety, and advised that signage, painting and reflectorising would all be used to maximise the visibility of the refuges. He noted that islands were tapered so that any vehicles hitting the end of an island were directed in the right direction.

In moving the motion, the Chair requested that cones and hit sticks be used ahead of the island installation to mark the location for residents.

Cr Briggs noted that action would be taken to address the risks and the concerns expressed by residents.  He thanked officers for their work on this. He considered that levels of safety would be increased if both islands were installed, and provided a level of service that improved the current situation.

Cr Shaw expressed concern over safety, particularly for the elderly, and supported the installation of islands together with railings and appropriate signage.

Cr Dyer supported the motion as this would increase the safety of pedestrians crossing the road.

 

 

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Sutton/Cr Mitchell)              Minute No. TSC 20503

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)    approves the installation of No Stopping - At All Times parking restrictions on Woburn Road, as shown in Appendix 2 attached to the report; and

(ii)   approves the installation of  No Stopping - At All Times parking restrictions on Woburn Road, as shown in Appendix 3 attached to the report.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would facilitate the installation, effective operation and visibility of the kerb extensions associated with the proposed median pedestrian islands.

ii)

Hautonga Street, Petone - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (20/775)

 

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

Members noted the Petone Community Board had endorsed the recommendation contained in the officer’s report.

 

recommended:    (Cr Sutton/Cr Shaw)                  Minute No. TSC 20504

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of a P15 (8am–5pm Monday-Friday) parking restriction on Hautonga Street, Petone, as shown in Appendix 1 of the report.”

For the reason that the proposed restrictions would improve parking turnover and availability on Hautonga Street, benefitting both local businesses and their customers. The proposed changes are supported by the nearby businesses, and would support Council’s Parking Policy (2017).

 

iii)

Muritai Road, Eastbourne - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (20/774)

 

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Engineer confirmed the Eastbourne Community Board had endorsed the recommendation contained in the officer’s report.

 

recommended:    (Cr Sutton/Cr Dyer)                   Minute No. TSC 20505

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the application of P15, 8am to 9.30am and 2pm to 3pm, Monday-Friday, School Days’ time limited parking restriction on Muritai Road, Eastbourne, as shown in Appendix 1 of the report.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve accessibility and parking availability for parents and caregivers accessing the kindergarten and the proposed changes would support Council’s Parking Policy (2017).

iv)

High Street, Boulcott - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (20/773)

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr D Patel advised that he opened his new business six weeks ago and commented on parking behaviour in the area of the Hutt Hospital.

Responding to questions from members, Mr Patel asked that members look at introducing time limits for the car parks across the road from his business, which provided unrestricted parking.

 

The Traffic Asset Manager elaborated on the report.  He noted that officers try and find a balance in areas of high parking demand and were always hesitant to take away on-street parking spaces in these areas. He noted that traffic enforcement could be asked to monitor areas where parking restrictions had changed.  He said these were difficult to enforce for short time restrictions, and the shop owner could report incidents of parking offending to Council.

Cr Briggs asked that the restrictions on the northern side be reviewed in 12 months time.  He advised that he would not support the business owner’s request for restrictions on the southern side at this time.

 

 

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Sutton/Cr Briggs)                Minute No. TSC 20506

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)    rescinds the existing P30 (8.00am to 6.00pm, Monday to Sunday other than public holidays) parking restrictions on the section of High Street, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(ii)   approves the installation of a P15 (8.00am to 6.00pm, Monday to Sunday other than public holidays), parking restriction on the section of High Street, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

For the reason that the proposed restrictions would improve parking turnover and availability on High Street, benefitting both local businesses and their customers. The proposed changes are supported by the nearby businesses, and would support Council’s Parking Policy (2017).

v)

Dowse Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (20/776)

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms J Schofer explained the circumstances surrounding access to and egress from her property via a steep driveway.  She supported the proposal to extend yellow lines across her driveway to make it safer to get into and out of her drive due to the poor visibility.

Responding to questions from members, Ms Schofer noted that the broken yellow lines on Dowse Drive led people to park where there were no lines.  She said the issue was on the southern side, not where the bus stop was located outside her property.

 

The Traffic Asset Manager suggested that the no stopping restriction could be modified by one additional metre to start from the end of the existing bus stop for a distance of 11 metres over the driveway of 111 Dowse Drive, providing the property owner with 3.7 metres and the neighbour at 109 Dowse Drive with 1.7 metres.

 

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Sutton/Cr Dyer)                  Minute No. TSC 20507

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of a No Stopping At All Times restriction on Dowse Drive, as shown in the Appendix 1 attached to this report with the addition of one metre, to start from the end of the existing bus stop for a distance of 11 metres over the driveway of 111 Dowse Drive.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve accessibility and safety for local residents and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

 

vi)

Stokes Valley Road - Proposed Bus Stop Relocation and 'No Stopping at All Times' Parking Restrictions (20/298)

 

The Traffic Engineer – Network Operations elaborated on the report.  He advised that this was a retrospective decision.  He said works had already been put in place by the developer, with the exception of moving the bus stop, which Greater Wellington would do.

 

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Sutton/Cr Shaw)                    Minute No. TSC 20508

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)    rescinds the existing Bus Stop and No Stopping At All Times restrictions along the frontage of 397 – 405 Stokes Valley Road;

(ii)   approves the relocation of Metlink bus stop number 9375 on Stokes Valley Road; and

(iii)  approves the installation of additional parking restrictions (No Stopping At All Times) as shown in Appendix 1, attached to the report.”

For the following reasons:

-      The approved residential development will result in a new driveway access to Stokes Valley Road which does not align with the existing markings;

-      Improved bus stop kerb alignment and safety as outlined in ‘Guidelines for public transport infrastructure and facilities – Interim Consultation Draft’.

-      Meets the requirements of Councils Road Space Hierarchy – Live and Play, as set down in Councils Parking Policy 2017.

-      Supported by Resource Consent Approval RM180262.

 

vii)

Bloomfield Terrace - Revised Time Restricted (P120) and  'No Stopping At All Times' Parking Restrictions. (20/297)

 

The Traffic Engineer – Network Operations elaborated on the report.

 

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Sutton/Cr Shaw)                 Minute No. TSC 20509

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)    rescinds the existing P120 (8.30 to 9am & 2.45 to 3.15pm, Monday to Friday)parking restrictions outside 7 – 7a Bloomfield Terrace as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report;

(ii)   rescinds the existing P5 (8am to 6pm, Monday to Saturday)parking restrictions outside 7 – 7a Bloomfield Terrace as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report;

(iii)  rescinds the existing No Stopping (At All Times) parking restrictions outside 7 – 7a Bloomfield Terrace as shown in Appendix 1 to this report;

(iv)  approves the installation of P120 (8am to 6pm, Monday to Saturday) parking restrictions outside 7 – 7a Bloomfield Terrace as shown in Appendix 1 to this report; and

(v)   approves the installation of No Stopping (At All Times) parking restrictions outside 7 – 7a Bloomfield Terrace as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report.”

For the reason that the recent multi-unit development on the abovementioned site has resulted in changes to the existing kerb line to facilitate vehicle access, and the existing parking restrictions do not align with the new access locations.

5.       QUESTIONS   

          There were no questions.

 

 

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 3.33 pm.

 

 

 

 

 

Cr L Sutton

CHAIR

 

 

 

 

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 29th day of September 2020


Attachment 2

Appendix 2 Proposed Median Refuge Islands Woburn Road - Island 1

 

 


Attachment 3

Appendix 3 Proposed Median Refuge Islands Woburn Road - Island 2

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Hautonga St Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions - Plan

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Muritai Road Proposed P15 Restrictions - Plan

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 High Street Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions - Plan

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Dowse Drive Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Plan

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 - Stokes Valley Road

 


Attachment 1

Proposed Parking Restrictions - Bloomfield Tce - APPENDIX 1

 


30

 

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee

 

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

 Monday 7 September 2020 commencing at 2.00pm

 

 

 

PRESENT:

Cr S Edwards (Chair)

Mayor C Barry (from 2.10pm)

 

Cr D Bassett (via audio visual link until 2.37pm)

Cr J Briggs

 

Cr K Brown (Deputy Chair)

Cr B Dyer

 

Cr C Milne

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

 

Cr S Rasheed

Cr A Mitchell

 

 

Cr N Shaw

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE:       Ms J Miller, Chief Executive

Ms A Blackshaw, Director Neighbourhoods & Communities (part meeting)

Ms H Oram, Director Environment & Sustainability

Ms A Welanyk, Director Transformation & Resources (part meeting)

Mr K Puketapu-Dentice, Director Economy & Development  

Mr M Boggs, Director Strategy & Engagement

Ms J Livschitz, Chief Financial Officer

Mr B Cato, Chief Legal Officer (part meeting)

Mr D Kerite, Head of Environmental Consents (part meeting)

Ms W Moore, Head of Strategy & Planning (part meeting)

Mr G Craig, Head of City Growth (part meeting)

Mr J Pritchard, Principal Policy Advisor (part meeting)

Mr D Bentley, Team Leader Environmental Health (part meeting)

Ms S van Mil, Environmental Health Officer

Mr K Eagle, Acting Budgeting & Reporting Manager (part meeting)

Ms C Taylor, Senior Research & Evaluation Advisor (part meeting)

Ms T Lealofi, Democracy Advisor

 

PUBLIC BUSINESS

 

1.       APOLOGIES

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Briggs)                                          Minute No. PFSC 20501

“That the apology received from Cr Hislop be accepted and leave of absence granted and the apology for lateness received from Mayor Barry be accepted.”

2.       PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate to.

Due to a technological issue with the electronic link, Cr Bassett left the meeting at 2.10pm and rejoined the meeting at 2.13pm.

 

3.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS    

          There were no conflict of interests.

4.       Recommendations to Council – 29 September 2020

i)

Letter of Expectation to Urban Plus Limited for its Statement of Intent 2019/20-2020/21 (20/971)

Cr Brown noted that she was Council’s representative on the Board of Urban Plus Limited (UPL).

 

The Director, Economy and Development advised that information regarding Plan Change 43 had been left out of the report.  He assured members that the Letter of Expectation would reflect the provisions of Plan Change 43.

 

Cr Dyer expressed support for the officer’s recommendations particularly the building pathways to ownership, environmental leadership and housing opportunities afforded by Plan Change 43.

 

Cr Milne advised that there was approximately $30M of equity in UPL.  He believed Council could use that equity to sit on an asset or treat it like a conveyor belt.  He considered that a conveyor belt scenario would have a greater impact on housing in the Hutt rather than Council building houses and then sitting on them.  He saw it as a clear strategy for UPL.

 

The Chief Executive advised that there was no plan to sell existing housing stock to create further capital.  She highlighted that UPL’s balance sheet was a security to generate new loans and to generate new builds without affecting Council’s borrowing ability.

Cr Briggs supported the recommendations and the new direction for UPL.  He looked forward to seeing this new direction coming to life in the next 12 months.

 

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Edwards/Cr Dyer)             Minute No. PFSC 20502

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)    notes and receives the information contained in the report;

(ii)   approves the inclusion of five listed priorities as a part of the Letter of Expectation (LoE) to Urban Plus Limited (UPL) for inclusion in its 2019/20 – 2020/21 Statement of Intent as follows:

(a)   provision for housing need (mandating UPL to provide for need across the housing continuum);

 

(b)   build more housing partnerships (UPL to develop relationships with key social organisations such as CHPs, mana whenua, non-governmental organisations as well as crown agencies with responsibilities for delivering housing);

 

(c)   building pathways to permanency (UPL to explore opportunities to deliver initiatives such as shared equity, rent to buy, reduced deposit schemes, and other means of assisting households into home ownership);

 

(d)   application of agreed environmental standards (UPL to explore how implementing Homestar 6 standards will contribute towards Council achieving its aims of lowering carbon emissions and whether additional measures are required); and

 

(e)   achieving wider outcomes (UPL to work with trade training institutes to support capacity uplift in the building and construction sector and partner with the construction industry to offer employment and further career development opportunities);

 

(f)    that Urban Plus Ltd look for housing opportunities around suburban shopping centres and transport hubs afforded by Plan Change 43, and be an exemplar of the kinds of well-designed developments Council envisaged in the Plan Change design guide; and

 

(iii) notes that section 10 contained in the report provides further detail on the           five priorities to be included as a part of the LoE to UPL.”

a)                   ii)

Proposed Appearance Industries Bylaw 2020 (20/841)

The Head of Strategy and Planning elaborated on the report.

 

In response to a question from a member regarding whether there was a standard code of practice that needed to be followed for marae tattoos, the Environmental Health Officer advised there was a voluntary code of practice.  The Team Leader Environmental Health advised that there was not a lot of Tā Moko tattooing being undertaken in the City.

 

Cr Dyer expressed concern that Tā Moko tatooing was currently included in the proposed bylaw.  He suggested Tā Moko tattooing be removed from the proposed bylaw and included within the code of practice instead.

 

Cr Briggs supported the recommendations.  He commented on the importance of respecting the mātauranga of the practitioners.

 

Cr Rasheed supported the recommendations.  She considered the proposed bylaw would be excellent for the hair and beauty industry.

 

Cr Brown supported the recommendations.  She advised that it gave the community reassurance that when they were visiting the operators there was a base line of safety.

 

The Chair commended the officers for their work on the complex bylaw.

 

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Edwards/Cr Rasheed)           Minute No. PFSC 20503

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)    receives this report;

(ii)   notes that 10 submissions were received with respect to the proposed Appearance Industries Bylaw;

(iii)  notes the Hearing Subcommittee has recommended to Council that the proposed Appearance Industries Bylaw be approved subject to some amendments as noted in Appendix 2 and 3 attached to the report;

(iv)  determines that, in accordance with section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002, the proposed bylaw:

a)     is the most appropriate form of bylaw;

b)     does not give rise to any implications under the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990; and           

(v)   agrees to adopt the Appearance Industries Bylaw, attached as Appendix 2 and 4 to the report, effective from 1 October 2020.”

  

5.

Council performance overview for the year ended 30 June 2020 (20/958)

Report No. PFSC2020/5/179 by the Senior Research and Evaluation Advisor

 

The Chief Financial Officer elaborated on the report.  She noted that Audit NZ was unable to resource the external audit of Council’s Annual Report at the next Policy, Finance and Strategy meeting on 21 October 2020. She said that work would be undertaken with Audit NZ to develop a new business plan to present and adopt Council’s Annual Report in December 2020.          

 

Due to a technological issue with the electronic link, Cr Bassett was unable to participate for the duration of the meeting.  

 

Resolved: (Cr Briggs/Cr Edwards)                                            Minute No. PFSC 20504

“That the Committee:

(i)    receives the report;

(ii)   notes the Covid-19 impact during the period and the Council’s proactive response as summarised in paragraph 5 of the report;

(iii)  notes the highlights and achievements as detailed in paragraph 6 of the report;

(iv)  notes the performance measure results as summarised in paragraph 8 of the report and detailed in Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(v)   notes the financial performance results as summarised in the report and detailed in Appendices 2, 3 and 4 attached to the report.”

 

6.

2020 Standard and Poor's Credit Rating (20/862)

Report No. PFSC2020/5/176 by the Chief Financial Office

 

The Chief Financial Officer elaborated on the report.

 

 

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                        Minute No. PFSC 20505

“That the Committee notes and receives the report.”

 

7.

Electoral Voting System (20/930)

Report No. PFSC2020/5/178 by the Electoral Officer

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Matthew Young noted that there had been no proper engagement with the public on the matter.  He made a suggestion that Council should operate under a STV voting system. He elaborated on the advantages of STV.

 

In response to a question from a member, Mr Young advised that he had no preference whether Council undertook a poll on the voting system.  He highlighted the financial cost of undertaking a poll.

 

The Electoral Officer advised that public engagement on the matter had not been undertaken due to officers being involved in other engagements eg the Long Term Plan and rubbish and recycling.  He believed that engagement with the public would not have assisted members in making a decision.  He considered that people who want change would let Council know.  He advised that the best way to gain feedback from the community was through a poll.  He highlighted that to undertake a poll now would cost Council around $175,000 and around $30,000 in conjunction with the local body elections in 2022. 

MOVED: (Cr Edwards/Cr Dyer)

That the Committee adopts to change the electoral system to Single Transferable Vote for the next two triennial general elections in 2022 and 2025 for the Hutt City Council and its Community Boards.  

Cr Brown spoke against the motion.  She considered that the public needed to be consulted on the matter.

 

Cr Sutton spoke against the motion.  She expressed concern that the STV system would be complicated for voters.  She considered that the public needed to be consulted on the matter.

 

Cr Dyer expressed support of the STV system.  It was suggested that educating the community would be useful to gain a better understanding on the voting system.

 

Cr Milne spoke against the motion.  He commented on the lack of public engagement.  He considered that the public needed to be consulted via a poll.

 

Cr Mitchell expressed concern that the community did not understand how the voting system worked.  He expressed support for STV but believed Council needed the community’s feedback.

 

Mayor Barry spoke against the motion.  He expressed support for Option C.  He noted that he would also like feedback from the community.

 

Cr Rasheed spoke against the motion.   She expressed support for Option C.  She advised that she would like to hear from the community before making a decision.

 

Cr Briggs spoke against the motion.  He expressed support for Option C providing officers commenced the work on the representation review in this triennium.

 

Cr Shaw spoke against the motion.   She expressed support for Option C.

 

Cr Edwards considered that STV was a fairer system.  He acknowledged it was confusing for voters to tick candidates on some voting forms and rank other candidates on other voting forms.

 

The Chair put the motion to the vote.

 

The motion was LOST on the voices.

 

MOVED:  (Cr Milne/Cr Mitchell)

 

That Council undertakes a poll of electors on the electoral system.

 

Cr Dyer spoke against the motion. 

 

Cr Briggs strongly advised that officers needed to commence work on the representation review in this triennium.

 

Cr Brown left the meeting at 3.09pm.

 

 

ReCOMMENDED: (Cr Mitchell/Cr Briggs)                                  Minute No. PFSC 20506

“That the Committee recommends that Council resolves to undertake a poll of electors on the electoral system to be run in conjunction with the 2022 triennial local government elections to be held on 8 October 2022.”

Cr Dyer requested that his vote be recorded against the above matter.

 

8.

Homelessness update 2019 - 2020 (20/852)

Report No. PFSC2020/5/177 by the Principal Policy Advisor

 

Cr Brown rejoined the meeting at 3.11pm.

Cr Milne left the meeting at 3.24pm and rejoined the meeting at 3.25pm.

 

 

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Brown)                                           Minute No. PFSC 20507

“That the Committee notes the report as the first annual update on:

a)  Council’s actions in response to homelessness as part of the Lower Hutt Homelessness Plan; and

 

b)  Council’s role in homelessness more broadly as part of the Lower Hutt Homelessness Plan.”

 

Council agreed to the strategic direction on homelessness in Lower Hutt, and its role in contributing to the short-term response to homelessness, in March 2019. Funding was agreed in June 2019. During the period since the funding was agreed officers have been working to progress the council actions.

 

9.

Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulations 2013 - Regulation 19(1) - Reporting by Territorial Authorities (20/872)

Memorandum dated 10 August 2020 by the Team Leader Environmental Health

 

The Team Leader, Environmental Health elaborated on the report.

 

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Mitchell)                                   Minute No. PFSC 20508

“That the Committee approves the publication of a ‘table of income versus expenditure’ on Council’s website showing the alcohol licensing income received from fees payable in relation to, and costs incurred in:

(a)   the performance of the functions of Council’s District Licensing Committee under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Act);

(b)   the performance of the functions of Council’s Inspectors under the Act; and

(c)   undertaking of enforcement activities under the Act.”

 

10.

Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee Work Programme 2020 (20/883)

Report No. PFSC2020/5/88 by the Committee Advisor

 

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                        Minute No. PFSC 20509

“That the work programme be noted and received.”

11.     Information Item

 

Economic Development Plan - Direction Next 6 months (20/887)

Report No. PFSC2020/5/89 by the Head of City Growth

The Head of City Growth elaborated on the report.

 

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Mitchell)                        Minute No. PFSC 20510

“That the report be noted and received.”

12.     QUESTIONS   

          There were no questions.

 

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 3.33 pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cr S Edwards

CHAIR

 

 

 

 

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 29th day of September 2020.

 


Attachment 2

Appendix 2: Proposed Appearance Industry Bylaw 2020

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Attachment 4

Appendix 4: Proposed Hutt City Council Appearance Industries Bylaw - Code of Practice - cleaned up version

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


103

 

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Community and Environment Committee

 

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

 Wednesday 9 September 2020 commencing at 2.00pm

 

 

PRESENT:

Deputy Mayor T Lewis (Chair)

Mayor C Barry

 

Cr K Brown

Cr J Briggs (Deputy Chair)

 

Cr B Dyer

Cr S Edwards

 

Cr A Mitchell

Cr S Rasheed

 

Cr N Shaw

Cr L Sutton

 

APOLOGIES:                  Crs D Bassett and D Hislop       

 

IN ATTENDANCE:       Ms J Miller, Chief Executive

Ms A Blackshaw, Director Neighbourhoods & Communities

Ms H Oram, Director Environment & Sustainability

Ms A Welanyk, Director Transformation & Resources

Mr M Boggs, Director Strategy & Engagement

Ms J Livschitz, Chief Financial Officer

Mr B Cato, Chief Legal Officer

Mr M Sherwood, Head of Parks and Recreation (part meeting)

Mr J Scherzer, Sustainability & Resilience Manager

Ms M Laban, Head of Community Hubs (Acting) and Head of Community Projects and Relationships

Ms D Hunter, Acting Committee Advisor

 

 

PUBLIC BUSINESS

 

1.       APOLOGIES 

Resolved:     (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Edwards)                    Minute No. CEC 20501

“That the apologies received from Crs Bassett and Hislop be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

2.       PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate.     

 

3.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS     

Cr Mitchell declared a conflict of interest in relation to item 6: Community Funding 2020-2021 and the application from Kaibosh.  He took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

          Cr Shaw declared a conflict of interest in item 4 – Proposed Sale of Building and Lease of Reserve Land at Fraser Park to Hutt Valley Gymnastics and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

4.       Recommendations to Council - 29 September 2020

 

Proposed Sale of Building and Lease of Reserve Land at Fraser Park to Hutt Valley Gymnastics (20/772)

 

Cr Shaw declared a conflict of interest and took no part in the discussion or voting on the matter.

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Bruce Chase, Chairperson of Avalon Rugby Club (the Club) stated the Club was in full support of the bigger picture to help the community and create opportunities for locals in the area.  He said the Club was disappointed that the Ricoh Sports Centre did not provide all facilities required by the Club.  He suggested that the $500K tagged to Hutt Valley Gymnastics (HVG) to refurbish the old Avalon Rugby clubrooms be allocated towards creating a gym at the Ricoh Sports Centre (RSC).  He questioned the reason why under the current lease proposal, HVG’s rent would be less than what the Club had been required to pay to Council when it was occupying the space.

 

In response to a question from a member, Mr Chase advised the Club was made aware that a gym would not be included in the RSC by word of mouth in late 2019.  He acknowledged that the Avalon clubrooms needed some maintenance work.  He believed it was not major work.

 

In response to a question from a member, Mr Chase confirmed the Club had given up a large amount to move into the RSC and the current proposal between Council and HVG was causing a lot of angst amongst members.  He advised that discussions were continuing regarding storage and that the situation looked more positive.  He noted that the Club had no choice as they had nowhere else to go.

 

The Director Neighbourhoods and Communities elaborated on the report.  She acknowledged the comments made by Mr Chase.  She emphasised that the recently formed working group was interested in working through issues with partnered clubs at RSC.  She said a report would be considered by Council in October 2020 with a proposed way forward.

 

The Head of Parks and Recreation commented that originally HVG had been approved $2M by Council.  However due to budget restraints, the current proposal was now on offer to HVG. 

 

In response to a question from a member, the Head of Parks and Recreation advised the rental charge was dependent on the rental formula used.  He noted that the Club had run a licensed bar which incurred a higher lease formula. 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDED:  (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Mitchell)      Minute No. CEC 20502

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(i)    notes that, Council has previously resolved to support the development of a gymnastics facility at Fraser Park by Hutt Valley Gymnastics Inc (HVG) through;

(a)     providing a grant to HVG of $500k;

(b)     acting as guarantor for a HVG loan for a further $500k;

(c)      issuing a Reserves Lease for land at Fraser Park to enable the development; and

(d)     supporting the sale of a Council owned building on Fraser Park, formerly occupied by Avalon Rugby Club, to HVG.

(ii)   notes that this report puts into action the mechanism required to facilitate (c) and (d) above;

(iii)  notes that, in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977, Council will publicly advertise its intention to issue a lease to HVG only;

(iv)  notes that any objections to the proposal received as a result of the public notification process, will be reported back to this Committee if these cannot be resolved through discussions with the submitters;

(v)   agrees to enter into a sale and purchase process with HVG for the sale of the building at Fraser Park for a nominal sum of $1, if demanded; and

(vi)  agrees to issue a lease for 20-years for the reserve land at Fraser Park occupied by the existing and to be developed buildings as indicated in Appendix 3 attached to the report.”

For the reason that the proposal is consistent with Council policy and ensures continued Council support for the activity.

 

5.

Update on climate change work (20/917)

Report No. CEC2020/5/184 by the Manager, Sustainability and Resilience

 

The Manager, Sustainability and Resilience elaborated on the report.

 

Resolved: (Cr Mitchell/Cr Briggs)                                      Minute No. CEC 20503

“That the Committee:

(i)    notes the update on various work streams to implement Council’s organisational carbon target and to realise emission reductions;

(ii)   notes that Council’s annual emissions from its use of energy and its fleet have decreased compared to the previous year, while emissions from air travel and Silverstream landfill have increased; and

(iii)  notes that the Manager Solid Waste Contracts and the Manager Sustainability and Resilience are working with LMS Energy to install and operationalise a flare at Silverstream landfill.”

 

6.

Community Funding 2020-2021 (20/926)

Report No. CEC2020/5/183 by the Community Funding Advisor

 

Cr Mitchell declared a conflict of interest in relation to the Kaibosh application.  He took no part in the discussion or voting on the matter.

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms Kena Duigan and Ms Emily Innes representing Wesley Community Action (WCA), presented the Wesley Rata Village Results Report as part of their Mahia Atu Community Partnership Fund reporting requirements.  Ms Duigan specifically commented on the following:

1.             Kainga/Homes – Affordable rental housing in an intentional community;

2.             Mahi/Jobs Skills and support for young people seeking a job;

3.             Tamariki/Children – Space for parents, babies and children to play and learn;

4.             Kia tuhono nga kaumatua/Connecting in ageing – Ageing Well Network;

5.             Wahi hui/Gathering space – Hosting community; and

6.             Taiao/Nature – Restoring the bush and environment so it can help restore us. 

 

Ms Duigan acknowledged the partnership funding and the importance of partnership across Council that WCA was building on in particular with Council’s Community Projects and Relationships, Libraries and Parks and Gardens teams.

 

In response to a question from a member regarding the location of members attending the Ageing Well Network, Ms Duigan confirmed that members came from around the Hutt Valley.  She added that WCA had a group of volunteers who would pick the kaumatua/seniors up if transport was an issue.

 

In response to a question from a member regarding housing, Ms Duigan confirmed that at the end of 2019 WCA became a Community Housing provider.  She advised there was criteria used to identify people who needed a place to live, as well as WCA working with local agencies in the Hutt Valley and whanau.  She further noted that WCA had received feedback from the residents who had moved into the four new homes and would review that feedback.

 

In response to a further question from a member regarding learnings during the COVID-19 lockdown, Ms Duigan commented they had noticed that the lockdown had taken a real toll on senior members in the community and were now seeing that level of stress when going into rest homes.  In conclusion, she stated that WCA had seen a lot of positive community connections being established during the lockdown. 

 

The Head of Community Hubs (Acting)/Head of Community Projects and Relationships Team elaborated on the report.  She noted that priority was on community organisations responding to COVID-19. 

 

In response to a question from a member regarding selection process, the Head of Community Hubs (Acting)/Head of Community Projects and Relationships Team advised officers had used a matrix system when assessing applications against the priorities of the fund and had made the recommendations accordingly. 

 

Members thanked officers for the full report provided around community funding.  They noted the priorities around COVID-19, particularly food, meant a larger number of the wider community would benefit from the fund.

 

The Chief Executive commented that she was pleased to hear the positive feedback coming through from the members and the community.  She acknowledged the hard work undertaken by the Community Projects and Relationships team. 

 

Resolved: (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Briggs)                      Minute No. CEC 20504

“That the Committee:

(i)      notes that there is $633K available to be allocated under the Mauri Ora Fund 2020/2021;

(ii)     agrees to the recommended allocations of $442,000 outlined in paragraph 21 of the officer’s report under the Mauri Ora fund 2020/2021 as follows:

Group

Granted$

Common Unity

$20,000

Taita Pomare Community Trust

$50,000

Kaibosh

$25,000

Takiri Mai (Food Sovereignty)

$32,000

Youth Inspire

$75,000

Trade School Kitchen

$20,000

ReConnect Hutt City (Age Concern)

$25,000

Te Puna Manawa Drop In Centre, (St David’s Anglican Parish of Naenae and Epuni)

$25,000

Citizens Advice Bureau Lower Hutt

$35,000

Ignite Sport Trust

$15,000

Naenae Youth Charitable Trust

$25,000

Moera Community House

$25,000

Wellington City Mission

$10,000

Big Brothers Big Sisters

$25,000

Goodtime Foundation

$10,000

Petone Community House

$5,000

Arohanui Strings

$10,000

Vulnerable Support Charitable Trust

$5,000

Team Naenae Trust

$5,000

(iii)    agrees to decline the groups outlined in paragraph 24 of the officer’s report under the Mauri Ora fund 2020/2021 as they did not fully align to the criteria of the fund as follows:

          Porirua Living Without Violence                        Wellington Boys and Girls Institute

          Te Whare Tane                                       Petone Budget Service

          Kiwi Trust                                              Toku Reo Charitable Trust

          Big Buddy Mentoring Trust                   Wharekai Pepe Breastfeeding

          Epilepsy New Zealand                            Massey Avenue Bowling Club

          The Family Centre (Pasefika Ola Manuia)         

(iv)    notes that further recommendations will be forthcoming for the remaining  $191,000 targeted at COVID-19 recovery; and

(v)     notes the funding that has been allocated under the Community Resilience Fund since the last meeting of the Committee held in July 2020 outlined in paragraph 31 of the officer’s report.”

 

7.

Director's Report - Neighbourhoods and Communities Group (20/908)

Report No. CEC2020/5/181 by the Director Neighbourhoods and Communities Group

 

The Director Neighbourhoods and Communities Group elaborated on the report.

 

Resolved: (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Edwards)                 Minute No. CEC 20505

“That the Committee notes and receives the report.”

8.

Director's Report - Strategy & Engagement (20/912)

Report No. CEC2020/5/182 by the Director of Neighbourhoods and Communities and the Director of Transformation and Resources

 

The Director of Neighbourhoods and Communities and the Director of Transformation and Resources elaborated on the report.

In response to a question regarding the ‘HighLight’ event, the Director of Neighbourhoods and Communities advised that information on the event would be included as part of the Long Term Plan. 

 

Resolved: (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Mitchell)                   Minute No. CEC 20506

“That the Committee notes and receives the report.”

9.

Councillor Led Climate Change Working Group Update (20/910)

Report No. CEC2020/5/19 by the City Wide Councillor

 

Cr Briggs elaborated on the report.

 

Resolved:  (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Mitchell)                  Minute No. CEC 20507

“That the Committee

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

(ii)     requests that the draft Long Term Plan has a Chapter on Climate Change, including an Action Plan and Measurements and that the four wellbeings are considered;  and

(iii)    recommends that the importance of Climate Change action is embedded in all parts of the draft Long Term Plan.”

 

 

 

 

10.     Information Item

 

Community and Environment Committee Work Programme (20/956)

Report No. CEC2020/5/92 by the Acting Committee Advisor

 

Resolved: (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Briggs)            Minute No. CEC 20508

“That the work programme be noted and received.”

11.     QUESTIONS   

            There were no questions.

 

 

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 3.07pm.

 

 

 

 

 

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

CHAIR

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 29th day of September 2020

 


Attachment 3

Appendix 3 Proposed Sale of Building and Lease of Land to HV Gymnastics - Proposed Lease Area at Fraser Park

 

PROPOSED LEASE AREA TO HV GYMNASTICS

FRASER PARK

 

  



120

 

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Regulatory Committee

 

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

 Tuesday 15 September 2020 commencing at 2.00pm

 

 

 

PRESENT:

Cr A Mitchell (Chair)

Mayor C Barry

 

Cr J Briggs

Cr K Brown

 

Cr B Dyer

Cr S Edwards

 

Cr S Rasheed

Cr N Shaw

 

Cr L Sutton

 

 

 

APOLOGIES:                  Cr Hislop

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE:       Ms H Oram, Director Environment and Sustainability

Mr M Boggs, Director Strategy and Engagement (part meeting)

Mr B Cato, Chief Legal Officer

Mr H Wesney, Head of District Plan Policy (part meeting)

Mr D Kerite, Head of Environmental Consents (part meeting)

Mr G Stuart, Head of Regulatory Services and Emergency Management (part meeting)

Mr D Simmons, Traffic Asset Manager (part meeting)

Mr J Jeffries, Senior Environmental Policy Analyst (part meeting)

Mr S Davis, Policy Planner (part meeting)

Mr B Haddrell, Policy Planner (part meeting)

Ms P Rotherham, Team Leader Resource Consents (part meeting)
Mr C Agate, Traffic Engineer – Network Operations (part meeting)

Ms K Stannard, Head of Democratic Services

 

 

 

PUBLIC BUSINESS

 

 

1.       APOLOGIES 

Resolved(Cr Mitchell/Cr Briggs)                                     Minute No. RC 20501(2)

“That the apology received from Cr Hislop be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

 

 

2.       PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate.      

3.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS    

There were no conflict of interest declarations. 

4.

Minutes of the Proposed Appearance Industries Bylaw Hearings Subcommittee dated 3 August 2020 (20/1015)

Report No. RC2020/5/100 by the Senior Democracy Advisor

 

Resolved(Cr Mitchell/Cr Edwards)                                 Minute No. RC 20502(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 3 August 2020 be adopted.”

 


 

5.       Recommendation to Council - 29 September 2020

i)

Updating District Plan to remove minimum car parking rate requirements in accordance with the National Policy Statement-Urban Development (20/885)

 

The Head of District Plan Policy and the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Asset Manager advised that the review of parking was in its early stage.  He stated that consultation on the review of parking would commence in late 2020 or early 2021.

 

ReCOMMENDED(Cr Mitchell/Cr Dyer)                         Minute No. RC 20503(2)

“That the Committee recommends that Council removes all provisions of the district plan that set minimum car parking rate requirements, other than for accessible car parks as set out in Appendix 1 attached to the report.” 

For the following reason that Policy 11 of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 came into force on 20 August 2020 and requires Council to remove any provisions from the District Plan that set minimum car parking rate requirements, other than for accessible car parks.

  

6.

Proposed Road Closures for Events (20/786)

Report No. RC2020/5/200 by the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

 

Speaking under public comment, Ms Belinda Moss, representing the Eastbourne Community Board, the Lowry Bay Residents Association and the Point Howard Association elaborated on the significant noise impact on the Point Howard and Lowry Bay residents from the Port Road events.  She highlighted that the noise was at its loudest before and after the events.  She spoke of the positive and constructive meeting with the event organisers earlier in the year.   She hoped that from the meeting, officers would take extra care with monitoring the events.  She expressed disappointment that the officer’s report was presented only to the Petone Community Board.  She highlighted that readership of the Hutt News by Eastbourne residents was low and suggested that officers also published public notices in the monthly Eastbourne Herald.   She asked Council not to consider additional events in the area as three events in the summer was the maximum that residents should tolerate and accommodate.

The Traffic Engineer – Network Operations elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Director Environment and Sustainability confirmed that noise standards were addressed in the Lower Hutt District Plan or by Council’s Environment Consents team.

In response to questions from members regarding noise coming from the events, the Traffic Engineer – Network Operations acknowledged there was some noise with the scrutineering of vehicles before the events.  He advised that officers could mention to the orangisers about reducing the noise from the events.

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Engineer – Network Operations agreed to undertake noise testing when the vehicles were being unloaded and scrutinised as part of the monitoring.

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Asset Manager advised that Port Road was situated within the Petone area.  He agreed that future matters that affected Petone and Eastbourne would be considered by both the Eastbourne and Petone Community Boards. 

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Asset Manager advised that it was a good time to review the road closure consultation requirements and also review how far the consultation was reaching.

Cr Edwards spoke of the concern of residents with the early morning noise coming from the events.  He asked officers to talk to the organisers about trying to keep the noise down.

Cr Dyer expressed support with the previous speaker’s comments.

Cr Briggs thanked the public speaker for updating members on the noise impact on residents from the previous events.  He said it was good to see additional safety measures put in place for the events.  He expressed support for the recommendations adding he looked forward to considering any future improvements before the next events.

 

Resolved:   (Cr Mitchell/Cr Dyer)                                      Minute No. RC 20504

“That the Committee:

(i)    receives the information;

(ii)   agrees to temporarily close the following sections of road for the events (as listed below), subject to the conditions listed in the Traffic Impact Reports attached as Appendix 1, Appendix 2 and Appendix 3 to the report:

(a)  Cam County (Inc.) Port Road Drags – 2020: Sunday 29 November 2020 between the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm (attached as Appendix 1 to the report):

1)   Port Road, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Marchbanks Street, to a point 500 metres north of the Barnes Street intersection); and

2)   Toop Street, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Marchbanks Street, to the intersection of Port Road);

(b)  Hutt Valley Motorsport Club (Inc) -  Port Road Sprints – 2020/21: Sunday
25 October 2020 and Sunday 24 January 2021 between the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm (attached as Appendix 2 to the report):

1)   Port Road, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Marchbanks Street, to a point 500 metres north of the Barnes Street intersection);

2)   Toop Street, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Port Road, for 100 metres towards the intersection of Marchbanks Street);

3)   Meachen Street, Seaview (the entire length (including service lanes) between Barnes Street and Port Road); and

4)   Barnes Street, Seaview (the section of road between its intersection of Port Road and Wareham Place);

(c)  Wellington Triumph Sports Car Club - Coast Road Sealed Sprint 2020: Sunday 8 November 2020, between 7:30am and 4:00pm (attached as Appendix 3 to the report);

1)   Coast Road, Wainuiomata (the section from the East Harbour Bridge intersection (-41.36427° lat : 174.88336° long) to the end of the sealed section (-41.41467° lat : 174.89532° long));

(iii)  agrees to temporarily close the following sections of road (if required) for the reserve days associated with the events (as listed below), subject to the conditions listed in the Traffic Impact Reports attached as Appendix 1, Appendix 2 and Appendix 3 to the report:

(a)   Cam County (Inc.) Port Road Drags – 2020: Sunday 6 December 2020 between the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm;

1)    Port Road, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Marchbanks Street, to a point 500 metres north of the Barnes Street intersection); and

2)    Toop Street, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Marchbanks Street, to the intersection of Port Road);

(b)   Hutt Valley Motorsport Club (Inc.) -  Port Road Sprints – 2020/21: Monday
26 October 2020 and/or Monday 25 January 2021, between the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm:

1)    Port Road, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Marchbanks Street, to a point 500 metres north of the Barnes Street intersection);

2)    Toop Street, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Port Road, for 100 metres towards the intersection of Marchbanks Street);

3)    Meachen Street, Seaview (the entire length (including service lanes) between Barnes Street and Port Road); and

4)    Barnes Street, Seaview (the section of road between its intersection of Port Road and Wareham Place);

(iv)  agrees to temporarily rescind the existing parking restrictions during the listed events, and impose ‘No Stopping’ parking restrictions on sections of the following roads:

(a)   Cam County (Inc.) Port Road Drags – 2020: Sunday 29 November 2020 or Sunday 6 December 2020 between the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm:

1)    Port Road, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Marchbanks Street, to a point 500 metres north of the Barnes Street intersection); and

2)    Toop Street, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Marchbanks Street, to the intersection of Port Road);

(b)   Hutt Valley Motorsport Club (Inc.) -  Port Road Sprints – 2020/21: Sunday
25 October 2020 or Monday 26 October 2020 and Sunday 24 January 2021 or Monday 25 January 2021 between the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm:

1)    Port Road, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Marchbanks Street, to a point 500 metres north of the Barnes Street intersection);

2)    Toop Street, Seaview (the section of road from the intersection of Port Road, for 100 metres towards the intersection of Marchbanks Street);

3)    Meachen Street, Seaview (the entire length (including service lanes) between Barnes Street and Port Road); and

4)    Barnes Street, Seaview (the section of road between its intersection of Port Road and Wareham Place);

(c)   Wellington Triumph Sports Car Club - Coast Road Sealed Sprint 2020: Sunday 8 November 2020, between 7:30am and 4:00pm:

1)    Coast Road, Wainuiomata (the section from the East Harbour Bridge intersection (-41.36427° lat : 174.88336° long) to the end of the sealed section (-41.41467° lat : 174.89532° long));

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

(vi)  notes that the closure of the section of Coast Road will cause disruption to users, and will require a comprehensive communication notification plan to mitigate the effects.

For the reason that the proposed temporary road closures are necessary to accommodate the safe and efficient running of events for organisers, participants, spectators and the general public.

 

7.

Regulatory Matters (20/951)

Report No. RC2020/5/201 by the Executive Assistant, Environment and Sustainability

 

Speaking under public comment, Mr Max Shierlaw advised that he had received a report, written by Tonkin and Taylor, relating to noise tests undertaken at the Wainuiomata Cleanfill (the cleanfill).  He noted that the report claimed that elevated noise levels in excess of the 50 dB LAeq limit were not attributed to the cleanfill but were due to other noise sources eg passing vehicles, airplanes, the Wainuiomata River and birds.  He highlighted that he had complained to the Acoustical Society of New Zealand (the society).  He stated that, unfortunately, the complaint could not proceed as the authors of the report were not members of the society.  He also stated that Council had a consent to operate the cleanfill and benefited directly from that operation.  He asked members to take action and transfer all regulatory responsibilities of the cleanfill operation to Greater Wellington Regional Council (GW).

In response to a question from a member, Mr Shierlaw advised of another serious complaint relating to non-cleanfill waste being dumped at the cleanfill.  He highlighted that, according to the Ministry of the Environment’s guidelines, that then disqualified it as a cleanfill.  He added that the cleanfill should be treated as a landfill that attracted emission trading levies.  He added that the matter had been referred to the Environmental Protection Agency to see if there was non-compliance with the emissions trading levy scheme.  

Speaking under public comment, Ms Sally-Ann Moffat elaborated on the history of the cleanfill and living next door to the cleanfill.  She highlighted that the Ministry of the Environment’s guide to cleanfill management stated cleanfills should not be sited on a floodplain of a river.  She spoke of the area’s natural rich heritage.  She expressed concern that over the years, as the cleanfill increased in size and activity, the area was now an awful environment to live in.   She also expressed concern with the noise and dust coming from the cleanfill.  She believed that complaints about noise and dust from the cleanfill were not being investigated and committee members were now being told that the cleanfill was working well.  She also believed that the cleanfill was currently non compliant and was collapsing in the middle due to a damaged stormwater pipe.  She spoke of the cleanfill being shut down by GW in December 2019 due to the cleanfill operating under an expired consent.  She asked for the officer’s report to be re-written to reflect the facts.  She also asked members to appoint a third independent body to conduct an investigation into the officer’s report, audits, noise monitoring and the current perceived non compliance of conditions 12, 14, and 25.  She also asked that GW be the primary enforcer of the cleanfill and for Council to find alternative cleanfill sites as a matter of urgency.  She highlighted that if it was Council’s aim to increase truck numbers to the cleanfill, then it be undertaken in a transparent and lawful manner.  She also asked that the information provided by her be included in future audits of the cleanfill.

Speaking under public comment, Mr David Smith expressed support for the comments made by the previous public speaker.  He elaborated on the questions he had raised previously and the poor responses from Council to those questions.  He tabled a list of questions attached as pages 11-16 to the minutes and asked members to respond. He considered there was a lot of misinformation in the community and believed someone was not doing their job properly as committee members were not receiving the correct information. He expressed concern regarding the non notified process undertaken by Council.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Moffat advised that she was aware of a number of complaints from residents of Parenga Street and Ngaturi Grove regarding dust which were not included in the officer’s report.  She highlighted that she was directing complainants through the correct Council channels.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Smith considered the Community Liaison Group (the group) was not happy with the operation of the cleanfill.  He elaborated on the request for cameras which still had not been actioned.  Ms Moffat highlighted the list of actions from the group that still had not been actioned by the consent holder.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Moffat advised that if GW taking over the landfill was the best solution then she supported that move.  She believed there would be more value in having a longer discussion with members regarding a potential solution.

Mr Smith asked that regular site visits take place at the cleanfill. 

Ms Moffat spoke of a recent breach of condition 25 whereby the group should have been notified, invited and given the opportunity to observe any audits of the cleanfill.  She stated that this had not occurred.

The Head of Environmental Consents, the Head of Regulatory Services and Emergency Management and the Team Leader Resource Consents elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Head of Environmental Consents advised that the $140 public notice fee related to advertising liquor licence notices.  He said that the public notices were advertised on Council’s website instead of the Hutt News during Covid-19 lockdown.

In response to a question from a member, the Director Environment and Sustainability advised that Council’s Policy team had commenced gathering information from a number of sources before consulting on the proposed Cat Bylaw.  She noted that the matter would be reported back through the relevant Committee of Council.

In response to questions from members, the Head of Regulatory Services and Emergency Management updated members on the extensive improvements made to the Doggone product since last year.  He also advised that the improvements made to the Doggone app would be advertised through Council’s channels.

Cr Briggs left the meeting at 2.55pm.

In response to questions from a member, the Head of Regulatory Services and Emergency Management elaborated on the number of dog registrations, the number of unpaid dog registrations and the number of dog owners using Doggone.

Cr Briggs rejoined the meeting at 2.58pm.

In response to a question from a member regarding the cleanfill, the Director Environment and Sustainability advised that it was a common situation for councils to be in where councils were the consent applicants.  She highlighted that the structure of Council’s Regulatory Division was kept separate from other Council divisions due to receiving consent applications from within those divisons eg Parks and Reserves.  She acknowledged that condition 25 had been breached.  She spoke of officers taking a ‘negotiation’ approach with consent holders to try and mitigate breaches.  She advised that enforcement of the cleanfill consent was not only undertaken by Council officers but also GW officers.  She also advised that regular site visits were undertaken by both Council officers and GW officers.  She highlighted that the group met regularly and feedback from Cr Brown was that the group was working well.

With regard to the cleanfill noise, the Director Environment and Sustainability advised that Council’s Regulatory officers requested a noise report from the consent holder.  She noted that upon receiving the report, Council’s Environmental Health officers were not comfortable with the methodology used by the consent holder.  She then noted that Council’s Noise officers undertook their own noise reading which was currently being peered reviewed.

In response to a question from a member, the Team Leader Resource Consents confirmed that no dust complaints had been received from residents of Parenga Street and Ngaturi Grove.

In response to a question from a member with regard to the group waiting on reports, the Director Environment and Sustainability advised that she would follow up with the consent holder to ensure reports were being provided to the group.

In response to a question from a member, the Head of Environmental Consents advised the the Code of Compliance Key Performance Indicators had not been met due to a number of challenges.  He stated that these challenges related to staff resources and staff resignations.

In response to a question from a member relating to illegal dumping at recycling stations, the Head Environmental Consents advised that the number of fines for illegal dumping was comparable to last year.  He highlighted that it was a complex issue and officers had tried signage and cameras to reduce the amount of illegal dumping.

In response to a question from a member, the Head of Environmental Consents advised that key stakeholders had been notified of the liquor licence notices being published on Council’s website. 

In response to a question from a member, Cr Edwards, as a member of the Wellington Region Waste Management and Minimisation Plan Joint Committee, advised that the joint committee was trying to get a consistent Solid Waste Bylaw across the Wellington region.  He acknowledged that the Solid Waste Bylaw would be customised if councils had different requirements.

 

Resolved(Cr Mitchell/Cr Shaw)                                      Minute No. RC 20505(2)

“That the Committee notes and receives the report.”

 

 

8.       Information Item

a)

Dog Control Activities Report (20/991)

Report No. RC2020/5/97 by the Head of Regulatory Services and Emergency Management

 

The Head of Regulatory Services and Emergency Management elaborated on the report.

In response to questions from members, the Head of Regulatory Services and Emergency Management elaborated on the engagement and education that Council’s Animal Services team provided to the community.  He spoke of the successful dog adoption programme, dog registrations, microchipping and the network with other rescue organisations to rehome dogs.  He explained the statistics relating to the registration of dogs, the drop of numbers for barking dog complaints and the drop of numbers for uncontrolled dog complaints. 

Members congratulated the Head of Regulatory Services and Emergency Management and the Animal Services team on their excellent work.

 

Resolved(Cr Mitchell/Cr Briggs)                            Minute No. RC 20506(2)

“That the Committee:

 

(i)    notes and receives the report; and

 

(ii)   notes the requirement under section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 to publish its Dog Control Policy and dog control practices and provide statistical information on Council’s website by 30 October 2020.”

b)

Work Programme 2020 (20/1004)

Report No. RC2020/5/98 by the Head of Democratic Services

 

Resolved(Cr Mitchell/Cr Dyer)                              Minute No. RC 20507(2)

“That the report be noted and received.”

9.       QUESTIONS   

There were no questions.

 

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 3.28pm.

 

 

Cr Mitchell

CHAIR

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 29th day of September 2020

 

Questions from David Smith

Re the use of and extension for the continued use of The Wainuiomata landfill situated on a known flood plain -the landfill in question situated on 126-196 Coast Road Wainuiomata lower Hutt, next to old wastewater treatment plant.

Question One

Have you or the Chief Executive physically visited the clean fill?

Hutt City Council compliance staff routinely visit the cleanfill.

The Team Leader, Resource Consents and the Chief Executive have both visited the site along with other staff including the manager of solid waste.

Routine audits are also conducted by Greater Wellington.

Question Two

Have you or the Chief Executive personally examined the photographic evidence that was presented by Sally-ann Moffat and others at the public meeting she called, and is available in the public domain which strongly suggests that illegal dumping has occurred at the site?

We did look into this complaint via the regulatory team when it arose and found that the concrete that was left at the clean fill by this customer is acceptable. Please note that this involved reviewing photos that were taken some time ago. We have reminded the operator that private vehicles are not allowed to deposit material at the cleanfill. We have been in touch with Sally-Ann to confirm that these materials are acceptable cleanfill materials, and should she have any further queries we have asked her to please get in touch with our regulatory team who manages complaints about the clean fill.

Question Three

Do you or the Chief Executive agree with the evidence presented by Sally-ann Moffat and others (at the meeting} that strongly suggests the rules under which those.who are currently permitted to dispose of Clean Fill at the site have breached the rules under which they are supposed to operate (Copies of which they were presented with (Or should have been presented with at the time of their original consent}.

The Ministry for the Environment has guidelines as to what material is permitted to be disposed of at a cleanfill. Council has not witnessed any non-cleanfill materials being dumped at the site. Please note regular audits are undertaken by Hutt City Council compliance staff, and by Greater Wellington Regional Council staff. The most recent audit by Greater Wellington staff on 30 ·

August 2019 found no evidence of non-cleanfill material. Hutt City Council were at the cleanfill most recently on 12 September and saw no evidence of any breach in terms of the materials dumped.

Question Four

Are you or The Chief Executive aware of any warning given to those who currently or in the past have had permission to dump clean fill on the site?

 

Question Five

Do you or the Chief Executive feel that the information you have is adequate regarding what constitutes Clean Fill under the current laws around what can be placed in a clean fill.

There is a variety of material that can be placed in the cleanfill under the Ministry for the Environment Guidelines. Please refer to our facebook note for further information.

Question Six

Have you or the Chief Executive or a person designated by you or the Chief Executive ever been physically present on site to see what comes out of a truck and onto the site?

Yes, Hutt City Council compliance officers have been on site when trucks have been dumping and have not observed any non-cleanfill material.

Question Seven

Do you or the Chief Executive think there is a need for full toxicology report on the site before final planting.

It is current practice as part of the cleanfill acceptance criteria to require laboratory analysis where there is a concern that the material maybe contaminated.

Question Eight

What steps do you and or the Chief Executive intend to take to ensure better monitoring of the site?

Council is satisfied with the monitoring regime in place for the cleanfill.

Hutt City Council compliance officers routinely and proactively monitor the site. In addition, if a complaint is received we will attend to it, usually the same day or within 24 hours.

Will you or the chief Executive consider asking the council for extra funds to ensure no truck arrives at the site with anything but clean Fill and has been certified as such.

Refer previous comment re testing of sites. We have not identified the need for any additional resources.

Will you oversee installation of security cameras?

Please note the load in each vehicle is physically inspected by the operator.

Question Nine

Between what hours are trucks legally allowed access to the site.

Condition 5 of the resource consent RM170015 states:

The cleanfill shall only operate within the hours of Monday to Friday 7.30am-5.00pm and Saturday 7.30am- 12.00pm (except where deposition of fill is required outside these hours/days for emergency civil works).

 

Question Ten

Do you or the Chief Executive feel misled by people who have given personal assurances around what might or might not be in the trucks?

We rely on our staff, who physically inspect each load from each truck and independent audit reports.

Do you or the Chief Executive feel vital information has been withheld from you?

See previous response re audits.

Are you happy about what information was supplied to the Mayor and other councillors regarding the application for an extension for use of the site?

Information regarding the resource consent on the extension of the cleanfill is on our website and is assessed as per the process for all consents. This is an operational matter.

Question Eleven

What advice have you or the Chief Executive sought or received from the Ministry for the Environment on issues and legalities pertinent to the use of and the extension of the life of the Wainuiomata Clean fill.

Hutt City Council and Greater Wellington Regional Council are the consenting authorities for the Cleanfill. The Ministry for the Environment does not have any part to play in the consenting of the cleanfill. The Ministry has produced "The Guide to Management of Cleanfills" which is a best practice manual, and is used by the operators of the cleanfill and for compliance purposes. It is up to the local authorities to use this document as guidance and issue consents accordingly.

Question Twelve

Have you, the present Chief Executive or Past chief Executive (to the best of your knowledge) sought advice from those people in Christchurch tasked with seeing that vast amounts of clean Fill are properly and legally disposed of and the systems they have in place for making sure illegal dumping does not occur (as they have years of experience with problems relating to clean Fill)?

Councils across the country share best practice and we are always keen to learn from the experiences of others. Our waste management consultants Tonkin & Taylor are leaders in the sector and supply the Council with advice.

Question Thirteen

Are you or the Chief Executive conducting or planning to conduct an official enquiry into issues raised around the past and present use of the Wainuiomata Clean fill, how and why the extension application was non-notified even to those nearest to the site, given that the decision would have been known by those responsible that that this application would have implications not only for them and the rest of Wainuiomata but for the whole of Lower Hutt, given that the site is on a flood plain?

I hope the below information is useful to you regarding the consent process in relation to the cleanfill.

 

 

Original consent

The original consent issued in 2011 was notified to a limited number of affected parties, due to the cumulative effects of the traffic, noise, visual and character effects, dust, vibration, erosion, stability and flooding and nuisance. This consent was due to lapse in 2016 as it had not been fully given effect to. An application to extend this original consent was applied for and granted without further notification, on the basis that the operating environment and consent conditions remained substantially unchanged, and in the knowledge that the extension would only allow operations to continue under the new consent for a limited period.

Consent extension

In granting the extension to the consent, a number of issues were considered by the planner (and independent experts) to determine what the level of effects were -these included noise, the separation distance between the clean fill operations and surrounding/adjoining properties, the management of the site via existing and future iterations of management plans (such as site management plan, noise management plan), visual amenity, odour, traffic, vibration, flooding and dust. These were all found to be "less than minor" -which is the test in the RMA which determines whether or not the application should be notified.

New application

In March 2019 a new consent was lodged for Stage 3. This consent is being processed by an independent expert planner. This consent has been notified to 115B, 119,199,200,201, 201A, 202, 203, 205 Coast Road. Submissions close 16 August with a hearing on 5 November to determine whether to approve or decline the resource consent. Those residents who submit are able to have their say at the hearing in September, along with the applicant and the independent planning consultant processing the resource consent.

The new consent being applied for is for a maximum period of a further two and a half years. The proposal before the independent planner states when the area is full it will be gazetted as reserve, and planted or otherwise developed, following consultation with the community as to their preferences for future use of the area. A decision on this resource consent has not yet been made. It will be determined in a hearing in front of an independent hearings commissioner.

The time between the consent application and the decision as to which neighbours to notify, was used by the independent planner to make sure all necessary expert advice was obtained and thoroughly reviewed.

As an organisation we have reviewed our approach regarding the cleanfill and the current resource application. We are confident that the legislation has been applied correctly.

If yes will you or the Chief Executive look at possible referral for persecution if illegal dumping is confirmed?

There are no grounds for pursuing a prosecution in this case.

If yes will the findings be made public?

N/A

If the council asks for a withdrawal of the Application to extend the life of the Clean Fill do you believe it is legally possible?

The cleanfill consenting and operation is an operational matter, and therefore not a matter for the elected members.

It is legally possible for the council as applicant to withdraw the application for an extension of the cleanfill, however there is still a need for an area for construction materials to be deposited at the cleanfill. See below information which is an extract from our facebook note.

The Wainuiomata cleanfill plays an important role in supporting the ongoing growth and development of Lower Hutt, including our construction industry -particularly in the current environment with the high volume of building in Lower Hutt.

Currently approximately 50% of the material deposited at the cleanfill is generated by developments progressing in Wainuiomata alone. A further 45% of cleanfill materials is from within Lower Hutt and includes the rebuild of the cinema at Queensgate. The remaining balance comes from the wider region.

Under what. circumstances will you or the Chief Executive support a full independent public enquiry, and do you believe the Council has the legal right to ask for one?

We could ask for a full independent public enquiry but this is not necessary as there are no grounds for this.

Question Fourteen

Are you or the Chief Executive aware that the government is looking at a task force to urgently look at Tips in general that are at risk due to climate change and contamination of water supplies?

We are aware of the project being undertaken by the Ministry for the Environment, the Department of Conservation, the Country's 16 Regional Councils and Tonkin and Taylor. It is our understanding that the project is intended to identify closed landfills (former municipal landfill sites) that may be impacted by various natural hazards. Those that may be impacted will then be prioritised for further investigation or action based on the material they contain, for example general household rubbish, asbestos or industrial waste. The focus of the project is to use information on closed landfills on the Regional Council's HAIL (Hazardous Activities and Industries List) alongside information on natural hazards such as predicted flooding extents. We understand that the project methodology will examine such matters as;

•          location i.e. in the flood plan, slips, adjacent to the sea etc

•          landfill construction e.g. liner and capping of material

•          nature of potential contaminants in the landfill

•          existing management structures or procedures

We consider it unlikely that the Wainuiomata Cleanfill will be identified as site for concern as the Wainuiomata cleanfill site is outside the one in one hundred year flood zone as defined by GWRC. The material in the cleanfill is inert material, as identified in the Ministry for the Environment's Cleanfill guidelines. The boundary of the cleanfill has a stopbank along the river side boundary, addressing the potential for inundation during an extreme flood event. The stopbank design has been approved by Greater Wellington Regional Council.

If yes, do you think The Wainuiomata Clean Fill should be on that list and if yes what would that mean in relation to the application for extension of use?

No, it is a cleanfill not a landfill.

Question Fifteen

Have you or the Chief Executive or the past Chief Executive consulted the Wellington Regional Council over this issue and if not do think they should have been.

We work closely with the regional council on compliance and consenting over this site.

Greater Wellington Regional Council staff undertake routine audits of the cleanfill.


Attachment 1

Proposed amendments to District Plan Chapter 14A Transport

 

 

Proposed Amendments to Chapter 14A Transport

 

Proposed deletions to Chapter 14A Transport are struck through.

 

Proposed amendment reference
 

 

 

 

 


Amendment 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

14A   Transport

14A 1   Introduction

A safe, efficient transport network is essential for the social and economic wellbeing of Hutt City.  The Hutt City transport network comprises the following components and transport modes:

·          all road corridors (including both State Highways and Local Roads);

·          pedestrian and cycling facilities within the road corridor, and off-road where primarily for transport purposes;

·          all railway corridors;

·          car and cycle parking facilities;

·          loading facilities; and

·          public transport services and their associated infrastructure (including bus, train and ferry services, and their associated train stations, harbour ferry wharfs, bus stops and Park and Ride car parks at train stations).

The transport network is administered by four different agencies. The New Zealand Transport Agency is responsible for designated State Highways.  KiwiRail is responsible for designated railway corridors. Greater Wellington Regional Council provides public transport services including buses and trains that use the infrastructure provided by these agencies. Hutt City Council is responsible for the remainder of the transport network. 

Hutt City Council road reserves are managed as overlays that lay on top of the underlying zones:  when a road is stopped under a Local Government Act or Public Works Act process, the underlying zone is revealed. Where the road reserve is between two different activity areas, the centre line of the road reserve is the boundary between such activity areas.

To achieve sustainable development, the transport network must be integrated with land use, so that people can easily move around the City, and businesses can move goods efficiently.  Appropriate integration also manages effects on and from the operation of the transport network, particularly regionally significant transport infrastructure.

This transport chapter contains city-wide objectives, policies and rules relevant to the transport network.

The approach of the chapter is to identify a transport network hierarchy, promote the integration of land use with the transport network and specify key standards for the design and construction of transport network infrastructure. All activities are permitted if they meet the specific standards and thresholds. In general, recognised industry standards are used, unless there is reason to use a specific local standard.  Activities that do not meet the standards or that generate significant volumes of traffic are assessed on a case by case basis through the resource consent process.

14A 2   Issues

Issue 14A 2.1

A safe, efficient, resilient, multi-modal transport network that is well integrated with land use and development is essential for both sustainable development and social and economic wellbeing.

Issue 14A 2.2

The construction, operation and maintenance of the transport network can have adverse effects on the surrounding environment, including noise, vibration and visual effects.

Issue 14A 2.3

Noise sensitive activities can have reverse sensitivity effects on the transport network, potentially affecting the construction, operation and maintenance of the network.

Issue 14A 2.4

Land use and development can adversely affect the safety and efficiency of the transport network through the generation of additional traffic.

Issue 14A 2.5

Land use and development can adversely affect the safety and efficiency of the transport network through inappropriate design of on-site transport facilities (vehicle access, parking, manoeuvring and loading facilities).

14A 3   Objectives

Objective 14A 3.1

A safe, efficient resilient and well-connected transport network that is integrated with land use patterns, meets local, regional and national transport needs, facilitates and enables urban growth and economic development, and provides for all modes of transport.

Objective 14A 3.2

Adverse effects from the construction, maintenance and development of the transport network on the adjacent environment are managed.

Objective 14A 3.3

Reverse sensitivity effects on the transport network from sensitive activities are managed.

Objective 14A 3.4

Adverse effects on the safety and efficiency of the transport network from land use and development that generate high volumes of traffic are managed.

Objective 14A 3.5

Adverse effects on the safety and efficiency of the transport network from on-site transport facilities (vehicle access, parking, manoeuvring and loading facilities) are managed.

14A 4   Policies

Policy 14A 4.1

Additions and upgrades to the transport network should seek to improve connectivity across all modes and be designed to meet industry standards that ensure that the safety, efficiency and resilience of the transport network are maintained.

Policy 14A 4.2

Land use, subdivision and development should not cause significant adverse effects on the connectivity, accessibility and safety of the transport network, and, where appropriate, should:

•      seek to improve connectivity within and between communities; and

•      enable walking, cycling and access to public transport.

Policy 14A 4.3

The transport network should be located and designed to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the adjacent environment.

Policy 14A 4.4

Land use, subdivision or development containing noise sensitive activities should be designed and located to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects which may arise from the transport network.

Policy 14A 4.5

Any activity that is a High Trip Generator must be assessed on a case by case basis. Adverse effects of High Trip Generators on the safety and efficiency of the transport network should be managed through the design and location of the land use, subdivision or development.

Policy 14A 4.6

Vehicle access, parking, manoeuvring and loading facilities should be designed to standards that ensure they do not compromise the safety and efficiency of the transport network.

Policy 14A 4.7

The transport network, land use, subdivision and development should provide for all transport modes.


 

14A 5   Rules

Rule 14A 5.1

(a)     Any activity is permitted if it:

i.        Complies with the standards listed in Appendix Transport 1; and

ii.       Does not exceed the high trip generator thresholds specified in Appendix Transport 2.

NOTES:

Where an activity is associated with a subdivision, the provisions of “Chapter 11 – Subdivision” also apply.

Where an activity will be undertaken by a network utility operator (as defined by Section 166 of the Resource Management Act), the provisions of “Chapter 13 – Network Utilities” also apply.

(b)     Any activity that does not comply with the standards listed in Appendix Transport 1 is a Restricted Discretionary Activity.

Discretion is restricted to:

i.        The effects generated by the standard(s) not being met.

(c)     Any activity that exceeds the high trip generator thresholds specified in Appendix Transport 2 is a Restricted Discretionary Activity.

Discretion is restricted to:

i.        The effects of the activity on the transport network including impacts on on-street parking.

An Integrated Transport Assessment, prepared by a suitably qualified traffic engineer/planner, must be submitted with any resource consent application under this rule.

NOTE: The New Zealand Transport Agency guidelines “Research Report 422: Integrated Transport Assessment Guidelines, November 2010” should be used to inform any Integrated Transport Assessment. 

Links to:

All Objectives and Policies

 

Appendix Transport 1 - Standards

Standard 1 - Standards for New Roads

(a)      Road Classification

Roads are classified under the One Network Road Classification described in Table 1-1 and are listed in Appendix Transport 3.  Any road not listed in Appendix Transport 3 is defined as an Access Road.  Any change to Appendix Transport 3 to add or reclassify a road requires a Plan Change.

Roads overlay zones, as shown in the Planning Maps.  When a road is stopped under a Local Government Act or Public Works Act process, the underlying zone is revealed.

Table 1-1:  Transport Network Hierarchy

One Network Road Classification

Description

Category from NZS 4404:2010

National

These roads make the largest contribution to the social and economic wellbeing of New Zealand by connecting major population centres, major ports or international airports, and have high volumes of heavy commercial vehicles or general traffic.

-

Regional

These roads make a major contribution to the social and economic wellbeing of a region and connect to regionally significant places, industries, ports and airports.  They are major connectors between regions and, in urban areas, may have substantial passenger transport movements.

Major Arterial Road

Arterial

These roads make a significant contribution to social an economic wellbeing, linking regionally significant places, industries, ports or airports.  They may be the only route available to important places in a region, performing a ‘lifeline’ function.

Major Arterial Road / Minor Arterial Road

Primary Collector

These are locally important roads that provide a primary distributor/collector function, linking significant local economic areas or population areas.

Minor Arterial Road / Connector/Collector Road

Secondary Collector

These roads link local areas of population and economic sites.  They may be the only route available to some places within this local area.

Connector/Collector Road

Access

These roads link local areas of population and economic sites.  They may be the only route available to some places within this local area.

This is often where your journey starts and ends.  These roads provide access and connectivity to many of your daily journeys (home, school, farm, forestry etc). They also provide access to the wider network.

Local Road

Access Road (low volume)

Lane

 

 

(b)      Engineering Standards

All roads must be designed and constructed in accordance with NZS 4404:2010 Land Development and Subdivision Infrastructure.

(c)      Service Lanes, Private Ways, Pedestrian Accessways and Walkways

Service lanes, private ways, pedestrian accessways and walkways must be designed and constructed in accordance with Section 3 of NZS 4404:2010 Land Development and Subdivision Engineering, except that Table 2-1 replaces the formation requirements for private ways detailed in NZS 4404.

No. of Potential Dwellings

Legal Width

Formation Width

1

3m

No specific requirements

2

3m

No specific requirements

3

4m

3m carriageway

4-6

6m

5m carriageway

7-10

7m

5m carriageway plus 1m footpath

 

Standard 2 - Site Access and Manoeuvring Area

(a)     Vehicle Access (excluding separation distances from intersections)

No more than two separate crossings for any front site.  The total width of such crossings must not exceed 50% of the road frontage.

There must be a separation distance of at least 1 metre between crossings measured at the kerb/carriageway edge.

Site access must be designed and constructed in accordance with Section 3 of AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 Parking facilities Part 1: Off-street car parking.

Where a vehicle access serves three or more dwellings, it must have a minimum width of 4 metres to allow for fire service vehicles.

(b)      Separation Distances from Intersections and Rail Level Crossings

The distance between new vehicle accesses and all intersections must be at least:

·           National or Regional:  30m

·           Arterial or Primary Collector:  20m

·           Secondary Collector:  15m

·           Access Road:  10m

The distance between new vehicle accesses and all rail level crossings must be at least 30m.

These distances are to be measured between the intersecting points of the site boundaries as shown in Diagram 2-1 below, and also apply to new vehicle accesses on the opposite side of the road from an intersection.

Diagram 2-1: Separation Distance from Intersection

(c)      Manoeuvring Area

Sufficient area must be provided for vehicles to stand, queue and make all necessary manoeuvres without using the public road reserve, and without using the area provided for parking, servicing, loading or storage purposes.

Sufficient area must be provided to allow vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward direction except where the access is to a single dwelling and accesses an Access, Secondary Collector or Primary Collector road (as listed in Appendix Transport 3).

(d)      Additional Provision for Service Stations

Site access and manoeuvring space for service stations must also be designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with RTS13 Guidelines for Service Stations.

Standard 3 - Minimum Sight Distances at Railway Level Crossings

(a)      Minimum Sight Distances at Railway Level Crossings

New buildings, structures and activities that would obstruct drivers seeing approaching trains must be designed, located and constructed in accordance with New Zealand Transport Agency Traffic Control Devices Manual 2008, Part 9 Level Crossings and the Australian Level Crossing Assessment Model (ALCAM).

 

Standard 4 - Car and Cycle Parking and End of Trip Facilities

Amendment 1

(a)      Car Parking Requirements

For all new activities and changes to existing activities, car parking spaces must be provided in accordance with the minimums calculated under Table 4-1.

In calculating the number of car parking spaces to be provided, fractional numbers must be rounded up to the next whole number.

For developments that involve a range of different activities (for example, Integrated Retail Developments) the car parking requirement must be determined on an aggregate basis.

Space needed for manoeuvring, loading, unloading, queuing, or standing at a service booth, must not be used for carparks counted towards meeting the requirement.

Table 4-1:  Minimum Parking Standards

Activity

Minimum Parking Spaces

Any activity in Central Commercial Activity Area

Nil

Any activity in Petone Commercial Activity Area

Nil

Residential:

 

Dwelling house

1 per unit

Home occupation

1 per home occupation (in addition to the Residential requirement)

Housing for the elderly

0.7 per unit/apartment and

0.3 per rest home bed

Residential facility

1 per staff member* and

0.3 per bed

Boarding house

0.5 per resident


Education:

 

Childcare facility

1 per staff member* and

0.2 per child that the facility is designed to accommodate*

Primary and intermediate school

1 per staff member*

Secondary school

1 per staff member* and

0.1 per student 16 and over

Tertiary or adult education (outside the Tertiary Education Precinct)

1 per staff member* and

0.2 per student

Tertiary Educational Precinct

[(1 parking space per 1.33 staff members* + 1 parking space per 2.5 students) – 300] ÷ 0.76

Medical:

 

Health care service, hospital and veterinary surgery

5 per 100m2 GFA

Community Health Activity Area

3 per 100m2 GFA

Retail:

 

Retail activity and licensed premises within the Suburban Commercial and Special Commercial Activity Areas

Nil for the first 400m2 GFA

2 per 100m2 for GFA greater than 400m2

Retail activity and licensed premises outside the Commercial Activity Areas

Nil for the first 100m2 GFA

5 per 100m2 for GFA greater than 100m2

Vehicle sale

1 per 300m2 site area

Commercial garage

4 per service bay

Service station

5 per 100m2 GFA

Trading Warehouse

3 per 100m2 GFA

Commercial:

 

Commercial activity

2 per 100m2 GFA

Industrial:

 

Industrial activity

2 per 100m2 GFA

Warehouse

2 per 100m2 GFA

Network Utility Operation

Nil for the first 200m2 GFA

2 per 100m2 for GFA greater than 200m2 **

Emergency facility

2 per 100m2 GFA

Accommodation:

 

Visitor accommodation, motor camp and camping ground

The greater of:

1 per unit or

0.2 per occupant

Cultural and Sporting:

 

Place of assembly and Sporting facility

1 per 5 people based on the maximum number of people that the site is designed to accommodate.

*    The number of staff members is the maximum number of full or part time staff members on the site at any one time.

 

(b)      Off-street Car Parking for People with Disabilities

Off-street car parking for people with disabilities must be provided in accordance with Section 5 of NZS 4121:2004 Design for Access and Mobility – Buildings and Associated Facilities.

Amendment 2

 

(c)      Location of Car Parking Spaces

Car Parking spaces must be provided on site, except for tertiary education activities within the Tertiary Education Precinct, for which car parking spaces must be located on any site within the Precinct.

(d)      Car Parking Design Standards

Car parking spaces and facilities must comply with the requirements of AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 Parking facilities Part 1: Off-street car parking.

(e)      Cycle Parking and End of Trip Facility Requirements

For all activities in new buildings and developments (including the redevelopment of existing buildings), cycle parking and showers must be provided in accordance with the minimums stated in Tables 4-2.

Table 4-2:  Minimum Cycle Parks and Showers

Number of Staff Members

Number of Cycle Parks

Number of Showers

1-5

0

0

6-10

1

1

10 or more

1 per 10 staff members

1 per 100 staff members

* The number of staff members is the maximum number of full or part time staff members on the site at any one time.

At every place of assembly or sporting facility cycle parking must be provided clear of footpaths and roadways, not more than 50m from the public entrance, at the rate of 1 cycle park per 20 persons based on the maximum number of persons the facility is designed to accommodate.

Cycle parking facilities required under this standard must meet the following minimum specifications:

1     Stands must be securely anchored to an immovable object.

2     Stands must support the bicycle frame and front wheel.

3     Stands must allow the bicycle frame to be secured.

4     Cycle parking facilities must be located so it they are easily accessible for staff.

5     Cycle parking facilities must be located so as not to impede pedestrian thoroughfares including areas used by people whose mobility or vision is restricted.

6     Cycle parking facilities must be located so that the bicycle is at no risk of damage from vehicle movements within the site.

7     Cycle parking facilities must be available during the hours of operation and must not be diminished by the subsequent erection of any structure, storage of goods, landscape planting or any other use.

8     Cycle parking facilities for staff must be located in a covered area.

9     Cycle parking facilities for staff must be located in an area where access by the general public is generally excluded.

Advisory note: Plan users are referred to the Council’s Cycling Parking Design Guide to assist in the design and provision of cycle parking facilities.

Standard 5 - Loading and Unloading

(a)      Loading and Unloading Requirements for Non-Residential Activities

For non-residential activities the number of loading spaces to be provided on-site must not be less than that shown in Table 5-1.

(b)      Design Requirements

Loading facilities must be designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with AS 2890.2:2002 Parking facilities Part 2: Off-street commercial vehicle facilities, based on the minimum vehicle design stated in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1:  Minimum Loading Space Requirements

 

Gross Floor Area

No. of Spaces

Minimum Design Vehicle

Up to 500m2

Nil

-

501 - 1000m2

1

Small Rigid Vehicle

1001 - 3000m2

1

Medium Rigid Vehicle

Greater than 3000m2

1

Heavy Rigid Vehicle

 

(c)      Rubbish Collection Facilities for Residential Activities

For residential developments of 20 or more dwelling houses, an on-site loading facility must be provided for rubbish collection vehicles. For the purpose of determining the design of the loading facility (under Standard 5(c)), the minimum design vehicle for the loading facility is a Small Rigid Vehicle.

Standard 6 - Development within the State Highway and Railway Corridor Buffer Overlays

Within the 40-metre wide State Highway and Railway Corridor Buffer Overlays, all new buildings containing noise sensitive activities, or existing buildings with new noise sensitive activities*, must be designed, constructed and maintained (at the level of installation) to meet the following standards:

(a)      Vibration

Buildings must comply with class C of Norwegian Standard 8176 E:2005 (Vibration and Shock - Measurement of Vibration in Buildings from Land based Transport and Guidance to Evaluation of Its Effect on Human Beings).

(b)      Noise

(i)    Indoor design noise level as a result of noise from road and rail state highway traffic must not exceed 45dB LAeq(24h).

(ii)    Indoor design noise level as a result of noise from rail traffic must not exceed the following levels:

Residential Activities, Visitor Accommodation, Boarding Houses or other premises providing residential accommodation for five or more travellers:

Bedrooms:  35dB LAeq(1h)

Other habitable spaces:  40dB LAeq(1h)

Childcare Facility:

All spaces:  40dB LAeq(1hr)

(c)      Ventilation

If windows must be closed to achieve the design noise levels in (b), the building must be ventilated to meet clause G4 of the Building Code (Schedule 1 of the Building Regulations 1992). The sound of the ventilation system must not exceed 30dB LAeq(30s) when measured 1m away from any internal grille or diffuser.

Compliance with the above performance standards for Noise and Vibration can be achieved by ensuring buildings are designed and constructed in a manner that:

1.       Accords with the building schedule in Appendix Transport 4; or

2.       Accords with an acoustic and vibration design certificate, signed by a qualified acoustic engineer, that states that the proposed design will achieve compliance with the above performance standards.

 

*    For the avoidance of doubt, this requirement does not apply to alterations or additions to existing buildings in which no new noise sensitive activity is proposed.

 


 

Appendix Transport 2 - High Trip Generator Thresholds

Activity

Threshold

Residential

Any residential development or subdivision enabling more than 60 dwelling houses

Education:

 

Child Care Facilities

More than 30 Children

Primary, Intermediate and Secondary Schools

More than 150 Students

Tertiary Education Providers

More than 250 Full Time Equivalent students

Health Care Services:

 

All Health Care Services

More than 500m2 GFA

Retail:

 

All Retail Activities (including Integrated Retail Developments)

More than 1,000m2 GFA

Licensed Premises

More than 500m2 GFA

Commercial Garages

More than 500m2 GFA

Vehicle Sales

More than 2,000m2 site area

Commercial:

 

Offices, Financial Institutions

More than 2,000m2 GFA

Veterinary Clinics

More than 500m2 GFA

Visitor Accommodation, Motor Camps and Camping Grounds

More than 50 beds

All other Commercial Activities

More than 1,000m2 GFA

Industrial:

 

Industrial Activities

More than 5,000m2 GFA

Warehouses

More than 10,000m2 GFA

Emergency Facilities

More than 1,000m2 GFA

Service Stations

Any Service Station

Places of Assembly and Sporting Facilities

More than 200 persons on the site at any one time

Any combination of Health Care Services, Retail and Commercial

More than 1,000m2 GFA

Any Activity Not Listed Above

More than 500 vehicle trips per day


 

Appendix Transport 3 - Transport Network Hierarchy


REGIONAL

Road

Start

Finish

Wainuiomata Hill Rd

Parkway

Rishworth St

 

ARTERIAL

Road

Start

Finish

Bell Rd

Gracefield Rd

Parkside Rd

Block Rd

Pharazyn St

SH2

Connolly St

Melling Rd

Harcourt Werry Dr

Cuba St

Esplande

Victoria St

Daysh St

Park Ave

Naenae Rd

Eastern Hutt Rd

High St

District Boundary

Ewen Bridge (incl. on and off ramps)

Railway Ave

Queens Dr

Fairway Dr

High St

SH2

Gracefield Rd

Gracefield Rd on ramp / off ramp

Bell Rd

Harcourt Werry Dr

Connolly St

Taita Dr

High St

Queens Dr

Eastern Hutt Rd

Hutt Rd

Sh2

Railway Ave

Jackson St

Hutt Rd

Cuba St

Ludlam Cres

Randwick Rd

Woburn Rd

Main Rd

Wainuiomata Rd

Moohan St

Marine Dr

Port Rd

97 Marine Dr

Melling Link

SH2

Rutherford St

Naenae Rd

Cambridge Tce

Vogel St

Parkside Rd

Seaview Rd

Bell Rd

Pharazyn St

Marsden St

Block Rd

Queens Dr

Ewen Bridge

Rutherford St

Railway Ave

Hutt Rd

Ewen Bridge

Randwick Rd

Croft Gr

Ludlam Cres

Rutherford St

Connolly St

Margaret St

Seaview Rd

Waione St

Port Rd

Taita Dr

Harcourt Werry Dr

High St

The Esplanade

Hutt Rd

Waione St

Udy St

Hutt Rd

Cuba St

Victoria St

Valentine St

Marsden St

Wainui Hill Rd on and off ramps

Wainui Hill Rd

Gracefield Rd

Wainui Rd

Whites Line East

Wainuiomata Hill Rd

Wainuiomata Road

Parkway

Fitzherbert Road

Waione St

Marine Pde

Seaview Rd

Waiwhetu Rd

Whites Line East

Naenae Rd

Waterloo Rd

Queens Dr

Oxford Tce

Whites Line East

Randwick Rd

Wainui Rd

Woburn Rd

Ewen Bridge

Bellevue Rd

 

PRIMARY COLLECTOR

Road

Start

Finish

Bell Rd

Parkside Rd

Whites Line East

Bellevue Rd

Woburn Rd

Laings Rd

Belmont School Slip Rd

Fairway Dr

Belmont School Access Rd

Bloomfield Tce

Laings Rd

Kings Cres

Bridge St

Parliament St

Marsden St

Bunny St

Queens Dr

Knights Rd

Cambridge Tce

Whites Line East

Wingate Overbridge

Cambridge Tce Turnoff

Cambridge Tce

Waterloo Rd

Cornwall St

Knights Rd

Pretoria St

Daly St

High St

Rutherford St

Daysh St

High St

Park Ave

Dudley St

Margaret St

Andrews Ave

Eastern Hutt Rd

Cambridge Tce

High St

Fitzherbert Rd

Main Rd

Nelson Cres

George St

Stokes Valley Rd

Evans St

Gracefield Rd

Bell Rd

Seaview Rd

Hutt Park Rd

Parkside Rd

Gracefield Rd

Kings Cres

Queens Dr

High St

Knights Rd

Laings Rd

Oxford St

Korokoro Rd Bridge

Korokoro Rd

Hutt Rd

Laings Rd

High St

Bellevue Rd

Main Rd

Moohan St

Hine Rd

Major Dr

SH2

Ilam Gr

Manuka Ave

Ludlam Cres

Puriri St

Margaret St

Rutherford St

Queens Dr

Marine Dr

97 Marine Dr

Muritai Rd

Marsden St

Victoria St

Pharazyn St

Melling Rd

High St

Rutherford St

Muritai Rd

Marine Pde

Makaro St

Myrtle St

Knights Rd

Woburn Rd

Naenae Rd

Vogel St

Rata St

Nelson Cres

Fitzherbert Rd

End Of Road

Normandale Rd

Bridge St

SH2 Overbridge

Oxford Tce

Knights Rd

Oxford Tce

Park Ave

High St

Daysh St

Parkway

Nelson Cres

Wainuiomata Rd

Parliament St

Railway Ave

Bridge St

Penrose St

Ludlam Cres

Knights Rd

Petone Ave

Hutt Rd

Gear St

Pharazyn St

Block Rd

Melling Link

Pharazyn St

Bridge St

Marsden St

Pohutukawa St

End of Road

Knights Rd

Port Rd

Seaview Rd

Seaview Rd

Puriri St

Massey Ave

Pohutukawa St

Queen St

The Esplanade

Jackson St

Randwick Rd

Seaview Rd

Croft Gr

Rata St

Treadwell St

Naenae Rd

Richmond St

The Esplanade

Jackson St

Scholes Ln

Jackson St

Udy St

Seddon St

Vogel St

Grierson St

Stevens Gr

Knights Rd

End of Road

Stokes Valley Rd

Eastern Hutt Rd

Manuka St

The Strand

Wainuiomata Rd

Fitzherbert St

Thirlmere St

Wise St

Castlerea St

Toop St

Port Rd

Marchbanks St

Treadwell St

Naenae Rd

Rata St

Vogel St

Cambridge Tce

Seddon St

Waterloo Rd

High St

Queens Dr

Waterloo Rd

Oxford Tce

Waiwhetu Rd

Wellington Rd

Nelson Cres

Enfield St

Whites Line East

Wainui Rd

Godley St

Wingate Cres

Cambridge Tce

Eastern Hutt Rd

Wise St

Nelson Cres

Donnelly Dr

Witako St

Waterloo Rd

Epuni St

 

SECONDARY COLLECTOR

Road

Start

Finish

Aglionby St

Railway Ave

Bridge St

Andrews Ave

High St

Dudley St

Awamutu Gr

40 Awamutu Gr

Leighton Ave

Barnes St

Port Rd

Seaview Rd

Beaumont Ave

Kiwi St

Victoria St

Birch St

Waterloo Rd

Oxford Tce

Birdwood Rd

Waiwhetu Rd

Haig St

Bolton St

The Esplanade

Jackson St

Bouverie St

Cuba St

Udy St

Bowers St

Stokes Valley Rd

George St

Britannia St

Jackson St

Udy St

Brook St

Grenville St

Vincent St

Brunswick St

High St

Kings Cres

Buick St

Elizabeth St

The Esplanade

Burcham St

High St

Taita Dr

Burden Ave

Main Rd

Peel Pl

Burnside St

Waiwhetu Rd

Riverside Dr

Bush St

Treadwell St

Naenae Rd

Campbell Tce

Petone Ave

Nelson St

Carter St

Owen St

End of Road

Castle Cres

Lord St

End of Road

Castlerea St

Wise St

Ruthven Rd

Churton Cres

Taita Dr

Taine St

Cleland Cres

Seddon St

Seddon St

Coast Rd

Hine Rd

End of Road

Collingwood St

Waiwhetu Rd

Trafalgar Sq

Colson St

Oxford Tce

Oxford Tce

Copeland St

Kings Cres

Oxford Tce

Cornish St

SH2

End of Road

Davis Gr

Wainuiomata Rd

End of Road

Downer St

High St

Bristol Sq

Dowse Dr

Hutt Rd

Miromiro Rd

Elizabeth St (Moera)

Randwick Rd

End of Road

Elizabeth St (Petone)

Jackson St

Kensington Ave

Epuni St

Kings Cres

Oxford Tce

Evans St

Stokes Valley Rd

George St

Everest Ave

Vogel St

Treadwell St

Fairway Dr on and off ramp

Fairway Dr

Harcourt Werry Dr

Ferry Rd

Marine Dr

End of Road

Fitzherbert St (Petone)

The Esplanade

Jackson St

Fleet St

Rata St

Kowhai St

Fraser St (Wainuiomata)

Main Rd

Holland St

Frederick St (Wainuiomata)

Nelson Cres

Derwent St

Gear St

Jackson St

Petone Ave

Glen Rd

Stokes Valley Rd

Tawhai St

Godley St

Guthrie St

Whites Line East

Grounsell Cres

End of Road

SH2

Guthrie St

Cambridge Tce

Riverside Dr

Hair St

Moores Valley Rd

End Of Road

Hall Cres

Witako St

Mitchell St

Harbour View Rd

SH2

Viewmont Dr

Hardy St

Trafalgar Sq

Waiwhetu Rd

Harrison Cres

Daysh St

Oxford Tce

Hautana St

Bellevue Rd

Sherwood St

Hawkins St

Cambridge Tce

Whites Line East

Hawthorn Cres

Stokes Valley Rd

Glen Rd

Hebden Cres

Fernlea Cottage

End of Road

Herbert St

Railway Ave

Bridge St

Hewer Cres

Treadwell St

Cambridge Tce

Hill Rd

Grounsell Cres

92 Hill Rd

Hinau Gr

Rata St

End of Road

Hine Rd

Main Rd

Willis Gr

Holborn Dr

George St

Logie St

Hollands Cres

Horlor St

Vogel St

Horlor St

Naenae Rd

Hollands Cres

Horoeka St

Glen Rd

Tawhai St

Huia St

Myrtle St

Bellevue Rd

Jackson St

Cuba St

Halford Pl

Jessie St

The Esplanade

Jackson St

Judd Cres

Ingram St

Waddington Dr

Jutland St

Craddock St

Waiwhetu Rd

Kensington Ave

Jackson St

Atiawa St

Kirkcaldy St

Marine Pde

East St

Korokoro Rd

Korokoro Road Bridge

Singers Rd

Kowhai St

Cambridge Tce

Rimu St

Laery St

Parliament St

Herbert St

Langford St

Fleet St

Rimu St

Leighton Ave

Whites Line East

Meadows Ave

London Rd

Korokoro Rd

Te Whiti Gr

Mabey Rd

High St

Taita Dr

Mahina Rd

Marine Dr

End of Road

Major Dr

Ilam Gr

Kaitangata Cres

Manor Dr

Thomas St

Lord St

Marchbanks St

Port Rd

Toop St

Marina Gr

Kings Cres

End of Road

Market Gr

Woburn Rd

End of Road

Massey Ave

Puriri St

Manuka Ave

Mckenzie Ave

Pito-One Road

End of Road

Meachen St

Port Rd

Barnes St

Meremere St

Parkway North

Matariki Gr

Mills St

Ropata Cres

Connolly St

Miromiro Rd

Normandale Rd

Mulberry St

Miromiro Rd

Dowse Dr

Martin Gr

Mitchell St

Brees St

Oxford Tce

Molesworth St

Tocker St

High St

Moohan St

Main Rd

Nelson Cres

Moores Valley Rd

Main Rd

End of Road

Mulberry St

Chestnut Gr

Miromiro Rd

Muritai Rd

Makaro St

Kowhai St

Naenae Rd

Rata St

Kowhai St

Nevis St

The Esplanade

Hutt Rd

Nikau Gr

Ludlam Cres

End of Road

Norfolk St

Wellington Rd

Wise St

Normandale Rd

SH2 Overbridge

108 Normandale Rd

Old Haywards Rd

SH58

End of Road

Orr Cres

Epuini St

Epuni St

Owen St

SH2

Norfolk St

Park Rd

Grounsel Cres

End of Road

Percy Cameron St

High St

Harcourt Werry Dr

Peterkin St

Eastern Hutt Rd

Eastern Hutt Rd

Petone Ave

Gear St

Jackson St

Petrie St

Moohan St

Bull Ave

Pilmuir St

Kings Cres

Copeland St

Pito-One Road

Korokoro Road

Cornish Street

Poto Rd

Pokohiwi Rd

Stratton St

Pretoria St

High St Rab

Kings Cres

Priests Ave

SH2

Pito-One Rd

Rainey Gr

High St

End of Road

Raroa Rd

High St

Cornwall St

Rata St

Wainuiomata Rd

Totara St

Rata St

Naenae Rd

Hay St

Redvers Dr

Park Rd

Meadowbank Dr

Regent St

Hutt Rd

Nelson St

Reynolds St

Taita Dr

Molesworth St

Richmond Rd

Mahina Rd

End of Road

Rimu St

Rata St

Kowhai St

Rishworth St

Wainui Rd

End of Road

Riverside Dr

Waitui Cres

Guthrie St

Riverside Dr

Bell Rd

Wainui Rd

Rodney St

Cambridge Tce

Waiwhetu Rd

Ropata Cres

Mills St

High St

Rossiter Ave

Waiwhetu Rd

Wyndrum Ave

Saulbrey Gr

Wai-Iti Cres

Whites Line West

Scholefield Street

Jackson St

East St

Seddon St

Grierson St

Judd Cres

South St

Cuba St

William St

St Ronans Ave

Waiwhetu Rd

Riverside Dr

Stellin St

High St

Taita Dr

Stokes Valley Rd

Manuka St

482 Stokes Valley Rd

Sydney St

The Esplanade

Regent St

Taine St

High St

Reynolds St

Taita Dr

Stellin St

Harcourt Werry Dr

Tawhai St

Glen Rd

Ngahere St

Tawhai St

Horoeka St

End of Road

Te Mome Rd

Hutt Rd

Victoria St

Te Puni St

The Espanade

Jackson St

Tilbury St

Waiwhetu Rd

Parnell St

Tirohanga Rd

SH2

Matuhi St

Tocker St

High St

Reynolds St

Toop St

Marchbanks

End of Road

Trafalgar Sq

Cambridge Tce

Cambridge Tce

Treadwell St

Rata St

Cambridge Tce

Tunnel Gr

Gracefield Rd

End of Road

Union St

Victoria St

Sydney St

Victoria St

The Esplanade

Hutt Rd

Victoria St

Wakefield St

Valentine St

Viewmont Dr

Harbour View Rd

Westpoint Ave

Waddington Dr

Naenae Rd

Rata St

Wagon Rd

Thomas St

Stokes Valley Rd

Wai-Iti Cres

Ludlam Cres

Woburn Rd

Waikare Ave

Leighton St

Bell Rd

Wakefield St

Hutt Rd

Mudie St

Walters St

High St

Oxford Tce

Wareham Place

Barnes St

End Of Road

Wellington Rd

Enfield St

Newburn Gr

Whites Line East

Godley St

End of Road

Whites Line West

Richmond Gr

Saulbrey Gr

William St

The Esplanade

Jackson St

Willoughby St

Knights Rd

Cudby St

Wise St

Donnelly Dr

Norfolk St

Witako St

Epuni St

Mitchell St

 

ACCESS ROAD

All formed roads not listed elsewhere in this Schedule are classified as Access Roads.


 

Appendix Transport 4 – Noise and Vibration Construction Schedule

For habitable rooms in buildings of single-storey framed construction

Element

Minimum construction for noise and vibration control

Note construction that complies with the New Zealand Building Code (NZBC) is assumed and implementation of any noise/vibration control shall be made to comply with the NZBC

Floor

For conformance with the Standard 6 vibration criteria, site-specific advice from a suitably qualified specialist is recommended. The vibration control required by the floor design is dependent on many factors.

However, an alternative is a constant level floor slab on full-surface vibration isolation bearing with natural frequency not exceeding 10 Hz and installed in accordance with the supplier’s instructions and recommendations. There must be no rigid connections between the building and the ground, including that any interface between the sides of the floor slab and the ground must be separated by vibration isolation.

External walls

Wall cavity infill of fibrous insulation, batts or similar (minimum density of kg/m3 )

Light cladding: timber weatherboard or sheet materials with surface mass between kg/m2 and 30 kg/m2 of wall cladding

Internal lining of minimum 17 kg/m2 plasterboard, such as two layers of 10mm thick high density plasterboard, on resilient/isolating mountings

Medium cladding: surface mass between 30 kg/m2 and 80 kg/m2 of wall cladding

Internal lining of minimum 17 kg/m2 plasterboard, such as two layers of 10 mm thick high density plasterboard

Heavy cladding: surface mass between 80 kg/m2 and 220 kg/m2 of wall cladding

No requirements additional to NZBC

Roof/ceiling

Ceiling cavity infill of fibrous insulation, batts or similar (minimum density of kg/m3)

Skillion roof with light cladding: surface mass up to 20 kg/m2 of roof cladding

Internal lining of minimum 25 kg/m2 plasterboard, such as two layers of 13 mm thick high density plasterboard

Pitched roof with light cladding: surface mass up to 20 kg/m2 of roof cladding

Internal lining of minimum 17 kg/m2 plasterboard, such as two layers of 10 mm thick high density plasterboard

Roof with heavy cladding: surface mass between 20 kg/m2 and 60 kg/m2 of roof cladding

No requirements additional to NZBC

Ceiling penetrations, such as for recessed lighting or ventilation, shall not allow additional noise break-in.

Glazed areas

Aluminium frames with fixed panes and/or full compression seals on opening sashes

Glazed areas up to 35% of room floor area

Double-glazing with one pane laminated glazing,

minimum 6L/12/4;

or other glazing with minimum performance Rw 33dB

Glazed areas greater than 35% of room floor area

Conformance with the Standard 6 noise criteria must be certified by a suitably qualified specialist.

Note, the Standard 6 ventilation system requirements must be conformed to

Exterior doors

Solid core exterior door, minimum surface mass

24 kg/m2 with edge and threshold compression seals; or other doorset with minimum performance Rw 30 dB

Exterior door shielded by building from State Highway and railway tracks

Exterior door with edge and threshold compression seals

For other building or element types or construction materials not included in this schedule, conformance with the Standard 6 vibration and noise criteria shall be shown and certified by a suitably qualified specialist.

 

   


                                                                                     147                                              29 September 2020

Hutt City Council

22 September 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/1115)

 

 

 

 

Report no: HCC2020/5/22

 

Hutt City Council's submission to Greater Wellington Regional Council's draft Toitū Te Whenua Parks Network Plan 2020-2030

 

 

 

 

Purpose of Report

1.    For Hutt City Council to consider a proposed submission in respect of the GWRC draft Parks Network Plan.

 

Recommendations

That Council endorses the proposed submission to Greater Wellington Regional Council’s Toitū Te Whenua Parks Network Plan 2020-30, attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

 

Background

2.    Regional parks and forests in Wellington are managed by the Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC), under a Parks Network Plan (PNP). The PNP is a combined plan for eight of Wellington’s regional parks and forests. Parks and forests included in the plan are Battle Hill, Belmont, East Harbour (including Baring Head and Parangarahu Lakes), Queen Elizabeth, Akatarawa and Pakuratahi and Kaitoke. The plan provides directions for the use and management of parks under the Reserves Act 1977.

3.    The Reserves Act 1977 requires that park management plans be kept up to date. In 2018, GWRC undertook public consultation about what should change in regional parks and forests. The new plan was drafted based on this feedback, to set the direction for the management of the regional park network over the next ten years.

4.    The draft Toitū Te Whenua Parks Network Plan 2020-30 is currently open for feedback. Consultation closes on 23 October 2020 after which time submissions will be reviewed.

5.    The draft PNP will then be updated and finalised for adoption by the GWRC. Once completed and approved, the PNP will guide management activities and use of regional parks for the next ten years, with amendments undertaken as the need arises. Works in the plan will be funded via GWRC’s long term plan and external funding opportunities.

The draft Toitū Te Whenua Parks Network Plan 2020-30

6.    The PNP provides a vision for parks and outlines policies, rules and the overarching outcomes that are sought for parks via long term management. The plan highlights unique features in each park, and provides management directions relevant to them. It is a framework for addressing issues common to these areas and managing them in a comprehensive and consistent way.

7.    The highest priority issue raised in the initial public consultation was the environment and that work to restore degraded areas to more healthy states is highly valued.

8.    Accordingly the vision for the draft PNP is “Restoring healthy ecosystems for the benefit of nature and people - He waka eke noa / we’re all in this together, moving forward”.

9.    The draft PNP identifies five key shifts:

§ Phasing out most livestock grazing activities.

§ Improving access to and within parks including adjustments in the trail network.

§ Developing and enhancing recreation experiences.

§ Focusing on building on collaborative work with mana whenua partners and community conservation and recreation groups.

§ Building a response to climate change into everything in parks.

Proposed submission by Hutt City Council

10.  The consultation process provides the opportunity for Hutt City to reiterate that we have two roles in the management of the regional parks. The first is as a key regional stakeholder and the second is as the owner of parts of the park network that are located in Lower Hutt.

11.  As the owner of parts of the network, including much of the eastern side of the Belmont Regional Park [Belmont Park] and areas within and adjacent to the East Harbour Regional Park, Hutt City has a particular interest in the management of these areas.

12.  Hutt City is supportive of the approach and focus of the draft Plan. As a landowner we also strongly support the kaupapa of “Reclothing Papatūānuku” in a collaborative way with mana whenua and community groups as set out in the draft Plan. We therefore support the intention to retire land in the parks from grazing, noting that more than half of the parks that have grazing targeted for retirement are within the Hutt City territorial authority boundary.

13.  The importance of Belmont Park as a recreational resource for Lower Hutt cannot be overemphasized. The proposal to retire land on the eastern side of the Belmont Park that is currently used for farming and re-establish native forest in its place is therefore welcomed and will provide a number of benefits for Lower Hutt.

14.  The benefits include, but are not limited to; supporting increased sequestration of carbon by the forest and helping achieve Council’s carbon target; the provision of enhanced recreational opportunities; and the development of habitats that would provide for increased biodiversity.

15.  In addition, HCC would like to explore, with GWRC, the potential to speed-up the native forest establishment process, by a consideration of mechanisms that could include the use of funds from carbon credits already earned to speed up replanting, by borrowing against the future income stream from forests registered under the ETS, or by accessing funds via the Billion Trees Programme (potentially by a joint GWRC and HCC joint application).

16.  In addition, should the plan be adopted and implemented, then other benefits may well emerge, such as partnering with community groups in the Belmont area to establish a biodiversity corridor aligned with one of the streams/valleys where there are wetlands.

Other considerations

17.  It is noted that Belmont Park includes a parcel of HCC-owned land comprising approximately 633 hectares. This has historically been known as the Kilmister Block. Between 1973 and 1983 the Kilmister Block was purchased by the then Lower Hutt City Council using the Public Works Act 1928 for the purpose of housing. It was considered at the time the land was needed for the anticipated future population growth of the city. Parts of the land were also acquired for a possible future roading link between Lower Hutt and Porirua, some for public reserves and for flood retention along the Speedy’s stream.

18.  The land was initially leased to various parties, eventually almost entirely to Landcorp Farming Limited for farming in the 1990s, by which time population growth in the city had stalled.

19.  It appears that through the 1990s the Council considered a range of future options for the land along with the Regional Council. It appears that in 1999 the Council resolved to sell part of the land (below the 250m contour) for development and retain the land above the 250m contour in Belmont Park. It further appears that consequent public feedback including a petition changed the Council’s decision and it was decided to retain the whole parcel within the Park.

20.  In 2003 Council made a decision to formally declare the land as reserve under the Reserves Act 1977, following public consultation.  In recognition of the land being made reserve, Council transferred $500,000 from its Reserves Purchase and Development Fund to its general account.

21.  The land is still in the ownership of HCC. It forms part of the Belmont Park, managed by GRWC, under a s17 Local Government Act 2002 Agreement which was subject to the special consultative process at the time. The reversal of this agreement requires formal consultation.

22.  Finally, the Kilmister block of land was considered as a potential greenfield development site during the workshop stages of the Urban Growth Strategy. However, it was noted that it would require the agreement of Greater Wellington Regional Council and the NZ Government to revoke the reserve status and take it out of Belmont Park. If this was at all possible then subsequently the land would need to be rezoned in order to allow for ‘residential’ activity. It was considered at the time extremely unlikely this could be achieved.

 

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Draft submission to GWRC draft Parks Network Plan

148

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author: David Burt

Senior Advisor Sustainability and Resilience

 

 

 

 

 

 

Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability

 

 


Attachment 1

Draft submission to GWRC draft Parks Network Plan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Greater Wellington Regional Council

PO Box 11646

Wellington 6142
parksplanning@gw.govt.nz

 

 

 

Submission on the draft Toitu Te Whenua Parks Network Plan 2020–30

 

To whom it may concern,

 

Summary

1.   Hutt City Council (HCC) welcomes the opportunity to submit on the Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) draft “Toitu Te Whenua Parks Network Plan 2020 – 30” [the draft Plan].

2.   HCC is the owner of parts of the regional park network, including much of the eastern side of the Belmont Regional Park [Belmont Park] and parts of East Harbour Regional Park [East Harbour] and therefore has a particular interest in the management of these areas.

3.   HCC supports the vision and direction of the draft Plan.

4.   HCC would like to explore opportunities with GWRC to speed up the re-establishment of indigenous forests specifically on the eastern side of Belmont Park, and partnering with community groups to improve biodiversity outcomes.

Commentary

The draft Plan, which sets directions for the management of the regional park network over the next ten years, is an important document. Hutt City Council (HCC) supports the plan’s vision of “restoring healthy ecosystems for the benefit of nature and people” including a focus on building the GWRC response to climate change into everything in parks - work that includes minimising emissions.

HCC is a key stakeholder in the greater Wellington geographic region and so has a keen awareness of the value that all the regional parks provide to the region’s citizens. In addition however, Hutt City is the owner of parts of the park network, including much of the eastern side of the Belmont Park and East Harbour and therefore has a particular interest in the management of these areas.

As a landowner we support the kaupapa of “Reclothing Papatūānuku” in a collaborative way with mana whenua and community groups as set out in the draft Plan. We therefore support the intention to retire land in the parks from grazing, noting that more than half of the parks that have grazing targeted for retirement are within the Hutt City territorial authority boundary.

Because of its location and its accessibility, Belmont Park plays an important role as a recreation resource for Lower Hutt. HCC therefore fully supports the proposal to retire land on the eastern side of the Belmont Park that is currently used for farming and re-establish indigenous forest in its place.

This land use change is supported by HCC because it would provide Lower Hutt with a number of benefits:

§ Increasing recreational opportunities for Lower Hutt City residents. The large and growing suburb of Kelson is currently under-serviced for recreational opportunities in the Belmont Park due to limited access and opportunities. Reforestation would provide opportunities for residents, by the provision of resources such as tracks, trails, swimming and picnic spots, and would enable a wider audience to enjoy the expansive views and open exposed ridgelines that the Belmont Park provides to its users. The increased recreational opportunities would also incentivise residents to participate in wider ecological restoration programmes.

§ Improving biodiversity, and improving the quality and mauri of freshwater. The latter would contribute to the work currently being carried out by the Whaitua te Whanganui-a-Tara Committee.

§ HCC has in place an organisational zero by 2050 carbon target, and will be engaging with its community on the development of a city-wide carbon reduction pathway to move to zero by 2050. Re-establishment of indigenous forest would increase sequestration of carbon by the forest, and could provide a new income source (via the Emissions Trading Scheme) to invest in further biodiversity and climate change mitigation and adaptation focused measures.

HCC would also like to explore the following opportunities with GWRC:

§ HCC providing input into the development of detailed master plans for the regional parks located in the Lower Hutt area.

§ Speeding up the process of establishing indigenous forests on current grazing land in Belmont Park. Some possible mechanisms for achieving this are using funds from carbon credits already earned to speed up replanting, by borrowing against the future income stream from forests registered under the ETS, or by accessing funds via the Billion Trees Programme (potentially by a joint GWRC and HCC application).

§ Partnering with community groups in the Belmont area to establish a biodiversity corridor aligned with one of the streams/valleys where there are wetlands. One example of this would be in the Speedys Stream area. Reforesting this valley floor could enhance stream values and could create a bush corridor connecting Speedys Reserve forests with remnant and retired areas on and beyond the saddle at its head.

§ Co-ordinating and collaborating with communities and GWRC on pervasive issues in the parks around pests and weeds. This work could build on existing efforts, grow community awareness and activities such as the Predator Free movement, and support new national strategies and statutory instruments for biodiversity.

§ Partnering with community groups to establish recreational trails, swimming and picnic spots, in order to make the parks more available to a wider audience to enjoy, and which may also incentivise residents to participate in wider ecological restoration programmes.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

 

Campbell Barry

Mayor of Lower Hutt


MEMORANDUM                                                 153                                              29 September 2020

Our Reference          20/1030

TO:                      Mayor and Councillors

Hutt City Council

FROM:                Kathryn Stannard

DATE:                10 September 2020

SUBJECT:           Alteration of Council Decision - 80 Parkway, Wainuiomata

 

 

Recommendation

That Council:

 

(i)      notes and receives the memorandum;

 

(ii)     pursuant to Hutt City Council Standing Order 24.6 agrees to alter part of resolution Minute No. 20201(3) by deleting the word ‘private’ and inserting the words ‘public road’ in its place to read:

 

“That Council approves the recommended public road street name and road type for the subdivision at 80 Parkway, Wainuiomata as “Ron Fawcett Way”;

 

(iii)    notes that the reason for the alteration is that the resource consent granted for the project requires that LOT 200 as shown in Appendix 1 to the memorandum is to be vested to Council; and

 

(iv)    notes that the correct process for naming of a public road has been followed.

 

Purpose of Memorandum

1.    The purpose of this memorandum is to recommend that Council consider altering part of resolution Minute No. 20201(3) passed by Council in March 2020 in respect of a subdivision at 80 Parkway, Wainuiomata.

Background

2.    At its meeting held on 19 February 2020, the Wainuiomata Community Board considered the naming of two new roads of the subdivision at 80 Parkway, Wainuiomata.

3.    The name of road 1 was approved as “Grovedale Terrace” and road 2 as “Fawcett Way”.

4.    Subsequent to the meeting, Land Information New Zealand advised that “Fawcett Way” was too similar to an existing road “Fawcet Place” in Belmont.

5.    Consequently, at its meeting held on 24 March 2020, Council approved the amended name for road 2 as “Ron Fawcett Way”.  Refer to Council’s resolution below:

Proposed New Private Street Name - Subdivision of 80 Parkway, Wainuiomata (20/192)

Resolved:  (Mayor Barry/Cr Briggs)                     Minute No. C 20201(3)

“That Council approves the recommended private street name and road type for the subdivision at 80 Parkway, Wainuiomata, as Ron Fawcett Way”.

For the reasons: an approved street name is needed for service connections and the issuing of titles for the new subdivision; the Wainuiomata Community Board supports the proposed naming; and Land Information New Zealand has approved the proposed name as suitable for use.

Discussion

6.    Road 2 was noted in the street naming reports as a private road.  However the resource consent granted for the project requires that LOT 200 as shown in Appendix 1 to the memorandum is to be vested to Council.  Hence it is to be noted that “Ron Fawcett Way” is a public road.

7.    As the final decision for the street naming was made by Council, with the agreement of the Wainuiomata Community Board, officers are asking Council to consider altering Minute No. C 20201(3) for the naming of a ‘private road’ and approve the same name for the ‘public road’, rectifying this administrative error.

8.    It is also noted that the street name suggestion originated from the public consultation conducted for the subdivision.  Hence the correct process for naming of a public road has been followed.

9.    Officers reported the administrative error to the Wainuiomata Community Board at its meeting held on 26 August 2020.  The Wainuiomata Community Board noted and received the information.

Legal Considerations

10.  Clause 30(6) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 and Hutt City Council Standing Order 25.6 Revocation or Alteration by Recommendation in Report.  

 

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 - 80 Parkway Street Naming Plan

154

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Kathryn Stannard

Head of Democratic Services

 

 

 

Author: Threesa Malki

Traffic Engineer

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Bradley Cato

Chief Legal Officer

 

 

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 

 

 

 

 

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 - 80 Parkway Street Naming Plan

 


                                                                                     158                                              29 September 2020

Hutt City Council

07 September 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/1017)

 

 

 

 

Report no: HCC2020/5/20

 

Schedule of Meetings for 2021 and 2022

 

 

 

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek adoption of interim schedules of meetings for 2021 and 2022, as provided for in the Local Government Act 2002.

 

Recommendations

That Council:

(i)    adopts the interim schedules of meetings for 2021 and 2022 attached as Appendices 1 and 2 to the report, subject to approval by the community boards and community funding panels in respect of their own meeting dates and venues;

(ii)   notes that updated schedules will be presented for adoption when dates have been set for meetings external to this Council, such as meetings of joint committees and Local Government New Zealand;

(iii)  agrees that the venue for meetings of Council, its committees and subcommittees is the Hutt City Council Chambers, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt;

(iv) agrees to a commencement time of 2pm for Council, committee and subcommittee meetings; and

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

For the reason that the Local Government Act 2002 requires that a local authority must hold the meetings that are necessary for the good government of its district, at the times and places that it appoints.

 

Background

2.    The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requires that a local authority must hold the meetings that are necessary for the good government of its district, at the times and places that it appoints.

3.    The LGA requires that notice be given in writing to each member of the time and place of a meeting, not less than 14 days before the meeting or, if the local authority has adopted a schedule of meetings, not less than 14 days before the first meeting on the schedule.

4.    In line with the previous triennium, the proposed meeting schedules have provision for five meeting cycles each year during 2021 and 2022.  Due to the local authority elections in 2022, only four meeting cycles have been included on the schedule for that year.

Discussion

5.    The proposed meeting schedules are attached as Appendices 1 and 2 to the report, and are largely based on an eight-weekly meeting cycle, modified as necessary to accommodate statutory holidays, covering:

a.       Week 1 – Corporate agenda process involving the Corporate Leadership Team and Heads of Department finalising the list of items on the Council’s work programme that will be reported during the upcoming meeting cycle;

b.       Week 2 – Order paper preparation for Week 3 meetings.

c.       Weeks 3 to 5 – Meetings and order paper preparation for the following week’s meetings.

d.      Week 6 – Meetings.

e.       Week 7 – Order paper preparation for Council meeting.

f.       Week 8 – Council meeting.

6.    The meeting schedules have been prepared based on the committee structure that was adopted by Council on 10 December 2019.  It is noted that the committee structure is scheduled to be reviewed in December 2020, 12 months after its introduction.  It is anticipated that this review will result in some amendment of the Terms of Reference for Council committees to clarify roles, responsibilities and reporting lines, but that the current committee structure will continue.

7.    Provision has been made in each meeting cycle for a meeting of the District Plan Review Subcommittee.  Additional meetings of this Subcommittee may be required.

8.    Provision has also been made in the schedules for meetings of the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan Subcommittee throughout the year, with minor modification of the eight-weekly cycle where required in order to accommodate these meetings. 

9.    Dates have been included in the schedule for the Community Funding Panels to meet in order to make formal funding allocations prior to the end of the financial year and prior to the Christmas period.  The Panels will be asked to decide on their meeting start times and venues at their upcoming meetings.

10.  Regular briefings have been included in the schedule, and the known dates of civic functions are included to assist with forward planning.

11.  The interim schedules attached primarily include only Council’s meetings, as dates for some joint meetings with other authorities and other external meetings such as Local Government New Zealand Zone 4 meetings have yet to be set.  Typically the days and times of these additional meetings do not conflict with other Council meetings.  Joint committees, Hutt Valley Services Committee and Wellington Water Committee agree their own meeting dates, times and venues.  The meeting schedules will be reported to Council again when these additional dates are known.

12.  Council determines the commencement times and venues for meetings of Council and its committees and subcommittees.

13.  Where additional meetings are required, ideally 14 days’ notice will be provided to members.  Where a lesser period of notice can be provided, such meetings would be treated as extraordinary or emergency meetings in accordance with the LGA.

14.  Circumstances may change, requiring the alteration of a date, time or venue of a meeting, or cancellation of a meeting.  It is recommended that Council delegates authority to the Chief Executive in consultation with the Mayor or committee/subcommittee Chair to make any required changes.

Option

15.  Council has the option of adopting the interim schedules attached or requesting changes to the schedules.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

16.  Climate change considerations are not considered relevant to consideration of this matter, which addresses an administrative requirement.

Consultation

17.  No consultation is required in respect of the matters addressed in this report.

18.  Community boards will adopt their own meeting dates, times and venues.  Proposed dates for community board meetings are included on the attached schedules to ensure that matters of interest to community boards can be referred for the Boards’ input prior to consideration by Council’s committees and subcommittees.

Legal Considerations

19.  The Act makes provision for local authorities to adopt a schedule of meetings, and for notification of the schedule, or of any amendment to the schedule, to constitute notification to members of the meetings to be held.

20.  Council, committee, subcommittee and community board meetings will be publicly notified in accordance with the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

Financial Considerations

21.  There are no financial considerations arising from this report.

 

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Meeting Schedule 2021

159

2

Meeting Schedule 2022

161

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author: Joyanne Stevens

Contractor

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewed By: Kathryn Stannard

Head of Democratic Services

 

 

 

Approved By: Anna Welanyk

Director Transformation and Resources

 

 


Attachment 1

Meeting Schedule 2021

 


 


Attachment 2

Meeting Schedule 2022

 


 


                                                                                     166                                              29 September 2020

Hutt City Council

21 September 2020

 

 

 

File: (20/916)

 

 

 

 

Report no: HCC2020/5/214

 

Appointment of Directors - UrbanPlus Limited

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to inform Council that the Selection Panel is recommending the appointment of two independent directors to the board of UrbanPlus Limited (UPL).

Recommendations

It is recommended that Council approves the appointment of Ms Pamela Bell and Mr Peter Glensor to the board of UrbanPlus Limited for a term of three years until 29 September 2023, on the grounds that Ms Bell and Mr Glensor have the necessary skills and experience to assist the board to guide UPL and achieve the company’s objectives.               

For the reason that appropriately skilled and experienced independent directors will assist UPL to achieve its wider social, environmental and sustainability outcomes.

 

Background

2.    UPL is 100% owned by Council. Its objectives are primarily to:

a.   Provide for the long term a growing portfolio of rental housing for the low-income elderly, ensuring this is appropriate for the changing needs of the community;

b.   Develop the housing portfolio in a manner which increases its property values; and

c.   Purchase, develop, lease or sell the development property portfolio in a manner which maximises its value at a level of risk appropriate for the investment of funds.

3.   The board of UPL comprises up to four directors. The board currently has two independent directors (one of whom is the chair) and one Councillor director.

Discussion

4.    The term of appointment of one of the current independent directors expires on 31 October 2020.

5.    Advertisements in the Hutt News and on the Institute of Directors website sought applications from people who bring a diverse set of skills and experience in property, community and/or commercial development, within the context of achieving wider social, environmental and sustainability outcomes.  Governance experience, membership of the Institute of Directors, effective decision-making and relationship-management skills, and the ability to work effectively with stakeholders and mana whenua were also sought. 

6.    Five candidates were shortlisted for interview by a Selection Panel comprising the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Chief Executive, Director Economy and Development and the chair of UPL.  The Director Economy and Development was unable to attend the interviews.

7.    The Selection Panel has recommended that Ms Pamela Bell and Mr Peter Glensor be ap