Climate Change and Sustainability Committee



16 September 2021



Order Paper for the meeting to be held in the

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




Thursday 23 September 2021 commencing at 2.00pm






Cr J Briggs (Chair)

Mayor C Barry

Cr K Brown

Cr S Edwards

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

Cr A Mitchell

Cr S Rasheed (Deputy Chair)

Cr N Shaw




For the dates and times of Council Meetings please visit


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 or calling the Democratic Services Team on 04 570 6666 | 0800 HUTT CITY

Membership:	8
Meeting Cycle:	Meets on an eight weekly basis, as required or at the requisition of the Chair
Quorum:	Half of the members
Reports to:	Council





This Committee has responsibility for oversight of Council’s environment and climate change response.

The Committee is aligned with the Environment & Sustainability Directorate.

Its areas of focus are:

§   Oversight of Council’s plan to reach Carbon Zero, including raising awareness of climate-related issues

§   Developing and implementing climate and environmental policies and plans including ecology, biodiversity and biosecurity matters

§   Waste and recycling



To develop, implement, monitor and review strategies, policies, plans and functions associated with environmental and climate change activities.



        All powers necessary to perform the Committee’s responsibilities including the activities outlined below.

        Develop required strategies and policies. Recommend draft and final versions to Council for adoption where they have a city-wide or strategic focus.

        Implement, monitor and review strategies and policies.

        Oversee the implementation of major projects provided for in the LTP or Annual Plan.

        Oversee budgetary decisions provided for in the LTP or Annual Plan.

        Oversee the development and implementation of plans and functions that promote environmental wellbeing, including Council’s plan to reach Carbon Zero.

        Maintain an overview of work programmes carried out by the Council’s Environment & Sustainability Directorate.

        Address matters related to ecological protection, the protection of biodiversity, and biosecurity.

        Address matters related to climate change, including raising awareness of climate-related issues, advocating for climate change issues and actions, and championing initiatives that reduce carbon emissions.

        Recommend to Council the acquisition or disposal of assets, unless the acquisition or disposal is provided for specifically in the LTP.

        Conduct any consultation processes required on issues before the Committee.

        Approval and forwarding of submissions.

        Any other matters delegated to the Committee by Council in accordance with approved policies and bylaws.

        The committee has the powers to perform the responsibilities of another committee where it is necessary to make a decision prior to the next meeting of that other committee. When exercised, the report/minutes of the meeting require a resolution noting that the committee has performed the responsibilities of another committee and the reason/s.

        If a policy or project relates primarily to the responsibilities of the Climate Change & Sustainability Committee, but aspects require additional decisions by the Communities Committee and/or Infrastructure & Regulatory Committee, then the Climate Change & Sustainability Committee has the powers to make associated decisions on behalf of those other committees. For the avoidance of doubt, this means that matters do not need to be taken to more than one of those committees for decisions.



Komiti Kaupapa Taiao


Climate Change and Sustainability Committee


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

 Thursday 23 September 2021 commencing at 2.00pm.




Public Business


1.       Opening formalities - Karakia Timatanga (21/1435)

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 

No apologies have been received.


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.       


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      

5.       Recommendations to Council - Te Kaunihera o Te Awa Kairangi -
 5 October 2021

a)      Cities race to zero (21/1433)

Report No. CCASC2021/4/228 by the Senior Advisor Climate and Sustainability  7

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed”

b)      Eligibility to receive Council's kerbside service, and landfill fee policy for charities (21/1430)

Report No. CCASC2021/4/217 by the Solid Waste Manager                  12

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed”


6.       Updates on Council's biodiversity action (21/1208)

Report No. CCASC2021/4/121 by the Ecology/Horticulture Advisor            23

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed”

7.       Update on Council's solid waste and waste minimisation work (21/1401)

Report No. CCASC2021/4/220 by the Solid Waste Manager                           37

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed”

8.       Sustainability considerations in RiverLink (21/1396)

Report No. CCASC2021/4/218 by the Project Manager Riverlink                   40

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed”

9.       Kerbside rubbish and recycling implementation project (21/1400)

Report No. CCASC2021/4/219 by the Strategic Advisor                                  44

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed”

10.     Sustainability considerations in the Naenae Pool project (21/1420)

Report No. CCASC2021/4/221 by the Advisor Energy and Carbon                48

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed”

11.     Update on Council's climate change work (21/1398)

Report No. CCASC2021/4/222 by the Head of Climate and Solid Waste       61

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed”

12.     Information Item

Committee work programme (21/1207)

Report No. CCASC2021/4/223 by the Democracy Advisor                             66

13.     Closing formalities - Karakia Whakamutunga (21/1436)

Whakataka te hau ki te uru

Whakataka te hau ki te tonga

Kia mākinakina ki uta

Kia mātaratara ki tai

E hī ake ana te atakura

He tio, he huka, he hau hū

Tīhei mauri ora.

Cease the winds from the west
Cease the winds from the south
Let the breeze blow over the land
Let the breeze blow over the ocean
Let the red-tipped dawn come with a sharpened air. 
A touch of frost, a promise of a glorious day.



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




Judy Randall




Climate Change and Sustainability Committee

06 September 2021




File: (21/1433)





Report no: CCASC2021/4/228


Cities race to zero




Purpose of Report

1.    To inform a decision by Council on whether to join the ‘Cities Race to Zero’ climate initiative.


That the Committee recommends that Council:

(1)   agrees to join the ‘Cities Race to Zero’ climate initiative;

(2)   reconfirms its commitment to keep global warming to below 1.5 degrees;


(3)   reconfirms its commitment to reach net-zero emissions by no later than 2050, preferably sooner;


(4)   pledges to set a target of halving city-wide emissions by 2030 as part of the work to develop a city-wide roadmap;


(5)   pledges to continue to work with the Lower Hutt community on a city-wide roadmap in order to plan and begin implementing inclusive and equitable climate action by 2022;


(6)   commits to reporting to the Committee on progress annually; and


(7)   invites our partners, businesses, and residents to join us in recognising the global climate challenge and help us deliver on science-based actions to overcome it.


For the reasons as outlined in this report.



2.    Council has been approached to consider joining the ‘Cities Race to Zero’ climate initiative.

3.    The Race to Zero is a global campaign run by the COP26 Presidency (26th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties), in partnership with a range of other international organisations and initiatives. It is the largest global alliance of companies, cities, investors, regions and universities credibly committed to halving emissions by 2030 and achieving net zero emissions by 2050. Its success will send governments a strong signal that cities, regions, businesses and investors are united in meeting the Paris goals and creating a more inclusive and resilient economy.

4.    The immediate objective of the initiative is to build momentum around the shift to a decarbonised economy ahead of COP26, to be held in Glasgow from 31 October – 12 November 2021 when governments will be asked to accelerate their contributions to the Paris Agreement.

5.    Worldwide, more than 730 cities have joined the movement. Within New Zealand, Auckland has joined this initiative and other cities, including Christchurch, Nelson and Dunedin have expressed interest.

Cities Race to Zero – the commitments associated with joining this initiative

6.    In order to join the initiative, cities are required to publicly pledge to take a number of actions:

§ Recognising a climate emergency and committing to keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees

§ Pledging to reach net-zero emissions in the 2040s or sooner, or by mid-century at the latest, in line with global efforts to limit warming to 1.5 degrees

§ Setting an interim target to reduce emissions to reflect a fair share of the 50% global reduction in emissions required by 2030

§ Begin planning and implementing inclusive and equitable climate action before 2022

§ Reporting on progress annually


7.    In addition, signatories also commit to taking at least one inclusive climate action from one of the following areas:

§ Create a more inclusive society

§ Create green and healthy streets

§ Reduce air pollution and ensure clean air

§ Develop zero carbon buildings

§ Move towards resilient and sustainable energy systems

§ Advance towards zero waste

§ Create sustainable food systems

§ Divest from fossil fuels and invest in a sustainable future

§ Move towards resilient and sustainable construction systems

Considerations for supporting the initiative

8.    Climate change is an important global issue, which is predicted to have increasingly severe local impacts.

9.    Joining the ‘Cities Race to Zero’ initiative would reinforce Council’s commitment to climate action in the national and international arena, and send a strong signal of solidarity with other cities around the world that are joining together to face the challenge of climate change.

10.  In light of our Climate Change Response Programme and the work to develop a city-wide roadmap, joining the initiative would signal that Council is serious about what we need to aim for and achieve, in order to avoid dangerous climate change.

11.  Officers have consulted with the Lead Group, which is leading the work on the road map for Lower Hutt, and its members’ support Council joining the initiative to send a clear signal on what is required to address the climate change challenge.

Considerations for not joining the initiative

12.  Our existing organisational commitments to make targets and reduce emissions are already in line with the initiative’s objectives. Whilst joining the initiative may have some practical benefits, including access to tools and sharing information and lessons learnt, it may be largely symbolic in order to show others our support for greater global climate action.

13.  However, even though it has no legal force, joining the initiative entails cities committing to halving city-wide emissions by 2030, as opposed to only making commitments regarding their own organisational emissions. While Lower Hutt has a de facto carbon target of net zero by 2050, as derived from the NZ Government’s target of net zero emissions by 2050, there is not yet a clear pathway of how Lower Hutt as a city will achieve this target, or any other target, such as halving emissions by 2030.

14.  Council is currently participating in a co-design process for the community to develop a city-wide roadmap to a Carbon Zero Lower Hutt by 2050 or earlier. Council making city-wide commitments ahead of the completion of the roadmap could be viewed as predetermining the outcome of the engagement process. It could also set unrealistic expectations, given that Council’s scope in determining city-wide emissions is ultimately limited. Regardless of what city-wide targets Council sets, the achievement of those targets relies on the community working together, which is why we embarked on a co-design process in the first place.

15.  It is noted that both Auckland and Christchurch have committed to reduce city-wide greenhouse gases by 50% by 2030, the former in their Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan (launched in December 2021) and the latter in Kia turoa te ao Otautahi Christchurch Climate Resilience Strategy 2021 (adopted in June 2021). However, just because the respective city councils have those plans in place, does not mean that there is high certainty of achieving those targets, or that all parts of the community are walking the talk to make this a reality.

16.  While the option of joining is not time-bound and could be reconsidered once our road-map is in place, not joining the initiative at this time could be taken as a signal that Council is not interested in supporting the initiative’s objectives.

17.  On balance, officers recommend that Council joins the initiative.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

18.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide. Joining the initiative could create additional momentum for achieving emissions reductions, particularly at a city-wide level, as it will create expectations of what the roadmap currently under development must be able to achieve. It may also push other players and stakeholders to do more to address the climate change challenge.


19.  Officers have engaged with the Lead Group on the question of whether Council should join the Cities Race to Zero initiative. Its members support Council doing so.

Legal Considerations

20.  The Cities Race to Zero initiative does not have any legal force, but joining the initiative does entail taking on commitments, and this will create expectations that Council will be expected to meet.

Financial Considerations

21.  While Council already reports annually on progress against our climate change objectives, joining the initiative has some additional (albeit not significant) reporting and resourcing implications.

22.  While Council’s (organisational) interim Carbon Reduction and Resilience Plan 2021-31 provides some certainty to achieve at least a 50% reduction by 2030 for some emission sources (eg fleet, energy use at facilities), the pathway for achieving these types of reductions for other emissions at an organisational level (eg landfill, services), and at a city-wide level (transport, energy) and associated financial implications, is still unknown.


There are no appendices for this report.   


Author: David Burt

Senior Advisor Climate and Sustainability


Author: Jörn Scherzer

Head of Climate and Solid Waste



Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability  

Climate Change and Sustainability Committee

03 September 2021




File: (21/1430)





Report no: CCASC2021/4/217


Eligibility to receive Council's kerbside service, and landfill fee policy for charities



Purpose of report

1.    To seek approval for making Council’s kerbside collection service available to some non-residential properties, and for making a change to the current approach of providing landfill fee exemptions to charities.


That the Committee recommends that Council:

(1)   notes that Council’s kerbside collection service is currently limited to residential and rural properties;

(2)   agrees to make Council’s kerbside collection service (rubbish, recycling and green waste) available on an opt-in basis to four other rating categories: CE – Community Education, and CF1-CF3 – Community Facilities - outlined in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(3)   agrees that this service extension is limited to Council’s standard service offerings for bin sizes, and does not extend to providing a customised service to cater for commercial-type waste volumes;

(4)   agrees to offer free kerbside recycling to the seven Marae based in Lower Hutt;

(5)   notes that for a number of years, Council has provided an exemption to charities regarding landfill fees, for the first 25 tonnes of waste disposed, but no formal policy exists;

(6)   agrees to change the approach and to establish a policy as follows:

a.    charities continue to be exempt from any fees in relation to clean green waste loads, up to 25 tonnes per year;

b.    charities receive a heavily discounted fee for any rubbish or mixed loads, from 1 July 2022, with the fee equivalent to the NZ Government’s waste levy for any given year, up to 25 tonnes per year (for 2022/23, the discounted fee for charities would be set at $30/t);

c.     charities continue to pay normal landfill fees for any waste above 25 tonnes per year;

d.    eligibility is limited to charities based in, or operating, within the Hutt Valley only; and

e.     Council could offer free waste audits and advice for charities based in Lower Hutt, with a view to identifying waste minimisation and cost savings opportunities; and

(7)   agrees to review this new policy 12 months after it takes effect.

For the reasons outlined in the report.



2.    Officers have been reviewing the arrangements regarding exemptions from landfill fees for certain organisations, by taking a look at the eligibility criteria in light of the Government’s waste levy increases that commenced on 1 July 2021.  

3.    At the same time, work has been undertaken to look at options for expanding Council’s new kerbside rubbish and recycling service to other groups of users in Lower Hutt that are currently ineligible to receive that service.

Kerbside collection


4.    Council’s kerbside collection service is currently limited to residential and rural properties. Other organisations, including sports clubs and churches, are ineligible to receive the service.

5.    However, some of these non-residential organisations have previously used Council’s kerbside recycling and bag collection service. Since the roll-out of the new service, some community organisations, such as churches, have made requests for Council to consider providing them with access to the new service. In some instances, this is because these organisations face a significant cost increase in light of small waste volumes and the need to otherwise engage a commercial-type private waste collection service.

Proposed approach

6.    Given the objectives and purpose of Marae and community organisations, such as sports clubs and churches, and in order to provide them with a cost-effective service, it would be beneficial to make the new service available to these organisations.

7.    Appendix 1 to the report shows an overview of Council’s rating categories. It is proposed that Council makes its kerbside collection service (rubbish, recycling and green waste) available on an opt-in basis to four other rating categories: CE – Community Education, and CF1-CF3 – Community Facilities. There are only 382 properties within these four rating categories, which is not a significant number considering there are over 40,000 residential properties.

8.    Note there are a smaller number of organisations (<6) within the NonR – Not Rateable category that could also be considered similar in objective or purpose to organisations within the CE or CF categories.

9.    Providing the ability for additional organisations rated as CE or CF1-CF3 to opt-in would mean that they can decide whether or not they wish to take up the service. If they do, then they will be charged a targeted rate in line with the services chosen, as residential properties currently already do.

10.  Officers propose also that this service extension be limited to Council’s standard service offerings for bin sizes, and not extend to providing a customised service to cater for commercial-type waste volumes. This is because Council has no ability to charge for a commercial type offering in line with significantly larger waste volumes. Organisations that require a commercial-type offering, with bin sizes larger than 240l or higher frequency, would need to arrange for an alternative private collection service.

11.  Finally, officers also propose to extend the offer of free kerbside recycling to the seven Marae based in Lower Hutt. Note that schools and early-childhood education facilities are already eligible to receive the recycling service for free, albeit its implementation for schools is not yet complete.

Landfill fee exemption for charities


12.  There is currently no clear basis and no formal policy for providing an exemption from landfill fees to charities, that is, there are no criteria for eligibility other than providing proof the organisation has charitable status. It is also unclear how or when this came about. It has been in place for a number of years.

13.  At present, about 60 charities are eligible for these exemptions, and this covers a range of different organisations (eg Salvation Army, Te Omanga Hospice, Forest and Bird, Habitat for Humanity, Menzshed Upper Hutt, Silverstream Retreat, Upper Hutt Musical Theatre, etc). Appendix 2 to the report provides a list of those that received the exemption in 2020, and the amount of waste disposed.

14.  Neither Porirua City Council (Spicer Landfill) nor Wellington City Council (Southern Landfill) offer any fee exemptions to charities.

15.  The actual opportunity cost for the last three financial years has been about $80k to $90k (ex GST). Assuming a similar take-up to previous years, this opportunity cost is likely to go up to about $100k to $115k, in line with landfill charges and government charges and levies having increased.  Per organisation, the exemption has a value of up to $3,500 plus GST per year for the 2021/22 financial year.

How and why charities use the exemption

16.  In order to better understand how and why charities use the exemption, a survey was undertaken. Out of about 60 charities, 25 responded to the survey.

17.  Approximately half of the charities that responded are based in Lower Hutt vs Upper Hutt, and they dispose waste in relation to clean ups, waste left over in relation to the receiving of second-hand goods, waste illegally dumped, church ground maintenance, and waste associated with community fundraisers.

18.  Most of the charities only dispose a share of their waste via the exemption, with other waste disposed via other means, including kerbside collections and/or skip-bins.

19.  As shown in Appendix 2, most charities only utilise a relatively modest share of their entitlement, with only a small number utilising the maximum 25 tonnes. Those utilising the full 25 tonnes appear more likely to be involved in the receiving and management of second-hand goods, and it is possible that they may be more affected by illegally dumped waste.


20.  The following options have been identified:

Option 1: Continue status quo

21.  In this option, Council would continue with the status quo. While organisations have to meet various criteria in order to qualify for charitable status, there are draw backs to providing a blanket exemption, as follows:

a.    The approach is inconsistent with the approaches in Porirua and Wellington. This could lead to charities in other areas opting to take their waste to Silverstream Landfill and Hutt City Council subsidising these organisations.

b.    Council faces opportunity costs from avoided fees, but also faces increasing direct costs from government charges and fees (eg waste levy, ETS charges).

Option 2: Tighter eligibility criteria

22.  In this option, Council would introduce additional criteria that charities would need to meet in order to qualify for the exemption.

23.  This could involve limiting the free allowance to charities that:

a.    are based in either Lower Hutt or Upper Hutt, and/or

b.    collect or receive second-hand goods for resale or donation, and/or

c.     are affected by illegal dumping of materials, and/or

d.    demonstrate that the disposal of the waste is the last option, and there is no diversion/recycling opportunity.

24.  This option should result in a reduction in the number of eligible charities. However, apart from limiting eligibility to charities operating in the Hutt Valley, other criteria regarding second-hand goods or being affected by illegal dumping are difficult to objectively assess. Those additional criteria could also result in additional administrative demands being put on Council and organisations that may already be stretched.

Option 3: Broadening the exemption to other not-for profits

25.  In this option, given that other not-for-profit organisations also contribute to various community objectives and outcomes, eligibility for the exemption could be broadened to include not-for-profit organisations.

26.  However, in this option it would be difficult to objectively assess which organisations would be worthy of receiving the exemption. Arguably, by obtaining charitable status, charities have already gone through a process to confirm that they provide a benefit to the public.

27.  The budget impacts of this option are currently unclear, except that costs would increase as a result of more organisations receiving the fee exemption.

Option 4: Replacing exemption with a discount

28.  In this option, the existing exemption would be replaced with a discount. This could reduce the opportunity cost to Council, and account for at least some of the increasing direct costs from government charges and fees (eg waste levy, ETS charges).

Option 5: Discontinue with exemption

29.  This option would involve removing the exemption. This would bring our practice in line with Wellington and Porirua. However, this could unreasonably increase costs for the affected charities, and adversely affect the value the public receives from them.

Option 6: Combination of options

30.  This option would involve a combination of features of the above options. This could involve:

a.       continuing the free disposal of green waste in order to incentivise its diversion,

b.       replacing the blanket exemption for rubbish disposal with a heavily discounted fee, equivalent to the NZ Government’s waste levy, in order to account for the increase in government charges that are outside Council’s control, and

c.       limiting the offer to charities based in, or operating in, the Hutt Valley only, to prevent the import of waste from other districts, as others become aware of this policy.

Preferred approach

31.  Officers propose that Council establishes a more formal approach to the exemption, and introduce some changes to the current policy, by adopting Option 6, which combines features from other  options, as follows:

a.       Charities continue to be exempt from any fees in relation to clean green waste loads, up to 25 tonnes per year. This is to encourage the diversion of green waste from Silverstream, and takes into account that the waste levy does not apply to any materials that are diverted from the landfill.

b.       Charities receive a heavily discounted fee for any rubbish or mixed loads from 1 July 2022, with the fee equivalent to the NZ Government’s waste levy for any given year, up to 25 tonnes per year. This takes into account the increasing direct costs from government charges, and through a small cost differential between rubbish and green waste loads, encourages the diversion of green waste. For 2022/23, the discounted fee for charities would be set at $30/t, in line with the waste levy for that year (this compares to current landfill fees of $161/t).

c.       Charities pay normal landfill fees for any waste above 25 tonnes per year, as they currently already do.

d.      Eligibility is to be limited to charities based in, or operating within, the Hutt Valley only. While it appears that most, if not all, charities currently using the exemptions are already operating in the Hutt Valley, an explicit condition would prevent the import of waste from other districts, as others become aware of this policy.

32.  In order to assist charities in this transition, officers propose that charities based in Lower Hutt be offered free waste audits and advice with a view to identify waste minimisation and cost savings opportunities.

33.  With regard to timing, the previous approach could apply until 30 June 2022, and the new policy could come into effect on 1 July 2022, in order to provide sufficient notice.

Climate change impact and considerations

34.  The roll-out of free kerbside recycling to Lower Hutt Marae, and extending the ability for other community organisations to opt-in to Council’s kerbside recycling service could encourage waste diversion.

35.  The change in approach to the landfill fee exemption policy could potentially encourage diversion of green waste, with some potential savings in terms of avoided carbon emissions.


36.  A survey was conducted of charities utilising the landfill fee exemption, with an opportunity for them to provide feedback on potential changes.

Legal considerations

37.  There are no known legal considerations.

Financial considerations

38.  The change to the current exemption approach will better align with Council’s increasing direct costs from government charges.

39.  A charity that was to only dispose rubbish up to the entitlement of 25 tonnes per year would pay up to $750, based on a discounted fee of $30/t. This compares to standard fee of $161/t.






Appendix 1 - Rating categories, and eligibility for Council kerbside service



Appendix 2 - Landfill fee exemptions








Author: Diljinder Uppal

Solid Waste Manager




Author: Jörn Scherzer

Head of Climate and Solid Waste







Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability


Appendix 2: List of organisations that utilise the exemption



Tonnage in 2020





















































































































Climate Change and Sustainability Committee

03 August 2021




File: (21/1208)





Report no: CCASC2021/4/121


Updates on Council's biodiversity action





Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to provide detail and updates about the biodiversity strategies and actions undertaken by Council’s Parks and Reserves work streams.

2.    The Parks and Reserves team will commence the development of a Biodiversity Strategy as reported in the officer’s report to the Communities Committee meeting on 14 July 2021. Phase One of the strategy work will come back to this committee in mid-2022.

3.    The work activities described in this informational report are undertaken alongside other Parks and Reserves work programmes and project work as reported in the officer’s report to the Communities Committee meeting on 14 July 2021.



That the Committee:

(1)     notes the work currently underway relating to biodiversity; and

(2)     notes that work on a Biodiversity Strategy is commencing this month.



Strategic Context for Biodiversity Action

4.    Council’s Parks and Reserves team is responsible for protecting and promoting biodiversity and is guided by policy and internal strategies. Our guidance comes from the following documents:

a.       Reserves Strategic Directions 2016

b.       Urban Forest Plan 2010

c.       Environmental Sustainability Strategy 2015-2045 (ESS) and associated Environmental Sustainability Strategy Implementation Plan. Focus Area: Biodiversity (Which will be superseded by the ‘Hapori Ora’ Plan)

d.      Reserves Management Plans

5.    The Reserves Strategic Directions is focussed on five key aims:

a.       Protect and Enhance

b.       Sustainable Practices

c.       Connected Reserves

d.      Quality Programmes and Facilities

e.       Engagement, participation, and collaboration.

6.    The Urban Forest Plan is concerned with three areas, each with a set of outcomes:

a.       Natural areas

b.       Urban Parks

c.       Street Trees

7.    Environmental Sustainability Strategy (ESS), Focus Area Biodiversity, attempts to address the following issues:

a.       Protection of Species/Habitat

b.       Invasive Species

c.       Coherence and connectivity

8.    Parks and Reserves have approximately 13 Reserve Management Plans some of which are site-specific (eg: ‘Jubilee Park and Percy Scenic Reserve management Plan’) and others apply to multiple sites (eg, ‘Bush Reserve management Plan’ or ‘Esplanade and Foreshore Reserve Management Plan’). These plans are continually under review by the Parks and Reserves team and their renewal cycles are not coordinated.

Biodiversity Strategy 

9.    Work on a Biodiversity Strategy is commencing this month. This will provide guidance for, and co-ordinate, work across Council relating to biodiversity.

10.  The Biodiversity strategy will contextualise the wide-ranging work programs we already undertake in the Parks and Reserves division and provide frameworks for measuring and improving our performance. It would also allow us to prioritise our efforts to maximise biodiversity gains.

Biodiversity Workstreams and Programmes

11.  There are a number of programmes and activities undertaken by Council’s Parks and Reserves team that specifically target biodiversity and there are a range of programmes that include biodiversity considerations within their operation. Community groups and external organisations are supported by Council with supply of plants and materials and/or funding support.

12.  Council-led programmes that specifically target biodiversity are:

a.       Indigenous Biodiversity Fund

b.       Predator Free Hutt Valley

c.       Pest Plant Programme

d.      Pest Tree Strategy

e.       Boundary Weed Clearance and Revegetation Sites

f.       Beach Weed Programme

g.       Site-led Pest animal control (possums, deer)

h.      Percy Scenic Reserve Conservation Collection

13.  Council-led programmes that are not primarily targeting biodiversity but have a direct effect on Biodiversity:

a.       Annual Winter Planting Programme

b.       Community Planting Support Funding

c.       Resource consent assessments and notices.

d.      Reserves Financial Contributions

e.       Little Blue Penguin Haven

f.       Carbon Forest Registration

14.  External programmes that are supported by Council that have a direct effect on Biodiversity:

a.       Key Native Ecosystems (KNEs)

b.       The Kiwi Project by Remutaka Forest Conservation Trust

c.       Mainland Island Restoration Operation (MIRO)

d.      Enviroschools

e.       A range of community groups and ‘Friends of…’ groups

15.  Other workstreams are being investigated that would provide better outcomes for biodiversity

16.  There are other responsive and ad-hoc projects and activities with biodiversity opportunities and they are considered on a case-by-case basis within the strategic context of the Reserves Strategic Directions, the Urban Forest Plan, the Environmental Sustainability Strategy and Reserve Management Plans.


Progress and Outcomes for Key Biodiversity Workstreams

17.  The Indigenous Biodiversity Fund is in its second year of operation and has been developed internally and with consultation with community.

18.  The fund is currently $200,000 per year and is open for landowners whose properties meet certain criteria for existing biodiversity values. Applicants can submit for either a Tier 1 (Up to $1000) or Tier 2 (Up to $20,000) for biodiversity support

19.  In the 2020/2021 financial year we received approximately 113 applications. Of the applications 86% were for Tier 1 and 14% were for Tier 2.  The average spend for Tier 1 grants is $881 and the average for Tier 2 is $13,053.

20.  A number of consumables and supplies were bulk-purchased and supplied (such as herbicide gels, rat trap tunnels and possum traps), and approximately 3630 plants were supplied to landowners. Uptake on the established pick-up days was generally good.

21.  The scheme experienced problems due to COVID-19 restrictions occurring during the time when applications were due to open, and continued uncertainty during prime planting season. As a result, planned resource pick-up days were delayed by eight months to coincide with the seasons (especially important for plants).

22.  There are a lot of learnings that have come out of the way it was intended to operate and the unexpected administrative load that would occur. Officers are continuing to engage with a group of representatives from various community groups who have been instrumental in solving some of these problems along the way.

23.  Set-up of one of the plant pick-up days where applicants could pick-up up-to 200 plants each for their properties under a Tier 1 grant:


24.  The Predator Free Hutt Valley (PFHV) project is spearheaded by Council’s Reserves Community ranger who coordinates the efforts of neighbourhood-led groups to get the best outcomes for removing invasive predators from Te Awa Kairangi which includes both Lower Hutt and Upper Hutt (Te Awa Kairangi ki Uta). Council supports this work primarily by supplying traps to volunteer groups and enables training for people who are eager to learn.

25.  The PFHV website is run by Hutt City Council and reports more than 24,000 pest animals killed and nearly 5000 traps deployed ( in the whole valley since approximately 2018. One of the challenges in this work is unifying the data and reporting information. Some groups who do this work are committed to using reporting systems that are not connected to Trap NZ’s systems.

26.  There are 16 Lower Hutt Groups under this umbrella and it is part of the Predator Free 2050 nationwide initiative. The work that Hutt City Council hires contractors to complete is additional to the Predator Free Hutt Valley initiative.

27.  Map of the coverage of Predator Free Hutt Valley (PFHV) Groups:


28.  The Pest Plant Programme is a long-running workstream that has been a key part of protecting indigenous forest from invasive plants for at least the last 20 years. It has been adaptive to the worst pest plant species and continues to be exceptional within the region for the level of control and monitoring applied to sites with the worst infestations.

29.  The programme offers free weed control of five species of weed for private property and on reserve land. Members of the public are invited to make contact and report their pest plant and our contractors will come in and control it. The pest plants currently on the list are old man’s beard ($30,000 p/a), banana passionfruit ($30,000 p/a), cathedral bells ($5,000 p/a), climbing asparagus ($14,000 p/a), and pampas ($5,000 p/a). This is in addition to the work carried out by our contractors on Council land.

30.  1585 sites were control in 2019/2020 financial year. Currently awaiting contractor report for the 2020/2021 financial year.


31.  Funding allocations for the pest plant programme from the last 18 years has remained reasonably steady with changes in response to threat level:

32.  The Lower Hutt City Authority is unique in the region in that under the Regional Pest Management Plan (A GWRC Policy under the Biosecurity Act), three of the worst weed species can be controlled wherever they occur on public or private land. These are Old Man’s Beard, Banana Passionfruit and Cathedral Bells. Although, to date, we have not had to enforce their control, being authorised to control them under the Biosecurity Act has been beneficial in compliance.

33.  One of the difficulties with the pest plant programme is the knowledge that there will never be a point at which there are no pest plants. In some cases, such as with Bomarea, we have successfully controlled it for several years but there are still a few remnant sites where it is present. While we would love to keep controlling it, other pest plants have started to become more imminent threats to biodiversity, and we need to respond to the newer threats within the limited budgets.

There are a number of areas within the Lower Hutt territory that are administered by other agencies such as KiwiRail and Waka Kotahi which have a high proportion of pest plants on them. These weeds become a seed source for pest plants.

34.  The Pest Tree Strategy is currently in draft, yet to be finalised, but the workstream resulting from this has been underway for a number of years. The pest trees with the greatest negative impact on biodiversity by a long stretch, are Pine trees – this pattern is also obvious nationwide. Because of this, almost all our current work has targeted Pine trees. 

35.  The Pest Tree Strategy workstream has been very active on the slopes surrounding Stokes Valley and as such, the control of pest trees has been persistent and concentrating on stands of trees that have the best Cost-Benefit ratio.  In the past few years there has been approximately $20,000 per year spent.

36.  The strategy involves working systematically from the North of the Lower Hutt Territory and proceeding South using the ‘drill and fill’ method where trees are poisoned in place, so long as they are far enough away from boundaries or tracks. The trees will initially lose the bulk of their biomass with leaf fall, then the lateral branches fall down as they rot. During this time natural regeneration of the native understory will occur, with adventive native species establishing first.

37.  After the stands have been controlled throughout the territory, the next phase will involve removing trees that are not able to be controlled by drill and fill. This phase will have a very high cost to low benefit ratio. It is unknown how many years it will take for the drill and fill phase to complete.

38.  The Pine control on the slopes of Stokes Valley in the 2019/2020 financial year:

39.  Recent aerial photography shows areas of recent control of pine trees:

40.  A one-off project to get rid of a stand of Sycamores (also very high on the draft pest tree strategy biodiversity risk matrix) on Hine Road in Wainuiomata occurred in the 2020/2021 financial year.

41.  There are a number of challenges with the Pest Tree Strategy which include the scale (and costs) of the work, the persistence of pest trees on private property adjacent to reserves, and site safety on steep slopes or areas around walking tracks.

42.  Boundary Weed Clearance occurs on the interface between private and public land. Weed species are removed and revegetation planting occurs to prevent weeds dominating again. There are other dedicated Revegetation Sites within reserves that increases native bush cover and reduce weed invasions.

43.  In 2020/2021 there were 31 sites that were prepared and planted under this programme. We responded to approximately 20 requests from members of the public to have their boundaries cleared. The total number of native plants planted under this programme was 3100.

44.  Boundary Weed Clearance and Revegetation Planting in 2020/2021 (Stars=Revegetation, Blue markers=active HCC maintained, red/yellow=homeowner-maintained):


45.  The Beach Weed Programme is a specific programme to enhance biodiversity on beaches and rocky shorelines. It comes under the management of beach weeds. The species controlled on this site are gorse, tree lucerne, horned poppy, boneseed and other key weed species. We are currently awaiting a contractor report for the 2020/2021 works.

46.  Greater Wellington Regional Council undertakes pest plant and animal work for their Key Native Ecosystems (KNE) work under a cost-sharing arrangement with Council. KNEs are a Greater Wellington Regional Council initiative that manages important sites on public and private land under arrangement with landowners. The MOU arrangement is assessed and discussed annually and renewed on a three year cycle. The annual contribution for KNE work is $18,350.

47.  Site-led and responsive pest animal control occurs in reserves throughout Lower Hutt and comprises a bait station network, rabbit control, and deer control. The hunting work occurs in the optimum season and where reports of pests in reserves are high. In the 2020/2021 financial year there were a total 57 red deer removed from reserves in Lower Hutt. Council has engaged Greater Wellington Regional Council biosecurity staff to manage this programme and ensure site safety. Greater Wellington Regional Council subcontracted Trap and Trigger to undertake some of this work.

48.  The locations and numbers of deer that were shot are:

·      Page Grove Reserve (Shooting range/race track) – 14 deer

·      Old Wainuiomata Landfill – 6 deer

·      Taita cemetery – 5 deer

·      Norrie Grove Reserve – 3 deer

·      Open Polytech – 1 deer

·      Wainuiomata Hill Road – 1 deer

·      East Stokes Valley – 14 deer, 1 goat, 1 pig

·      Haywards Scenic Reserve/Parkway – 6 deer

·      Taitā/West Stokes Valley – 5 deer

·      Hine Road – 2 deer

49.  This financial year officers will continue with the deer control arrangement but assess whether other areas should be targeted.

50.  The Pest Animal arrangement with Greater Wellington Regional Council is reviewed alongside the KNE work and is approximately $55,150 per annum.

51.  The Percy Scenic Reserve Conservation Collection is a nationally significant collection and is a key part of conservation outreach, research, and propagation. Many rare and endangered plants from the region, the country and offshore islands are in the collection and tour groups are often given the opportunity to see plants that they would rarely see in the wild. Researchers from a range of research institutions regularly use the collection for study (Te Papa Tongarewa, LandCare, Waikato University). Plants propagated from the collection are sometimes planted back into the wild such as at the foreshore, or as features in street or reserve gardens.

52.  The two new alpine cold-houses are an innovative facility that optimises conditions for their growth. Organisations such as Otari-Wilton’s Bush look to our collection management as an example of what could be achieved.

53.  Scientist and Botany Curator from Te Papa Tongarewa, Heidi Meudt who is undertaking research on plants in the Percy Scenic Reserve Conservation Collection:

54.  If there is interest among Councillors, Parks and Gardens would like to invite you to join us on a tour of the potted collection.

55.  Every year Council undertakes a Winter Planting Programme to make garden improvements that contribute moderately to indigenous biodiversity in our public parks. While this work is not targeting biodiversity, opportunities for continuity of habitats and addition of rare plants into our gardens contribute to increased awareness and cultivation trends.

56.  Community Planting Support is coordinated by the Reserves Community Ranger who attended approximately 28 planting days in the 2020/2021 financial year. There are likely to be three times that many planting days that are not attended by Council’s Ranger, but that have their plants supplied by Council. The total number of eco-sourced native plants supplied is approximately 9,446. Council’s Ranger coordinates approximately 100 volunteers a year within community groups, with about 500 ad-hoc or one-off volunteers for projects. Often these planting events are organised community groups and “Friends of…” groups, with Council providing support and plants.

57.  During Resource Consent Assessments officers refer application plans to the Ecology/Horticulture Advisor for advice on permittable indigenous forest removal. Assessments are done closely aligning to the Ecological Impact Assessment Guidelines which is an industry best-practice methodology guideline produced by the Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand Inc. Opportunities are sought to preserve biodiversity values and mitigate unavoidable losses.

58.  Assessments Carbon Forest Registration have been undertaken and, as a result, some areas have been registered under the MfE Emissions Trading Scheme (approximately 130 hectares). The indirect benefits for biodiversity are that forests are established and further protected by this registration. In addition some of the carbon credits generated are made available for funding further biodiversity work.

59.  There are some other external groups that are supported either financially or with resources to promote sanctuaries for bird populations. These include The Kiwi Project by Remutaka Forest Conservation Trust ($5000 p/a) and the Little Blue Penguin Haven in East Harbour.

Other Opportunities

60.  Kaitiakitanga undertaken by Iwi and local Marae. – requesting permission for Tikanga Māori principles to manage indigenous vegetation and materials in a sustainable way. This is an opportunity to take instruction and build trust with Mana Whenua and to enable iwi to decide what they would like to manage and how it should be done. An example of a work stream being investigated is Pā Harakeke, and working with people with local knowledge about how and where to plant.

61.  Maintenance and Service Contract Procurement Processes – Include requirements for eco-sourced plant material, low-emission machinery and transport, recycled and reusable materials and consumables.

62.  Development of a Biodiversity Strategy and/or Action Plan – coordinate all the workstreams and build performance indicators for each activity. This has been a subset of the environmental strategy in the past but there are benefits in taking a more focussed and coordinated approach to the delivery of this outcome by elevating and targeting work through the development of a stand-alone strategy.

63.  MonitoringIncrease monitoring capability. Performance indicators and measurables should be defined in a biodiversity strategy. Discussions have taken place between Council officers and Greater Wellington Regional Council environmental science regarding commissioning a monitoring programme. These discussions are very preliminary and have not taken into account resources to undertake the monitoring work. These measures would be part of the Biodiversity Strategy performance indicators

64.  Reserves Financial Contributions are currently being investigated as a way to facilitate additional Biodiversity benefits and Carbon sequestration. It may be that a Carbon Forest Plan is established to formalise funding and pathways to registration of indigenous forests for ETS credits. This would involve accessing the internal Carbon Acceleration Fund to accelerate natural revegetation and restoration processes.


65.  There are no options as this is an information report.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

67.  Protecting and promoting biodiversity and planting additional trees contributes to climate change mitigation.


68.  No external consultation occurred during the compilation of this informational report

Legal Considerations

69.  There are no legal considerations in this informational report.

Financial Considerations

70.  There are no financial considerations in this informational report.



There are no appendices for this report.    








Author: Jonathan Frericks

Ecology/Horticulture Advisor







Approved By: Marcus Sherwood

Head of Parks and Recreation









Climate Change and Sustainability Committee

31 August 2021




File: (21/1401)





Report no: CCASC2021/4/220


Update on Council's solid waste and waste minimisation work




Purpose of report

1.    To provide the Committee with an update on various solid waste management and minimisation work streams.


That the Committee receives and notes the update on various solid waste management and minimisation work streams.



2.    Council undertakes a range of solid waste management and minimisation initiatives, and this report consolidates information on their status.

3.    However, the following solid waste and/or waste minimisation matters are addressed in separate reports, as follows:

a.       The update on the work to implement Council’s new rubbish and recycling collection services is covered in a separate report to this committee.

b.       Detailed and regular information on the ongoing development, operation and performance of the Silverstream Landfill is covered in a separate report to the Hutt Valley Services Committee.



Changes at Silverstream transfer station

Resource recovery

4.    Council’s Long Term Plan has funds allocated to make significant changes to the layout of the transfer station at Silverstream Landfill.  Changes are needed to improve upon the current level of service and establish a resource recovery park.  The funding for the resource recovery changes remain subject to the completion of a business case.

5.    However, there are some no-regrets works that are now underway. This includes the construction of a new intersection, which will enable a change to the way waste is loaded out. This will eliminate a significant health and safety risk, by removing a large pit used for loading out waste. Construction is to be completed by February 2022.

6.    As Council’s landfill operations contract is coming up for renewal at the end of 2022, a procurement process will need to be undertaken. The scope of the contract will include the operation of the landfill, but will also include the operation of a resource recovery park. Therefore, this could provide an opportunity to test the market regarding the best approach to the resource recovery park, and its best location, at either Silverstream Landfill or elsewhere.

Green waste

7.    Since 1 July 2021, green waste is no longer used for landfill cover, and instead is taken to Composting NZ in Kapiti for composting. During July 2021, 82 tonnes of green waste were diverted from the landfill, which would otherwise have been used for landfill cover and thus contributed to greenhouse gas emissions.

Weighing of domestic users of the transfer station

8.    Officers are continuing to work with Tonkin & Taylor and Waste Management on options to introduce weighing for all vehicles using the transfer station, to more accurately reflect actual waste disposed (as opposed to charging based on vehicle type only).

9.    This is not yet in place because additional preparatory works have to be scoped and implemented, including changes to the kiosk and weigh-station set up, and IT changes. Officers will report back on progress but are aiming to have the new approach in place before the end of the year.

Hazardous waste drop off facility

10.  Officers have also been working with Tonkin & Taylor and Waste Management New Zealand (WMNZ) to make significant improvements to the hazardous waste drop-off at Silverstream Transfer Station, including improved material separation and signage, making the site cleaner and more user-friendly. This also covers an increase in staffing to manage the collected materials and to direct users to the correct drop-off locations.

11.  The new drop-off facility was scheduled to be operational by the end of August 2021, but there have been delays due to the COVID-19 lockdown. Officers now aim to have it operational by early October 2021. 

12.  Once in place, Council will no longer run an annual hazardous waste collection event, and will instead promote the new drop-off point at Silverstream Transfer Station. Officers of both Hutt City Council and Upper Hutt City Council are still discussing arrangements regarding the sharing of costs regarding hazardous waste, in line with our previous arrangements to share costs for the annual hazardous waste collection event.

Implementation of the solid waste bylaw

Multi-unit developments (MUDs)

13.  Developers of multi-unit developments (MUDs) must make adequate provision for the management of all waste, recycling and organic material generated on the premises.

14.  Council already has in place a guide for developers to assist them in designing waste storages areas for MUDs of more than 5 units.

15.  Officers are now working with other city and district councils in our region to develop a calculator to enable a consistent approach for calculating waste storage space. A regionally-consistent template for making applications as part of the resource consent process is also being developed.

Regional Licensing

16.  Council’s solid waste bylaw flags the introduction of a licensing system for waste collectors and facilities, to be in place by 2023. Work is underway to develop a streamlined approach across the Wellington region to capture waste data and improve waste outcomes.

Climate change impact and considerations

17.  The work regarding improved resource recovery directly aligns with Council’s desire to reduce emissions at Silverstream Landfill, as it could reduce the amount of organic waste disposed.


There are no appendices for this report.    



Author: Diljinder Uppal

Solid Waste Manager



Reviewed By: Jörn Scherzer

Head of Climate and Solid Waste


Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability


Climate Change and Sustainability Committee

31 August 2021




File: (21/1396)





Report no: CCASC2021/4/218


Sustainability considerations in RiverLink





Purpose of Report

1.    To update the Committee on how sustainability is being considered in the RiverLink project.


That the Committee receives and notes the information contained in the report.



2.    RiverLink is a transformational project for Lower Hutt City that seeks to improve its resilience, connectivity, enable growth and address the ecological and wellbeing issues facing the city. It is a project that embraces and celebrates the spirit of our taonga (treasure), Te Awa Kairangi/Hutt River.

3.    RiverLink is a partnership project between Hutt City Council, Greater Wellington Regional Council, Waka Kotahi, Taranaki Whānui ki te Upoko o te Ika (Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust) and Ngāti Toa Rangitira.

4.    The overall project objective is for the integration of flood protection, transport and urban regeneration works between Ewen Bridge and Kennedy Good Bridge, including:

·      Enhanced flood protection for Lower Hutt's city centre and adjacent residential areas;

·      Enhanced connections on SH2 at Melling and linkages to local transport connections;

·      Enhanced amenity and connections so that Te Awa Kairangi becomes the centrepiece of the city; and

·      The identity of Te Awa Kairangi and mana whenua within the project area is enhanced through design and the practice of kaitiakitanga.

5.    The project is to be completed in the following three phases:

·      Phase 1 - is the planning, design and consenting phase of the project, and includes all works required to acquire the necessary environmental approvals for the project. It is anticipated to run through to end of 2021;

·      Phase 2 - is the delivery of the capital project, including the detailed design and construction stages and is anticipated to run through 2021-2028, and

·      Phase 3 - is the phase of the project following the conclusion of construction under phase 2, which focusses on urban renewal of the Lower Hutt riverside and CBD, including the implementation of the post-construction goals.


6.    Climate change has been at the centre of all planning and design of RiverLink as we work to achieve carbon zero by 2050 and make our operations more sustainable and climate friendly.

7.    All three partners are passionate about providing integrated sustainable transport solutions and RiverLink will deliver a step change in this regard. Access from the city to the replacement Melling Station across the new pedestrian cycle bridge will be a major improvement, as well as our proposed high quality cycleways linking with other upcoming projects like the Te Ara Tupua cycleway, the Eastern Bays Shared Path and routes to and from Hutt CBD.

8.    The RiverLink partners are seeking to enable sustainability performance and outcomes to be established early and measured throughout all project phases. To do this we propose to use the Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia (ISCA) Rating Tool.

9.    The rating tool covers:

·      Management and Policies,

·      Climate Change,

·      Resource Efficiency,

·      Environmental Impacts, Ecology and Waste, and

·      Community, Heritage and Stakeholder Engagement.

10.  Teams document the project’s performance and submit suitable documentation to the rating tool body for independent assessment.

11.  The assessment is completed at the end of the project (ie at the end of the design, end of construction etc.).

12.  Projects are assessed on the level of their performance and the number of credits achieved, earning a final rating. The RiverLink team are seeking to attain a rating of ‘Excellent.’

13.  The ISCA rating tool is being used on a number of projects across Australia and New Zealand. Examples in New Zealand include the City Rail Link (CRL) in Auckland, the McDougall’s Lift Replacement at Cardrona and the Scott Point Sustainable Sports Park. KiwiRail has recently become a member of the scheme. In Australia the tool has been used on a broad spectrum of projects including healthy waterways, roads, rail, windfarms, waterfront development and three waters.  

14.  A CRL example of resource use tracking using the ISCA rating tool is given below.

15.  As well as setting a financial budget for the project, Council is seeking to set a carbon budget and is commencing discussions with the project partners about this idea. Setting a carbon budget based on the existing design would be the first step, with the potential to use this as a threshold and require the Alliance bidders to quantify the carbon emissions resulting from their ideas at tender stage and be held to account for the targets they set for the duration of the project.

16.  Furthermore, Council would like to explore opportunities to calculate the carbon emission savings which the project will generate, with transport mode shift being a key aim of the project. This will be discussed with the project partners.

Mana Whenua and Te Ao Māori Considerations

17.  There is Mana Whenua representation from Taranaki Whanui and Ngati Toa Rangatira which provides governance oversight of the project at a partnership level. The RiverLink project also has a Mana Whenua Steering Group which provides direction and guidance at a more operational level. Mana Whenua support in principle the ISCA rating tool but have also noted the need to ensure that their values, principles and expectations are directing and informing the application of the tool.

18.  Mana Whenua will have a direct role in deciding and agreeing how the ISCA rating tool will be used and applied.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

20.  The design of the RiverLink project takes into account climate change projections and is partially premised on increasing Lower Hutt City’s resilience to effects of climate change. 

21.  The flood defence elements of RiverLink consider the effects of climate change, with rising sea levels and changes in rainfall patterns both an integral part of the design.

22.  The key outcomes being sought by Council on RiverLink as it relates to meeting our climate change objectives, are:

·    Using the ISCA tool and achieving an ‘Excellent’ rating

·    Establishing a carbon budget, and

·    Calculating the carbon effect of transport mode shift.


23.  The matters arising from this report do not require consultation.

Legal Considerations

24.  There are no legal considerations arising from this report.

Financial Considerations

25.  There will be costs resulting from the initiatives outlined in the ‘Climate Change Impact and Considerations’ paragraph 20 in this report. However, these shared costs will be insignificant in the context of the combined $700m RiverLink budget and the value for the project and for Council will outweigh the expenditure. 

26.  ISCA’s recent study, IS Rating Scheme Return on Investment, found that infrastructure projects rated under the ISCA Rating Scheme can deliver up to NZ$2.60 in benefits for every dollar spent.


There are no appendices for this report.   



Author: Tom Biggin

Project Manager Riverlink



Approved By: Kara Puketapu-Dentice

Director Economy and Development


Climate Change and Sustainability Committee

31 August 2021




File: (21/1400)





Report no: CCASC2021/4/219


Kerbside rubbish and recycling implementation project





Purpose of Report

1.    This is the final update on the implementation of the new kerbside rubbish and recycling services.  Future reporting to this Committee on these services will form part of a wider report covering all solid waste activities.


That the Committee receives and notes the report.


2.    Council decided on 15 September 2020 to introduce rates-funded weekly rubbish and fortnightly recycling collection services, commencing on 1 July 2021. An opt-in green waste service was also approved.

3.    A Council project team was established to implement the new services and has been working closely with Waste Management Limited (WML) since October 2020 on the project. This is the final update to the Committee on the implementation.

Service implementation

Bin roll-out

4.    The initial bin roll out plan had a six week buffer period to allow for unforeseen circumstances, such as bin delays, poor weather or resourcing issues. The entire six weeks was required in managing late bin delivery due to international shipping delays.

5.    The final shipment of bins from Australia arrived into the warehouse on Tuesday 6 July 2021, with remaining households without bins scheduled for delivery by Sunday 11 July 2021. 

6.    As a result of this delay, contingency plans were activated and 3000 households were delivered rubbish bags to provide an alternative means of rubbish disposal during this hiatus period. A team of Council officers undertook this work over the three day period 23-25 June 2021.  Additionally bags were made available free of charge at all libraries and community hubs for any other household that may have required them.

7.    The bin exchange programme commenced early August 2021. Prior to COVID 19 level 4 restrictions, the exchange was running smoothly.  It involved 940 requests made by ratepayers prior to 1 July 2021 for a different size bin from what was originally selected (or not selected, in the case of ratepayers who did not make a choice and received the standard bins).

8.    Officers are also planning another bin swap programme for residents that have requested a change in bin size received by Council after 1 July 2021. Residents will be contacted to confirm their change before their change is processed and delivered later this year.

Service provision

9.    The new service provision commenced on 1 July 2021, with WML applying additional resources (vehicles and personnel), to cater for the collection of rubbish bags for those properties that did not yet have their bins. WML also agreed to collect other receptacles for this initial period to ensure all rubbish and recycling put out for collection would be addressed.

10.  Missed collections have steadily decreased over the past eight weeks and are getting close to the target set within the contract of 50 per week. This was expected, with a three month bedding-in period whilst both the contractor and residents become accustomed to the new services.

11.  There are now 182 assisted services requests (up from 120 as last reported), which WML is being asked to manage. A further 50 requests have been received and will be investigated once we have moved to level 2 COVID-19 restrictions. This is disproportionately higher than other Territorial Authorities ( TAs)/councils in New Zealand. Officers will assess all assisted service properties and additional requests based on assessment criteria consistent with TAs in New Zealand. There is additional work involved over and above business as usual in understanding personal circumstances and whether residents meet the criteria for an assisted service.

12.  The service is being maintained through the COVID 19 Level 4 and 3 restrictions.  

13.  Requests for Service (mostly missed collections) are being handled through the Confirm system, while changes to our online system ‘Saber’ for recording new bins and bin changes for the rates system are expected to be finalised in mid-September 2021.

14.  The online tool developed for residents to access information on bin collections on phones and other devices is being enhanced to include green waste collections.

Internal resourcing

15.  With the delayed bin roll-out overlapping with the commencement of the new services, there was a large increase in inward communications from residents on a variety of rubbish and recycling issues.  Planned additional temporary staffing to help manage the expected increase in enquiries was insufficient to deal with the scale of the increase and required further temporary resources to help manage this.  Overflow calls were handled by the Palmerston North contact centre.

Changes during COVID-19 lockdown levels

16.  The recent lockdown in August due to Covid level 4 disrupted the recycling (for five days) and glass (for three days) where material was not picked up from the kerbside as our processing partners could not operate their plants.

17.  Following this, alternate arrangements were made. For glass, a change was made to collect it, but not to sort at the kerbside. Instead, mixed glass was sent to Visy in Auckland for additional processing (colour-sorting) to avoid material ending up in landfill. For mixed recycling (yellow bin), collections resumed but had to be disposed in the landfill, due to the lack of processing during Level 4.

18.  Level 3 protocols allow OJI to operate their plants and sort the recycling. Therefore, as Wellington moved into Level 3, any mixed recycling collected was again sent to the Materials Recovery Facility in Seaview for processing.

Recycling statistics for July 2021

19.  In July 2021, Waste Management collected 244 tonnes of mixed recycling, 122 tonnes of glass, and 89 tonnes of green waste. The total amount of recycling collected was 455 tonnes for the month of August.

20.  About 14.3% of mixed recycling was contamination, which is above our target of less than 10% contamination. The figure below shows the breakdown of mixed recyclable materials collected.

21.  To reduce contamination, work is underway on education and behaviour change, as part of the service getting bedded-in. This includes the bin inspector providing direct feedback based on the inspection of bins and their content.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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

Financial Considerations

23.  The total cost of implementation of the new service is forecast to be just under $1M.


There are no appendices for this report.    



Author: Bruce Hodgins

Strategic Advisor



Author: Diljinder Uppal

Solid Waste Manager





Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability


Climate Change and Sustainability Committee

02 September 2021




File: (21/1420)




Report no: CCASC2021/4/221


Sustainability considerations in the Naenae Pool project





Purpose of Report

1.       To provide the Committee with an update on the consideration of energy efficiency and sustainability options for the new Naenae Pool and Fitness Centre. Options will be presented to the Major Projects Board as part of the pool design process.


That the Committee receives and notes the report.



2.    As part of its Long Term Plan 2021-31, and Council’s Interim Carbon Reduction and Climate Resilience Plan 2021-2031, it has committed to phase out natural gas at all its facilities. Council also confirmed that it is looking to achieve a Green Star design and build rating of at least 5, or equivalent, for Naenae Pool, with all energy coming from either electricity or alternative low-carbon energy sources.

3.    Options are also being explored to reduce the embodied carbon of the project, albeit care must be taken to ensure that the gross embodied emissions are reduced, and that offsets are not used extensively. By way of context, as per the New Zealand Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990 – 2019, Construction and Manufacturing constituted 22.4% of New Zealand’s gross non-agriculture emissions (9.3% of gross emissions). Embodied emissions are assessed via a Life Cycle Impact Assessment, and can be improved by:

a.       designing the facility proportional to the needs of our community (i.e. not using excessive construction material) and recycling where possible;

b.       minimising construction waste and using long lasting materials; and

c.       minimising the use of carbon intensive materials (such as concrete) in favour of carbon negative materials (such as timber).

The Green Star Rating tool

4.    Green Star is the only New Zealand based, internationally recognised certification system for confirming that a facility has been designed and built to a sustainable standard. As such, it is the best available method to demonstrate that the project will make a major contribution towards reducing carbon emissions.

5.    Since 2007, there have been over 200 Green Star certified and completed buildings in New Zealand of which 30 are in the Wellington Region. In the Hutt Valley itself there are two examples of Green Star certified facilities: the MPI multi-purpose building in Trentham and the Kimi-Ora School in Naenae.

6.    Green Star takes a holistic approach, considering not just direct environmental impacts like materials or water use, but broader transport, indoor environment quality, and management implications of a project.

7.    Green Star assesses the important elements of a project's sustainability across key categories. Points are awarded for successfully meeting criteria across various categories. The total number of points awarded decides the final Green Star rating.

8.    A Green Star rating of 5 would confirm that the project has achieved a build quality of New Zealand excellence; a rating of 6 demonstrates world leadership. This aligns with similar commitments from other relevant organisations, such as Wellington City Council’s commitment to Green Star for all applicable builds, and Urban Plus Ltd’s commitment to Homestar 6 for all builds.

Project Update

9.    The Naenae project team is currently working with Crown Agency Callaghan Innovation who is assisting the development of the desired sustainability features. From previous case studies of certified buildings, typical design features that reduce energy consumption and that could also feature in the design of the Naenae Pool and Fitness Centre include:

a.       Adopting Passive House principles (essentially eliminating uncontrolled heat flow; there are some certified Passive House swimming pools Internationally)

b.       A reduction in heat gain by using sun-shading or smaller windows which means in turn lower costs to cool the building in summer. Also, high efficiency window and glazing suites using low-E glass and thermally broken framing.

c.       Glazing is a major feature in the design of pool buildings due to the large full-height facades that are commonly used.

d.      Air handling units with high efficiency heat recovery

e.       Centralised heating, cooling and electrical systems. 

f.       Fine tuning of pool water temperatures

g.       The use of Pool covers to reduce the amount of heat loss when not in use

h.      Solar PV system

i.        Energy efficient LED luminaires

j.        Stainless steel tank construction – less embodied carbon than concrete base/walls

k.       Energy efficient pool services e.g. backwash water heat recovery

10. In addition to these initiatives, the project team is aiming to reduce the amount of demolition material that would otherwise go to landfill; up to 70% by weight of waste material is planned to be either recycled or re-purposed into the new pool. Concrete from the pool and bleachers will be crushed on site and re-used to fill the pool void. It is also hoped to re-purpose some of the timber beams that were used to create the roof over the main pool and leisure pool. Recycling contributes towards the Green Star rating.


11. Items of heritage and memorabilia will be salvaged and stored safely for recycling. Once the soft strip of the Pool hall is complete in October, there will be an opportunity for the community to claim items, dependent on what has been recovered.   


12.  There is not yet a pool in New Zealand that has achieved a Green Star rating, indeed the current rating tool used by Green Star requires some modification to ensure that the full credits are correctly applied in the certification process. Some aspects, such as Energy and Innovation, will be straightforward; others such as water use may be more difficult to apply the correct credit.

13.  The Naenae Pool Redevelopment - Environmentally Sustainable Design attached as Appendix 1 to the report describes a breadth of initiatives. During the preliminary design phase, these initiatives will be assessed against the Green Star rating tool and then shortlisted for implementation. The option analysis will include a consideration of whole-of-life costs to ensure that contributions to lowering operational expenditure are fully explored. 

14.  This preliminary design is the next phase of the project and will be completed with the submission of a resource consent application late December 2021.


15.  Options regarding sustainability features and systems will be presented to the Major Projects Board for approval and this Committee will be updated following that.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

16.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide. Sustainability considerations play an integral part in designing the new Naenae pool.


17.  The matters arising from this paper do not require consultation, although the target of achieving a minimum Green Star rating of four (4) was included at the design brief stage as a requirement.

18.  Progress towards certification will be included for information in the forthcoming community engagement on the Naenae Pool and Fitness Centre concept design in October 2021.

Legal Considerations

19.  There are no legal considerations arising from this report.

Financial Considerations

20.  The options analysis stage will involve an assessment of both capital and operational costs.






Appendix 1: Concept Report - Naenae Pool redevelopment







Author: Jonathan Linders

Advisor Energy and Carbon



Author: Andrew Quinn

Project Manager (Naenae)





Reviewed By: Jörn Scherzer

Head of Climate and Solid Waste



Approved By: Andrea Blackshaw

Director Neighbourhoods and Communities


Climate Change and Sustainability Committee

31 August 2021




File: (21/1398)





Report no: CCASC2021/4/222


Update on Council's climate change work




Purpose of report

1.    Officers provide a regular update on climate change work in order to implement Council’s organisational carbon target, facilitate a reduction in city-wide emissions, and address climate change impacts.


That the Committee notes the update on various climate change work streams.

Electricity and natural gas use

Eastbourne summer pool

2.    Regarding the change in heating technology at Eastbourne summer pool, upgrades to the electrical infrastructure are scheduled to be completed in time for the new season. A preferred supplier for the heat pump has been selected, and the contract is currently being finalised.

3.    However, due to the COVID-19 lockdown, there is now a significant risk that this heating change may not be achieved before the beginning of this year’s season.

LED street lighting

4.    As at 31 August 2021, there has been no change regarding the number of streetlights that have been upgraded to LED luminaires since 30 June 2021 (5,960 streetlights, 42%). However, 500 LED luminaires are still scheduled to be installed over the next two months.

5.    Progress continues to be severely hampered by supply line constraints, and also luminaire installation rates, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 restrictions.

Pumps for our water infrastructure

6.    Our water infrastructure is managed by Wellington Water Limited, albeit the electricity used by pumps is paid for directly by Council. A scoping study was completed to review and identify opportunities to improve energy performance at selected bulk water, storm water and waste water pumps, and to identify the need or otherwise of more detailed energy audits.

7.    We have found that the selected pumps are operating very well, and we have not been able to identify any new efficiency opportunities. This is a pleasing result, as it confirms the good work done by Wellington Water Limited in optimising these assets.

Council’s vehicle fleet

8.    As at 31 August 2021, Council’s vehicle fleet includes 19 EVs (out of 70 vehicles), an increase of four EVs compared to the end of June 2021. Total fleet size reduced by one vehicle, due to the removal of a vehicle with low utilisation. Council’s EV share is now at 27%.

9.    While there is no central database to compare our performance with other territorial authorities in New Zealand, the NZ Government has a fleet dashboard for its agencies. Out of 143 agencies (eg District Health Boards, Ministries, crown entities), 71 of these operate vehicles. Our EV share puts Hutt City Council within the top-6 of this sub-set of agencies.

Emissions from Silverstream Landfill

10.  LMS Energy is undertaking a programme of work to improve gas extraction to address shortcomings identified following the installation of the new flare in March 2021. While these works are likely to take until the end of the year to complete, some changes have already resulted in improvements to gas extraction and destruction, as shown in the figure below.

11.  If the current trend can be maintained, then the emissions liability for 2021 could be much lower than in 2020.

12.  However, the decrease in emissions liability compared to 2020 is unlikely to result in a lower cost liability, as the cost of carbon has continued to increase, moving well beyond $60/t, as shown below.

13.  A number of factors have influenced the recent lift in carbon prices, including structural changes to NZ’s Emissions Trading Scheme, and the release of the Climate Change Commission’s advice to the NZ Government.

Update to Council’s corporate carbon footprint

14.  Whilst Council measures a number of emission sources on an ongoing basis (eg fleet, energy use at facilities, air travel, landfill, etc), Council’s last comprehensive carbon footprint was compiled in 2018, for the 2016/17 year.

15.  Officers are working on an update to this for the annual periods since 2016/17, and aim to complete this work by the end of October 2021.

City-wide carbon reductions and responding to climate change impacts

Council’s Carbon Reduction Plan

16.  In August 2021, Council approved its Interim Carbon Reduction and Resilience Plan 2021-31 - Mahere Hukihuki Whakaiti Waro me te Manawaroa ā-Āhuarangi mō Te Kaunihera o Te Awa Kairangi 2021-31. Work to implement the plan’s 21 actions is underway.

Development of a city-wide roadmap

17.  The lead group is continuing to work on problem definitions and a draft framework for the city-wide roadmap.

18.  A Co-Lab event is now scheduled for 6 November 2021. The Co-Lab will focus on how we, as a community, can respond together (that is, what the community, including Council, collectively can do in response to climate change; what will key stakeholders such as large businesses do to reduce their emissions).

Electric vehicle charging stations across Lower Hutt

19.  Over the next 12 months, Council will roll out 20 additional DC charging stations across Lower Hutt, co-funded by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority.

20.  Council collaborated with Wellington City Council on a joint procurement to identify a suitable supplier to project manage the roll-out, and operate the charging stations once they are in place. Contract negotiations with the preferred supplier are currently underway.

21.  The first four charging units are scheduled to be in place by December 2021, albeit there are risks of delay due to the significant lead times for charging equipment (in line with delays for other products involving micro-chips).

22.  Prior to the roll-out of charging stations at the various facilities, officers will undertake consultation with the community and affected stakeholders at the selected locations.

Climate Change impact and considerations

23.  This report responds directly to the need to reduce carbon emissions, by providing a regular update on Council’s key initiatives. 

24.  The key practical initiatives noted in this report that will positively reduce the Council’s carbon footprint include the continued increase in the Council’s EV fleet, progress on our workstream to de-carbonise Council facilities, to install LED lights throughout the city and monitoring the reduction of carbon at the landfill.  

25.  Officers continue to gather evidence to ensure Council is limiting its emission sources, and reducing where it can.  During the reporting period, this is being done by updating our own carbon footprint and assessing the energy performance at selected water pumps throughout the city.

26.  In the engagement and education space, in this reporting period, work is continuing with the community co-design project.


There are no appendices for this report.     






Author: Jörn Scherzer

Head of Climate and Solid Waste







Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability


Climate Change and Sustainability Committee

03 August 2021




File: (21/1207)





Report no: CCASC2021/4/223


Committee work programme






Purpose of Report

1.    To seek agreement on the Committee’s recommended work programme during the 2021 calendar year.



That the Committee agrees to the proposed work programme shown in Table 1 contained within the report.


2.    In December 2020, Council established a new Climate Change and Sustainability Committee, to provide for a better focus on environmental issues, and with the following areas of focus:

a.    Oversight of Council’s plan to reach Carbon Zero including raising awareness of climate related issues

b.    Developing and implementing climate and environmental policies and plans including ecology, biodiversity and biosecurity matters

c.     Waste and recycling.

3.    With the establishment of this new committee, Council’s existing Climate Change Working Group was disestablished as at 31 December 2020, as its work was subsumed into that of the new Committee.

Proposed work programme

4.    Officers propose that the Committee considers the following matters and/or reports during the 2021 meeting calendar year.

Table 1


25 November 2021

Regular update on climate change work programme


Report on the scope, process and decision-making approach for an internal low carbon acceleration fund


Report on the NZ Government’s response to the Climate Change Commission’s advice, and implications for Lower Hutt and Hutt City Council (timing subject to NZ Government timeframes)


Implications for Hutt City Council of the recommendations by the Task-force on climate related financial disclosure


Sustainability considerations in RiverLink


Sustainability considerations in the Eastern Bay Shared path project (eg IS rating tool, plans and progress to date, etc)


Sustainability considerations in the Naenae pool project


Sustainability considerations for key upcoming procurements (eg how we will achieve carbon reductions through those procurements, how we will minimise waste, etc)


Regular update on solid waste management and minimisation work streams


Final update on the implementation of Council’s new rubbish and recycling services


Report on the final Whaitua Implementation Plan


Eligibility to receive Council’s kerbside service an landfill fee policy for charities


Update on Council’s biodiversity action


Remediation and options for Wainuiomata Landfill


Cities race to zero report


Climate Change Impact and Considerations

5.    No detailed climate impact statement has been prepared, as this report covers administrative matters.  Climate change impacts will be covered in detail in the reports listed above.



There are no appendices for this report.    







Author: Judy Randall

Democracy Advisor





Reviewed By: Kate Glanville

Senior Democracy Advisor



Approved By: Kathryn Stannard

Head of Democratic Services