Komiti Hanganga
Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee



26 April 2022




Order Paper for the meeting to be held via Zoom,





Tuesday 3 May 2022 commencing at 2.00pm


The meeting will be livestreamed on Council’s Facebook page.

Members of the public wishing to speak to an item on the agenda are asked to contact






Cr D Hislop (Chair)

Mayor C Barry

Cr G Barratt

Cr K Brown

Cr B Dyer

Cr A Mitchell (Deputy Chair)

Cr N Shaw

Cr L Sutton




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
Membership RMA Hearings:	An independent Commissioner plus a minimum of either 3 or 4 elected members (including the Chair) and alternates who have current certification under the Making Good Decisions Training, Assessment and Certification Programme for RMA Decision-Makers. 
Reports to:		Council


This is an operationally focused committee, overseeing Council’s above and below ground core infrastructure needs, and core regulatory functions. 

The Committee is aligned with the Economy & Development, and Environment & Sustainability, Directorates.

Its areas of focus are:

§  Three waters infrastructure

§  Roading/transport

§  Infrastructure strategy

§  Integrated transport strategy

§  Wharves

§  Environmental consents

§  Regulatory functions including enforcement



To deliver quality infrastructure to support healthy and sustainable living, providing efficient and safe transport options, and promoting the city’s prosperity.

To consider matters relating to the regulatory and quasi-judicial responsibilities of the Council under Council’s bylaws and relevant legislation including the following:

§  Building Act 2004

§  Dog Control Act 1996

§  Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987

§  Local Government Act 1974

§  Local Government Act 2002

§  Public Works Act 1981

§  Reserves Act 1977

§  Resource Management Act 1991

§  Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012


§   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 economic wellbeing.

§   Maintain an overview of work programmes carried out by the Council’s Economy & Development Directorate.

§   Undertake the administration of all statutory functions, powers and duties other than those specifically delegated to any other committee or subcommittee, or retained by Council.

§   Conduct any consultation processes required on infrastructure 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 Infrastructure & Regulatory Committee, but aspects require additional decisions by the Communities Committee and/or Climate Change & Sustainability Committee, then the Infrastructure & Regulatory 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.


Additional Infrastructure Delegations:

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

§  Hear objections to specified traffic matters where the community board wishes to take an advocacy role.

§  Make decisions under Clause 11(e) of the Tenth Schedule of the Local Government Act 1974 and the Transport (Vehicular Traffic Road Closure) Regulations 1965 in respect of temporary road closures, including making decisions on any ancillary matters including, without limitation, approval of temporary “No Stopping” restrictions under Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017. 

§  Undertake hearings on road stopping under the Local Government Act 1974.

§  Make recommendations to Council whether to proceed with a road stopping and the disposal of stopped road, including (where the proposal includes or involves a related acquisition, disposal or land exchange) a recommendation to Council on the acquisition, disposal or exchange.

§  Consider and recommend to Council any request to the Crown that a road is stopped under section 116 of the Public Works Act 1981, and the disposal of the stopped road.

§  Make any resolution required under section 319A of the Local Government Act 1974 regarding the naming of new roads and alterations to street names (other than those in the Harbour and Wainuiomata Wards, which are delegated to the community boards in those areas).

Additional Regulatory Delegations:

§  Develop any regulations required to achieve Council’s objectives.

§  Approve Council’s list of hearings commissioners under the Resource Management Act 1991, including councillors sitting as hearings commissioners and independent commissioners.

§  Conduct statutory hearings on regulatory matters and make decisions on those hearings2, excluding those conducted under the Resource Management Act 1991, which are delegated to the Hearings Subcommittee and District Plan Hearings Subcommittee.

§  Authorise the submission of appeals to the Environment Court on behalf of Council.

§  Make decisions on applications required under the Development Contributions Policy for remissions, postponements, reconsiderations and objections.  

§  Recommend to Council the list of members approved to be members of the District Licensing Committee under section 192 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.


Delegations to make Appointments:

§  The Chair of the Infrastructure & Regulatory Committee, in conjunction with the Chief Executive, is authorised to appoint a subcommittee of suitably qualified persons to conduct hearings on behalf of the Committee.

§  The Chair of the Infrastructure & Regulatory Committee, in conjunction with the Chief Executive, is authorised to appoint a Hearings Subcommittee of suitably qualified persons to conduct resource consent and related hearings on behalf of the Committee.

§  The Chair of the Infrastructure & Regulatory Committee is authorised to appoint three people from the list prepared under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 to specific meetings (Chair and two members).




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


Reasons for the importance of the training:

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


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

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



1            When acting in this capacity the committee has a quasi-judicial role.





Komiti Hanganga | Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee


Meeting to be held via Zoom on

 Tuesday 3 May 2022 commencing at 2.00pm.




Public Business


1.       APOLOGIES


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.     

4.       Recommendation to TE KAUNIHERA O TE AWA KAIRANGI | Council - 24 May 2022

Integrated Transport Strategy (22/1000)  (The Integrated Transport Strategy will be separately circulated via a supplementary agenda.)

Report No. IARCC2022/2/85 by the Head of Transport                               8

Chair’s Recommendation:

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


5.       Response to Petition - Save the Atkinson tree in York Bay, Eastbourne from removal (22/927)

Report No. IARCC2022/2/74 by the Head of Transport                                       25

Chair’s Recommendation:

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

6.       Proposed Private Street Names: Subdivision of 128 and 132A Molesworth Street, Taita (22/908)

Report No. IARCC2022/2/75 by the Traffic Engineer                                          31

Chair’s Recommendation:

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

7.       Regulatory Matters Report (22/865)

Report No. IARCC2022/2/76 by the Head of Regulatory Services                       42

Chair’s Recommendation:

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

8.       Information Items

a)      Street Names Approved by Community Boards (22/857)

Memorandum dated 5 April 2022 by the Traffic Engineer                           70

Chair’s Recommendation:

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

b)      Infrastructure and Regulatory Forward Programme 2022 (22/858)

Report No. IARCC2022/2/77 by the Democracy Advisor                           75

Chair’s Recommendation:

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


9.       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.




Kate Glanville




                                                                                      10                                                            03 May 2022

Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee

21 April 2022




File: (22/1000)





Report no: IARCC2022/2/85


Integrated Transport Strategy


Purpose of Report

1.    To seek the advice and direction of the Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee on the Integrated Transport Strategy feedback.


That the Committee:

(1)     receives and notes the information;

(2)     thanks the submitters for their feedback on the draft Integrated Transport Strategy (to be separately circulated);

(3)     considers the submissions received on the draft Integrated Transport Strategy;

(4)     provides feedback to officers on the draft Integrated Transport Strategy; and

(5)     subject to consideration and feedback, advises Council of its view of the Integrated Transport Strategy ahead of approval being sought from Council.

For the reason set out in the report and attachments.



2.    The initial consultation in the development of the Integrated Transport Strategy (ITS) in 2021 involved a wide range of stakeholders, including:

·      Mana Whenua

·      Community Leaders

·      Resident’s associations and community boards

·      Local business groups

·      City Councillors

·      Waka Kotahi, Greater Wellington Regional Council

·      Businesses in the transport industry  

·      Council officers

3.    120 stakeholders were contacted during this initial consultation which was conducted in conjunction with engineering and environmental services consultancy, WSP. This consultation consisted of multiple interviews and workshops. There were 638 visits to the Hutt City consultation website during this initial consultation period.

4.    The ITS has been designed to be read alongside and is complimentary to, other internal and external strategies and plans including:

·      Hutt City District Plan

·      HCC 10 Year Plan

·      HCC Interim Carbon Reduction and Climate Resilience Plan

·      Lower Hutt Climate Action Pathway

·      Wellington Regional Growth Framework

·      Government Policy Statement on land transport

·      Road to Zero

5.    This ITS sets us up to be able to respond quickly to changes in government, Waka Kotahi, or Council policy, for example the Emissions Reduction Plan.

6.    The ITS sets the future direction for Council for planning and investment in the transport system and will be followed by plans under each of the seven focus areas.



7.    Hutt City Council’s draft ITS was made available to the public for consultation and feedback for a two-week period between 30 March 2022 and 12 April 2022.

8.    The online feedback form asking respondents for their level of agreement on the guiding principles, focus areas and actions outlined in the draft ITS.  There was also opportunity for respondents to provide feedback via free-text comments.

9.    During the consultation period there were 775 visits to the Have Your Say project page and 284 individuals downloaded the draft ITS document.

10.  There was a total of 224 responses to the survey including 715 free-text comments.

11.  Given the number of responses received, we can be 95% confident that the population results (that is, if we had responses from all our Lower Hutt residents) sit within +/- 6.75% of these results.

12.  Further detailed submissions were received from the following organisations/groups which are appended to the report:

·      Hutt Cycle Network 

·      Living Streets Aotearoa

·      Waka Kotahi

·      Hutt Carbon Zero Network

·      Petone Community Board

13.  The Hutt Carbon Zero Network, Hutt Cycle Network and Living Streets Aotearoa have requested to speak to their submissions at the Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee meeting on 3 May 2022 - see Appendix 1, Appendix 2 and Appendix 3 attached to the report.

Survey Structure and Feedback

14.  The consultation survey asked participants for their level of agreement with the following aspects of the strategy:

·      The guiding principles

·      The seven focus areas

·      The actions proposed under each focus area


15.  Free-text comments were also invited on the guiding principles, and each of the focus areas. 

Guiding Principles

16.  During the consultation on the draft ITS, officers consulted on six guiding principles, which were:

·      Changes to our existing transport network should seek to balance the appeal of travel by car with the appeal of travel by other modes.

·      Improvements to our traffic network should not undermine the attractiveness of public transport.

·      We should prioritise changes that make active modes, such as walking and cycling, the most attractive option for people making short journeys. 

·      Changes to our transport system, needed to service new development, should improve public transport and active mode networks before increasing road capacity.

·      We should prioritise changes that make public transport the most attractive option for people travelling to the main work and education hubs.

·   We should ensure that the access needs and challenges of everyone in the community are considered when planning for changes.


17.  At least two thirds of respondents supported each of the six proposed guiding principles.  

18.  Those principles that identified active transport modes were less likely to be supported than those that mentioned public transport or considered all forms of transport, including car travel. This was a theme throughout the responses.

19.  Free-text comments on the guiding principles revealed three strong emergent themes:

·      An increased focus on climate change and reducing emissions

·      More specific focus on disability, mobility, and accessibility challenges

·      Greater focus on improving safety for all people using the transport network


20.  While these were an important part of the draft ITS that went out for consultation, they will be incorporated more specifically into our stated guiding principles, and elsewhere in the draft ITS document. 

Focus Areas

21.  The consultation also had seven focus areas, which were:

·      Developing a connected, safe transport network that makes it attractive for people to cycle, walk or use the bus 

·      Creating people-focused, liveable streets around key transport hubs and local centres

·      Encouraging people to rethink how and when they travel 

·      Making it easier for all people to use public transport 

·      Improving connectivity to the regional transport network to support the movement of goods and services 

·      Supporting the uptake of innovations that help change behaviour and reduce emissions

·      Building housing and locate key services close to employment and activity centres to reduce travel distances and reliance on cars.

22.  The majority of respondents agreed with all seven focus areas.

23.  The four focus areas targeting physical changes to improve safety, attractiveness and connectivity received high levels of support (73% to 83%).

24.  There was less support (63% and 68%) for the two focus areas aimed at changing behaviours and ways of doing things.

25.  For each of the seven focus areas in the draft ITS, a number of more tangible actions that could be implemented to achieve the desired outcome were listed. These actions were developed through previous community engagement activities.​​

26.  The online feedback form asked respondents if they agreed that Council should make each action a priority in order to achieve the relevant focus area. Respondents were able to state their level of agreement with each action regardless of whether they agreed or disagreed with the focus area the action was trying to achieve. 

27.  The survey data for the actions under each focus area, and the free-text feedback on each focus area will be reviewed, and possible changes to the focus areas and proposed actions will be assessed. 

Next steps

28.  The wording of the guiding principles will be adjusted to incorporate the feedback.

29.  Complete a review and analysis of feedback on seven focus areas and actions to be completed, with changes made to wording as required.

30.  Full report on all consultation results, and the resulting changes to the strategy to be presented to the Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee and further input sought.

31.  Receive feedback from Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee and make any agreed appropriate changes to the draft ITS.

32.  Wording and design changes to the draft ITS document to be completed.

33.  Final ITS document presented to Council at its meeting to be held on 24 May 2022.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

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


35.  This report sets out the public consultation that has taken place on the draft ITS.

Legal Considerations

36.  There are no legal considerations for the report.

Financial Considerations

37.  There are no financial considerations for the report.






ITS Feedback - Hutt Cycle Network



ITS Feedback - Living Streets Aotearoa



ITS Feedback - Waka Kotahi



ITS Feedback - Petone Community Board





Author: Jon Kingsbury

Head of Transport




Approved By: Kara Puketapu-Dentice

Director Economy and Development


Attachment 1

ITS Feedback - Hutt Cycle Network


Attachment 2

ITS Feedback - Living Streets Aotearoa


Attachment 3

ITS Feedback - Waka Kotahi


Attachment 4

ITS Feedback - Petone Community Board


                                                                                       1                                                             03 May 2022

Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee

13 April 2022




File: (22/927)





Report no: IARCC2022/2/74


Response to Petition - Save the Atkinson tree in York Bay, Eastbourne from removal





1.    This report is to provide an update to the Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee in response to the petition that was presented to the Committee on 1 March regarding saving the Atkinson tree in York Bay.



That the report be noted and received.



2.   Council officers have received the petition and have referred this to the design team working on Tupou Horo Nuku for their consideration.

3.   A drawing has also been provided to the project team by the residents for consideration. This is attached.

4.   The design of the shared path that has been consented, proposes to remove the Atkinson tree which is a constraint to achieve a consistent path width.

5.   The Te Ara Tupua Alliance have commenced conceptual design work for Point Howard, York Bay, Lowry Bay, and Mahina Bay for Tupua Horo Nuku.


6.   The project team has assessed 4 potential treatment options at this location. These are described in the table below:







Remove the Atkinson Tree in line with the consented design to achieve a consistent path width consistent.

·    Lowest cost

·    The consented design

·    Consistent path width for all users

·    No tree branch’s that could create hazards for path users

·    Community expectations not in line with the consented design.


Option A

Community Design to  retain tree, add curved stairs, boat

ramp and rock revetments around the tree and adjacent

seawall. Even with proposed bridging structure over tree

roots, this requires the path width to be narrowed to an

effective path width of approx. 1.5m (2.5m noted by the

community was not deemed achievable).

·    In line with community submission

·    Will create an additional rest and play area for the community + path users

·    H&S risks due to proximity to tree branches increasing the risk of accidents and injury

·    Proposed rocks, mini boat ramp and stairs not in line with the consented design.

·    Rock revetment rocks drawn look small and likely to create hazards after storms.

·    Rock likely to be very deep here meaning stairs and ramp will require large excavation to be installed.

·    More beach encroachment than other options.

Option B

Re-align the road landward, retain the tree and maintain a

pathwidth of 2-2.5m effective path width. This option

requires the relocation of 1 street light pole, the loss of car park areas and new sealing and markings.

·    Ability to retain the tree at the current location

·    Consistent path width

·    Minimises branch overhang hazard

·    Reduced encroachment on the beach

·    Likely removes parking on the other side of the road

·    Different to the consented design

·    Will require road remarking and paving

·    Requires the relocation of a streetlight

Option C

Relocate the tree 1m seaward to enable the path width to

be maintained at 2.5m.

·    Ability to retain the tree

·    Consistent path width

·    Design very similar to the consented design.

·    Chance that the tree does not survive the relocation

·    Might be expensive to relocate.

·    Encroaches on to the beach more than some other options.

7.    The project design team is currently completing site investigations, cost, risk, and value assessment.

8.    Officers will report back to the Committee once investigations are complete.

9.    There will be the opportunity for all residents of York Bay to provide feedback once the plan has been completed.







Proposed Residents Design





Author: Jon Kingsbury

Head of Transport



Approved By: Kara Puketapu-Dentice

Director Economy and Development


Attachment 1

Proposed Residents Design


                                                                                       1                                                             03 May 2022

Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee

12 April 2022




File: (22/908)





Report no: IARCC2022/2/75


Proposed Private Street Names: Subdivision of 128 and 132A Molesworth Street, Taita


Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek approval for an appropriate private street name for the development at 128 and 132A Molesworth Street, Taita.


That the Committee:

(1)   approves a new street name for new private road shown in Appendix 1 of the report, as suggested below:

(a)      “Takapū” recommended road type “Te Aro o”;

(b)      an alternate name from the Reserved Street Name list, attached as Appendix 2 to the report; or

(c)      an appropriate name tabled during the meeting;

(2)   approves the appropriate road type as shown in the list attached as Appendix 3 to the report.

For the reasons so that these sections of the development may proceed to completion as a variety of utility connections and other administrative bodies require formalised street addresses for the necessary connections to be provided.



2.    The subdivision of 128 and 132A Molesworth Street, Taita by Urban Plus Limited, creates one new private road within the development. Hutt City Council has been supportive of Urban Plus’s drive of their new housing developments in Lower Hutt area.

3.    The new development off Molesworth Street creates 19 new housing units, all of which are addressed off the new private road, to be named.

4.    The responsibility for naming new roads within Lower Hutt (outside of the Community Board catchment areas) lies with the Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee.


5.    It is acknowledged that the Council had adopted the Kaupapa Here Tapanga, the New Street Naming Policy at the Council meeting held on
23 March 2022.

6.    The process of this street naming was carried out prior to the new Street Naming Policy 2022, hence the old policy was followed where no public consultation was needed for private roads.

7.    The developer initially submitted the name Te Ara o Motutawa, which has already been approved for a development in Avalon in 2020. Upon further discussion with the developer Te Ara o Takapū was submitted as the preferred name. 

Takapū - a well-known cultivation associated with Motutawa pā, situated to the northwest of the pā on the banks of Te Awa Kairangi.  

8.    The name was submitted by the iwi partners of the development Te Rūnanganui o Te Āti Awa.

9.    The Te Ara o Takapū  has been checked with Land Information of New Zealand (LINZ) and is suitable for use.

10.  It is to be noted that “Takapu Road” is already in use over in Tawa, taking its name from another cultivation (Te Takapū o Patukawenga) located in the Kenepuru river valley close to the present road, which was a traditional boundary maker between Te Āti Awa and Ngāti Toa tribal territories.

11.  LINZ has given approval for the proposed name to be used in Taita given that both sites have cultural significance to Mana Whenua and were traditionally used independently of each other, and the fact that the proposed street name uses a fully Māori road name/road type combination, giving an extra measure of differentiation.


12.  The recommended names for all three roads under discussion is;

a)   Takapū;


13.  Road Types recommended are;

a)   Te Ara o; or

b)   an appropriate road type as shown in the list attached as Appendix 3 to the report.


14.  Option a) has been checked with LINZ are acceptable to use.


15.  If an alternate name is tabled during the meeting, it can be considered for use, but will be subject to meeting the requirements of AS/NZS 4819:2011 and gaining LINZ approval. An appropriate backup name must also be recommended in case the alternate name is deemed not suitable.

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.

17.  The decision will not increase greenhouse gas emissions and will not be affected by a changing climate. There are no opportunities in this decision to reduce emissions or build resilience.



18.  As is normal with the naming of private ways, consultation has been limited to the relevant Board, developer and their community network.

19.  The name was submitted by the iwi partners of the development Te Rūnanganui o Te Āti Awa, in the process.

20.  Council’s Kaitatari Tumuaki Māori have checked the Māori names for spellings and suitability.

Legal Considerations

21.  The Committee has the delegated authority to name the public road.

22.  The new street name is required as a variety of utility connections and other administrative bodies require individual street addresses in order for the necessary connections to be provided.

Financial Considerations

23.  There are no financial considerations. The developer is responsible for the necessary street name signs. This will be undertaken by Council’s contractor with the cost paid by the developer.






Appendix 1 - Map - 128 & 132A Molesworth Street, Taita.






Appendix 3 - Permitted Road Types








Author: Ravi Soni

Traffic Engineer



Reviewed By: Bob Hu

Traffic Engineering Manager



Approved By: Jon Kingsbury

Head of Transport


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 - Map - 128 & 132A Molesworth Street, Taita.


Attachment 2



Attachment 3

Appendix 3 - Permitted Road Types


                                                                                       1                                                             03 May 2022

Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee

06 April 2022




File: (22/865)





Report no: IARCC2022/2/76


Regulatory Matters Report


Purpose of Report

1.    To provide the Committee with an update of regulatory matters arising from the work of the Environment and Sustainability Group.


That the Committee receives and notes the information.




2.    The report covers the regulatory activities associated with the teams in the Environment and Sustainability Group. In particular, the Regulatory Services and Resource Consents teams.  

3.    We are seeing unprecedented development in our city, which sits in the most densely populated floodplain in Australasia.  This increase in activity has hit the consenting teams hard with a significant increase in the number of resource consent and LIM applications and more complex building consent applications.  This, coupled with the changes in the development contributions policy, has resulted in delays in processing applications across the board.  This has been reported to the Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee regularly since June 2021 and most recently to Council on
23 March 2022 via the Chief Executive’s statement. In addition, there was an open briefing for elected members on 6 March 2022 where the issues around consenting were discussed.

4.    In preparation for the increase in application numbers, consultants were brought on board to supplement our workforce, but there were, and continue to be, shortages of planners, building officials and development engineers nationwide.  Therefore, the consultant base is also struggling to keep up with demand.   


5.    In the LIMs area, we now have a full team, and improvements are visible.  Equally, in the building inspections area, we can see that delivery within statutory timeframes for Code Compliance Certificates (final sign off for building work) has improved. In the building team, the number of building consent applications being approved within statutory timeframes has decreased by only 4%.  In resource consents, the area that has been most hit by the heavy workload resulting from the development contributions policy change (50% more applications than the previous year), has seen a 31% increase in consents being issued beyond the statutory timeframes.  It will take some time to see improvements in this area, because of the continued high numbers of applications and the shortage of skilled staff nationwide.  

6.    To provide an opportunity for a free and frank exchange of information, feedback and sharing ideas for improvement, some informal discussions have been held with developers, but this was formalised by holding four online hui with the development community.  In these we discussed the challenges we have been experiencing with longer processing times resulting from the significant increase in building activity, more complex multi-unit dwelling applications, building on what are now complicated land parcels and the influx of resource consents driven by the change to the development contributions policy last year.   The development community shared their frustrations and 29 ideas for consideration were put forward.  We are planning on holding these hui quarterly.    

7.    Although these hui were designed to gather feedback on all areas of consenting, the conversations focused on resource consent and engineering applications. 


8.     The general themes coming out of the hui were: 


·     The impacts resulting from Council’s processing times for resource consents and suggestions for how this can be improved 

·     The need for increased communication with developers around status of resource consent applications and timing of decisions 

·     Suggestions on potential process improvements and technical matters, including some that are driven by policy 

·     Resourcing. 


9.    Work had already started, and some pilots had been run with the development community, on eight of the 29 ideas from the hui.  The remaining ideas are being investigated by the resource consents and development engineering teams to assess the viability of the idea, the benefits of each idea and how to proceed.  This includes consulting with colleagues across the country.  This work will be prioritised in line with staff resource and impact.  There will be regular communication with the development community to inform and gather further feedback. 


10.  Relevant consents data is attached as Appendix 1 to the report.  




     Resource Consents Team 

11.  2021 was a record year for resource consents, with 650 resource consent applications received.  All of the resource consent applications accepted for processing, have been allocated to a planner.   There are four resource consent applications which have not been accepted, the reasons for which range from non-payment of the deposit fee to insufficient information. 


12.  In 2022, we have received 62 resource consent applications at the date of writing.  Most of these applications have not yet been allocated to a planner.   


13.  In February 2022 we issued 26 consents and received 19 consents. In March 2022 we issued 33 resource consents and received 31 resource consents. 


14.  Of the non-notified resource consents issued to 31 March 2022, 31 resource consents were issued within the 20 working day statutory timeframe. 18 consents were issued between 21 and 40 working days, 11 were issued between 41 to 60 working days and 17 consents were issued over 60 working days.  Feedback from developers and experience of other Councils currently indicates that 40 working days is the norm across the region and in the current environment this would be an acceptable timeframe. 


15.  In totality, the team is actively managing around 350 resource consents.  These resource consents are in different stages of their lifecycle, with some awaiting further information.  There is the ability under the Resource Management Act to “stop the statutory clock” where an application does not contain all the information necessary to process it.  Whilst Council is waiting to receive the information, the application goes “on hold”.  The time whilst the application is “on hold” does not count towards the 20 working day total timeframe.  


16.  Hutt City Council, like others, manages fluctuations in resource consent applications by contracting additional resources on top of its base staff resource. Consultant resource was employed to anticipate the influx of resource consent applications in June 2021, but there was insufficient consultant capacity regionally and nationally.  We are drawing resources where available from consultancies and other local authorities, where we can, whilst we bring our permanent staffing up to the level needed.  We currently have 19 consultant planners from seven different consultancy companies processing resource consent applications for Council, and one other local authority is helping us with minor applications.  On the development engineering side, we have seven consultant engineers working for Council in this space.   

17.  To manage additional work we are lifting our staffing capacity. We have recently recruited three new Resource Consent Planners to fill three of the four current resource consent planner vacancies in the team.  The new recruits will start in early May 2022.  Recruitment continues to be a high priority for the team and we have taken action to ensure the pool is as large as possible.  We recruit for planners and engineers nationwide and overseas, and take a flexible approach including variable hours, working from home and accommodating childcare/study etc.  


18.  The graph below shows the number of resource consent applications by month, those processed within statutory timeframes and those not.  




19.  Resource consents over statutory timeframes: of the resource consent applications that were granted in February 2022, 46% were issued above the statutory working days.    

20.  In March 2022, 77% were issued above the statutory 20 working days.  


21.  The Resource Management Act requires fee discounts, under certain circumstances (where an applicant agrees to an extension under s37 of the RMA, these days are excluded from any discounting).  When a resource consent application is submitted, a deposit is paid, with the remainder of the fee, or a refund, invoiced after the decision.  Just as the team are behind with resource consent processing, it is also behind with the invoicing.  Invoices are currently being processed for this financial year and discounting is being applied. 


22.  Information on the RMA discounting regulations has been posted on Council’s website here


23.  RiverLink: The RiverLink resource consent applications will be heard in the Environment Court on the week beginning 26 April 2022. 


24.  Silverstream Pipeline Bridge: The Silverstream Pipeline Replacement project has received a favourable recommendation from the experts involved.  A hearing is no longer required as Wellington Water Limited worked with the submitter, and none of the submitters wished to be heard.  A draft report has been written and is currently going through the peer review stage. 




25.  Notable resource consents lodged: 

·   31 Treadwell Street - redevelopment of Naenae pool 

·   14A Waiu Street - application has been made for the Waiu Street cleanfill following the lapse of the previous consent. This is a resource consent application for a privately run cleanfill.  Council’s involvement is in the consenting and monitoring of the cleanfill only. 

·   15 Puriri Street - eight units 

·   41 Percy Cameron Street - 200+ development of the Avalon Studios site 

·   64-66 Glen Road - 21 units. 

26.  Other notable resource consents: 

·   70 Maungaraki Road (13 lot subdivision and dwellings) hearing was held 7 March 2022 and a decision from the hearing panel is expected by
19 April 2022

·   143-159 Jackson Street –Council is in the late stages of the notification decision for the demolition of a building in Jackson Street heritage area, and redevelopment of the site with a mixed use commercial and residential component) 

·   Waiwhetu awa –Council is working with Tangata Whenua to make a notification decision for a proposal relating to the establishment and use of a new footbridge to support ongoing use of Te Whiti Park and local foot tracks/recreational areas 

·   Metlink has provided Council with a draft Notice of Requirement to redevelop the train stations in the Lower Hutt City limits 

·   Kainga Ora has engaged with Council on a number of residential projects around the Hutt Valley.   

27.  Recently granted resource consents: 

·   55 Britannia Street - 14 dwellings 

·   31 Fitzherbert Street - 12 dwellings 

·   11 The Strand - 95 residential and mixed use units, including 13 dual key arrangements 

·   41 Percy Cameron Street - Certificate of Compliance to demolish Avalon Studios building 

·   2 Hastings Grove - four additional dwellings 

·   240 Stokes Valley Road - 16 dwellings 

·   28 Ruakawa Street - 22 dwellings – was limited notified but did not proceed to a hearing.  Some local concern on cumulative impact of development on this street 

·   19 Bush Street - nine dwellings 

·   31 Wainuiomata Road - nine dwellings 

·   11-13 Waiwhetu Road - seven dwellings 

·   13 Pirie Street - 10 dwellings 

·   Korokoro Stream – Greater Wellington Regional Council remedial works along Korokoro Stream, and redevelopment of footbridge at the dam site 

·   170D White Lines East - New Hauora building to be used by Te Runanga in the City’s Covid 19 response package 

·   2 Campbell Terrace - 60 unit title apartments 

·   1960 Coast Road - public toilet supporting use of public tracks in the Orongorongo area. 

RMA compliance updates 

 Wainuiomata Cleanfill 


28.  All the latest compliance related information is now available online here  


29.  No complaints relating to the cleanfill have been received for February and March 2022. 


30.  From 28 February 2022, the cleanfill was closed to moist material, with the exception of hard fill and only topsoil to complete the contouring and landscaping in winter. 


Building Consents   

31.  The building team is on track to provide information to IANZ demonstrating compliance with the Building Regulations by the due date of 29 April 2022.  This includes the evidence to demonstrate the necessary changes have been made to clear all non-compliances raised by IANZ in the last audit.   


32.  The next scheduled IANZ audit of the building control function is due in August 2022, exact date yet to be confirmed. This is a key issue noted in Council’s risk register and was reported as a risk to the Audit and Risk Subcommittee on 15 February 2022 and 19 April 2022.  This reporting will continue until the risk is removed, with the next update provided at the Audit and Risk Subcommittee on 28 June 2022.   


33.  There were 438 building consent applications received in the third quarter of the financial year. The total value of work in the applications received was $141M. 


34.  There continues to be high demand for building consents for multi-residential developments across the city and this is expected to continue as Resource Management Act changes will allow for more intensified development without the need for a resource consent. These changes will come into effect in August 2022. 


35.  The graph in Appendix 1, attached to the report, illustrates the number of new household units measured against the number of building consent applications. It shows the increasing number for building consents for multi-residential developments, which are more complex and take longer to process.  


36.  The increasing complexity of building consent applications has had an effect on our timeliness and ability to meet our statutory timeframe targets.  


37.  In addition, the building team is now processing Project Information Memoranda (PIMs) for Kāinga Ora. This is a new workstream as a result of Kāinga Ora processing its own building consents. This equates to 204 PIMs being issued this financial year. 


38.  Building consents over statutory timeframes: during the month of March 2022 we granted 138 building consents, 56% of which were issued within the statutory timeframe. This compares to 113 building consents granted in February 2022 of which 60% were issued within statutory timeframes.  


39.  90 Code Compliance Certificates (CCCs) were issued in March 2022 of which 93% were issued within statutory timeframes. This compares to 86 CCC’s issued in February 2022, at a statutory compliance rate of 88%.  


40.  The team is managing the high workload withassistancefrom external consultants, whose availability is also being stretched. The team is liaising with stakeholders and communicating messages about timeframes on Council’s website.We have engaged consultants to take on the overflow of work. The consultants are also experiencing high demand from local authorities across the country.  The team is checking for additional consultant capacity on a weekly basis and referring applications to consultants to process, as capacity allows.  


41.  The current focus is compliance with IANZ. Following this, in the latter part of 2022, a new computer system, GoGet is being introduced to streamline consent processing and the delivery and recording of inspections. This system is used by other local authorities in the Wellington region and will be of assistance where we are facing business continuity issues and for processing of overflow for, or by, neighbouring local authorities.  


42.  In addition to the developer hui mentioned in the report, the building team is setting up a customer advisory group for regular meetings to keep stakeholders informed and to provide a forum for feedback in the consenting space. This group will be set up and will have had its inaugural meeting within the next quarter. 


43.  We are proactively recruiting to fill five vacancies in the building consents area, using multiple recruitment agencies to find suitable candidates. The team is currently interviewing for the Building Manager, Residential Consents Lead and building officer positions.  Since the last report we have filled four vacancies in this area.  As in the resource consents area, we are recruiting widely across New Zealand and overseas and offering flexibility.   


44.  The building team has for some years provided a variety of roles to attract staff by providing different career pathways.  These include a cadet role, which provides an established career path for person with no formal building qualifications, often straight from high school.  We provide all training and support to attain qualifications.  We also have building technician roles, which are entry level jobs for people with qualifications.    


Notable Building Consents Received 


·    Summerset Village, 1a Boulcott Street - four x two storey blocks of four residential units above ground level, 1 single integrated garage per unit (16 units total) - $7.65M  


·    New apartments, 54 High Street - two new blocks of apartments - 17 townhouses and one retail space - $7M  


·    Gracefield Innovation Quarter, 69 Gracefield Road - drainage works with below ground infrastructure - $4.8M  


·    7 Ariki Street, Boulcott - construct five blocks of multi-residential dwellings - 21 new townhouses total - $3.6M 


·    28 Raukawa Street, Stokes Valley - multi-residential dwellings, 22 x two storey units (demolish existing dwelling and outbuildings)  


·    13 Biddle Crescent, Taita - multi-residential dwellings - six blocks - 16 townhouses (10 x one bedroom and six x two-bedroom units) 


·    51b Seaview Road, Seaview – industrial depot - hardstanding / parking bay for trucks, earthwork, pavements, low-height retaining walls around the west, south, and east boundaries and stormwater with associated treatment and detention elements - $2.5M 


·    1 Rainey Grove, Taita - three two storey blocks of multi-residential dwellings - 14 units total  


·    8 Burnham Street, Petone - Callaghan Childcare facility - new modular construction with total of nine modules, built in factory to be relocated to site.  


·    90 Knights Road - multi-residential dwelling, five two storey townhouses, one single storey townhouse (Block 4) (Units 9 - 14)  


Building Quality Assurance Team 


Inspections of residential pools 

67.  We are continuing to work with the non-compliant pool owners to resolve these before starting our next three year cycle and have undertaken 27 first inspections to date this year.  


68.  We have been working closely with Kainga Ora about pools on its properties and the need for tenants to comply with pool barrier rules. We have made great progress in this area and have seen an increase in compliance across Kainga Ora owned properties.  


Earthquake Prone Building work 

68.  We have started issuing the next group of letters advising building owners where their buildings meet the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) profile categories for potentially earthquake prone buildings. We have issued letters regarding 46 buildings as part of this work and have had a good response from owners. 


69.  The owners of these properties will have 12 months to provide information to Council for consideration regarding this matter before Council officers will make decisions on the earthquake prone status of their building. 

Environmental Health Team 

70.  Environmental Health services are provided for Upper Hutt as well as Lower Hutt. 


Alcohol Licensing  

71.  The Epidemic Notice remains in effect, meaning that the New Zealand Police and the Ministry of Health are not required to report on applications until 30 working days after 18 March 2022, being 4 May 2022.  


72.  No on/off or club licences can be issued without reports from the agencies. This is so far not having any impact on the District Licensing Committee (DLC) being able to issue licences, as reports are continuing to be received thus far.  


73.  Two hearings have been set down by the DLC in April 2022 and May 2022 for contested applications. One relates to a new on licence for Gear Street Hospitality, which has received several public objections. The second relates to opposition by Police for alleged non-compliances with the Act and licence conditions (Kelson Store). 


74.  The Quality Management System (QMS) for food verification was audited (remotely) in February 2022 by IANZ. The audit was very successful with 13 recommendations being made. There were no non-conformances raised.  


75.  There are currently 103 verifications that are overdue in Lower Hutt, up from 88 as last reported. This is primarily due to the period during the covid lockdown, when verifications were unable to be carried out. It is noted that the number of overdue verifications has been dropping steadily over the past two months, now that on-site verifications have resumed. 


76.  Illegal dumping has continued to decrease slightly overall. However, it appears that more construction materials are being dumped, particularly along the Hutt river trail area. Increased landfill fees may be a factor in this. Unfortunately, there is little evidence of the offender being found, and therefore infringement fines are unable to be issued. 


77.  The Environmental Investigations Officer has now taken up a role within the Enforcement Team at Council, and the position is currently being advertised. Duties are currently being delivered by the Environmental Health Team.  


Trade Waste 

78.  The Inflow Project (stormwater entering sewer) in Maungaraki, is now underway. 


Parking Services 

79.     During the third quarter the Parking Team issued a total of 6,372 infringements, at an average of 2,124 a month and $110 per infringement.  


80.  The Parking Services team have been short staffed due to staff departures and also affected by covid isolation protocols. Despite these challenges, our dedicated wardens were still able to keep on top of requests for service and parking complaints across the city.  


81.  Wardens are monitoring high risk areas where illegal parking affects traffic flow, typically around construction sites and vehicle mechanics where cars are parked illegally. Wardens take the opportunity to educate and manage the safety risks with the offenders, multiple infringements have been issued to offending vehicles at these locations.  


82.  There was a significant drop in parking complaints around Days Bay as summer came to an end. There was a co-ordinated approach by Parking Services and the Communications team to promote safe parking practices in these areas. Plans are in place to ensure safety messages are again promoted in the lead up to summer and more regularly highlighted throughout the year. 

Animal Services 

83.  Animal Services are provided for Wellington as well as Lower Hutt.   


84.  We currently have 9,937 registered dogs in Lower Hutt and staff are working steadily to follow up on the remaining 576 unregistered dogs. Penalties for any unregistered dogs are $300 infringement fine and/or seizure of the dog.  


85.  We are looking into whether Animal Services can provide an instalment payment option for dog owners to pay their dog registration fees using a provider such as ‘AfterPay’ or similar. These are websites or applications that allow customers to purchase a product or in our case pay a fee online immediately without having to front up with the full price.  


86.  Service providers, such as AfterPay, pays the retailer/us the full price and the dog owner then pays the service provider back in instalments which could be very attractive for customers who can’t afford to pay the full price straight away but would like to be responsible dog owners 


87.  We have successfully recruited a new kennel officer who started on
4 April 2022. We are currently recruiting for an Animal Control Officer to cover the weekend work.  



88.  LIM applications typically fluctuate during a calendar year influenced by property sales, staff processing capacity, and complexity including the proportion of commercial vs residential LIMs with commercial applications taking more time. We are tracking higher in terms of applications processed than for the same time last year (2021) where we had a record number of LIMs with 20 more LIM reports issued as at 31 March 2022.   

89.  In terms of total volume of LIMs processed we are tracking above average from 1 July 2021 to 31 March 2022 averaging just over 100 LIMs a month. Of note, November 2021, February 2022 and March 2022 were 22% to 31% higher than average.   


90.  From September 2021 to March 2022, between 11 to 146 LIMs were issued over the statutory timeframe each month. This equates to a total of 520 LIMs issued outside the statutory timeframe. On average, LIMs were processed in 14 working days. In the first quarter (July – September 2021) LIMs were processed in 5 to 8 working days, in the second quarter (October – December 2021) they were processed in 10 to 15 working days and in the third quarter (January – March 2022) they were processed in 20 to 22 working days.   

91.  We did not see as many duplicate applications for each property with a maximum of two applications for any one property. This indicates a trend where the vendor / agent orders the LIM for the property rather than multiple purchasers.   

92.  At the start of February 2022 we had 167 LIMs in the queue (received and not yet processed), this has been reduced to 30 which is considered a sustainable number to enable the issuing of LIMs within statutory timeframes (10 working days). The LIMs team is now fully staffed with an additional staff member compared to a year ago and recruiting for a permanent administration role working across LIMs and Urban Development. We have temporary administration in the meantime and 1.5 contractors assisting with processing peak work and training new staff. These contractors were employed previously by Council and offered their services while we got out team up to the level required.   

Climate Change Impact and Considerations 

93.  With development on the most densely populated floodplain in Australasia, which is subject to climate impacts, great care needs to be taken to ensure development is appropriate and this risk is mitigated.  This is dealt with through thorough peer reviews and expert technical advice.

94.  Work is happening to ensure the next round of dog registration letters and invoices are sent to owners via email rather than on paper through the mail, which has traditionally been the case.  

95.  As part of our business plan, we have committed to review any vehicles that come up for renewal in the Regulatory Services department, preference for electric vehicles (EV) is always considered as a priority. 

96.  Utility vehicles and four-wheel drive EV options will be available from the start of 2023. These will be suitable for use by Building Inspectors and Animal Control Officers. A recent demonstration was organised to test drive the vehicles and feedback has been positive.   


97.  Not applicable. 

Legal Considerations 

98.  Not applicable. 

Financial Considerations 

99.  Any costs associated with delivering the activities covered in this report are met by available budget. 






Effect of multi-residential development



Regulatory Services graphs at the end of March 2022








Author: Derek Kerite

Head of Regulatory Services







Approved By: Helen Oram

Director Environment and Sustainability


Attachment 1

Effect of multi-residential development


Attachment 2

Regulatory Services graphs at the end of March 2022


MEMORANDUM                                                  1                                                             03 May 2022

Our Reference          22/857

TO:                      Chair and Members

Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee

FROM:                Ravi Soni

DATE:                05 April 2022

SUBJECT:           Street Names Approved by Community Boards




That the Committee receives and notes the contents of the memorandum.


Purpose of Memorandum

1.    This memorandum is to provide the Committee visibility over recent street names approved by the Community Boards.


2.    Officers were asked by a Committee member if they could report back to the Committee on street names approved by local Community Boards in the latest round prior to the Committee meeting. This would allow Committee members oversight on the names chosen by the Boards.

3.    At its meeting held on Monday 11 April 2022, the Petone Community Board approved the following Private Road (Road 2) for the subdivision located at 124 Richmond Street, Petone (attached as appendix 1 to the report):

Te Ara o Ripeka Wharawhara – was through descent and marriage kin to Te Āti Awa chiefs whose mana continued to extend over the Wellington region after the arrival of Pākehā settlers in 1840. As an heir to that mana, she was part of an ongoing tradition of leadership, exercising with her husband the rights and duties of Wellington's leading Māori families. (Source: Te Ara, The Encyclopedia of New Zealand). She lived at Taumata, the house on Korokoro and was awarded an OBE for her work in the 1918 Pandemic. More information on the name can be found on

It is to be noted that a private street named ‘Ripeka Way’ exists in Moera named after the daughter of one of the earliest settlers in Petone, Joseph Robinson.

4.    Approved a new street name for new private road (Road 3) shown in Appendix 1 of the report:


Te Ara o Te Amo Hohipene - The mother of Wi Hape Paku Love (Mother-in-law to Ripeka Wharawhara).


5.    Approved a back-up name for the private roads (Road 2 and Road 3) shown in Appendix 1 of the report:

Te Ara o Takiri Love - Takiri Akuhata Love was born in Paraparaumu 1900, her parents were Ruhia Epiha and Akuhata Eruini of Te Atiawa Ki Whakarongotai descent. Although associated with the Takiri House on Coastlands, Takiri Eruini’s family are all Petone based, and she passed away in Petone in 1983. In a difficult time for Māori landowners balancing their commitment to preserving their lands for future generations and meeting the pressure to release land for sale, or having blocks taken under the Public Works Act, Takiri steadfastly stood for Te Atiawa.







Appendix 1: 124 Richmond Street - Road Map









Author: Ravi Soni

Traffic Engineer







Approved By: Bob Hu

Traffic Engineering Manager





Attachment 1

Appendix 1: 124 Richmond Street - Road Map


                                                                                       1                                                             03 May 2022

Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee

08 April 2022




File: (22/858)





Report no: IARCC2022/2/77


Infrastructure and Regulatory Forward Programme 2022







That the Committee receives and notes the Forward Programme for 2022 attached as appendix 1 to the memorandum.

Purpose of Memorandum

1.  To provide the Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee with a forward Programme of work planned for the Committee for 2022.


2.  The Terms of Reference for the Committee requires the Committee to consider and make recommendations to Council on infrastructure matters and considering any infrastructure core matters referred to it by Council. This is an operationally focused committee, overseeing Council’s above and below ground core infrastructure needs, and core regulatory functions.

3.  The forward programme for 2022 provides a planning tool for both members and officers to co-ordinate programmes of work for the year.  The forward programme is attached as Appendix 1 to the memorandum.

Forward Programme


4.    The forward programme is a working document and is subject to change on a regular basis.









Appendix 1: Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee Forward Programme










Author: Toi Lealofi

Democracy Advisor







Approved By: Kathryn Stannard

Head of Democratic Services





Attachment 1

Appendix 1: Infrastructure and Regulatory Committee Forward Programme