Agenda of Planning and Regulatory Committee Meeting

Planning and Regulatory Committee – Terms of Reference

Fields of Activity

Oversight of all matters relating to the Council’s planning and regulatory functions and the development of policies and strategies in relation to those functions. The matters within this committee’s responsibilities include (but are not limited to):

· Resource Management Act 1991

· Building Control including the Building Act 2004 and the New Zealand Building Code

· Bylaws

· Health Act 1956

· District Plan

· Historic Places Act 1993

· Security Patrol

· Maritime Planning Schemes

Other regulatory matters including:

· Animal and pest control,

· Dangerous goods and Hazardous substance,

· Fencing of swimming pools,

· Litter,

· Alcohol,

· Noise abatement,

· Public health and safety,

· Prostitution,

· Gambling,

· Parking control.

· Responsibility for all matters related to the District’s environment including the environment of neighbouring districts and water bodies

· Other Regulatory matters not otherwise defined.

Membership

Chairman appointed by the Council

Deputy Chairman appointed by the Council

The Mayor

All Councillors

Quorum – 8 members

DELEGATED POWERS

General Delegations

1. Authority to exercise all of Council powers, functions and authorities (except where delegation is prohibited by law or the matter is delegated to another committee) in relation to all matters detailed in the Fields of Activity.

2. Authority to re-allocate funding already approved by the Council as part of the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan process, for matters within the Fields of Activity provided that the re-allocation of funds does not increase the overall amount of money committed to the Fields of Activity in the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan.

3. Responsibility to develop policies, and provide financial oversight, for matters within the Fields of Activity to provide assurance that funds are managed efficiently, effectively and with due regard to risk.

4. Responsibility to monitor Long Term Plan/Annual Plan implementation within the Fields of Activity set out above.

Bylaws

5. Authority to review bylaws and to recommend to the Council that new or amended bylaws be made including but not limited to the review of bylaws made pursuant to rules under the Land Transport Act 1998, (primarily relating to speed limits) and bylaws relating to parking.

Legal proceedings

6. Authority to commence, compromise and discontinue mediations, legal proceedings, prosecutions and other proceedings within the Fields of Activity.

Fees and Charges

7. Except where otherwise provided by law, authority to fix fees and charges in relation to all matters within the Fields of Activities.

Resource Management/Environmental issues

8. Authority to make submissions on behalf of the Council in respect of any proposals by another authority under any legislation, or any proposed statute which might affect the District’s environment or the well being of its residents including such matters as adjacent local authorities’ district plans, any regional policy statement, and Regional Plans.

File Ref: 17/919

REPORT TO: Planning and Regulatory Committee

MEETING DATE: Thursday 16 November 2017

FROM: Strategic Transportation Engineer

Nilesh Redekar

SUBJECT: Havelock North Cycle Lane

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Committee on the removal of five on-street parking spaces on the north east section of Havelock Road between Karanema Drive and Porter Drive (the study section), to enable cycle lanes on both sides of the road to be established.

1.2 This proposal arises from the recent reseal work completed on the study section of Havelock Rd between Karanema Drive and Porter Drive and a commitment made previously as part of the Havelock Road/Heretaunga Street Corridor Management Plan (CMP).

1.3 The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost–effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.4 The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is the provision of quality infrastructure and local public service.

1.5 This report concludes by recommending the removal of five on-street parking spaces on the north eastern section of Havelock Road between Karanema Drive and Porter Drive to accommodate on-street cycle lanes on both sides of the road.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 Havelock Road is categorised as an arterial route and has 20.1 m wide road reserve. The carriageway is generally 11.5 m wide and includes traffic and parking lanes on both sides. It also has a 1.2 m to 1.5 m wide footpath with up to 2.0 m wide grass berms on either side.

2.2 This section of Havelock Road has five on-street parking spaces on the north-east side and eight on south-west side of the road.

2.3 The Havelock Road/Heretaunga Street Corridor Management Plan (CMP) study was completed in 2011 by Opus International Consultants Limited and was adopted by Council in 2012. The CMP identified how a multi-modal transport corridor can be achieved for the route, and provided a series of recommendations for use by Council in developing the corridor. It provides for significantly enhanced walking and cycling facilities in the medium term and a dedicated public transport facility in the long term. It is intended to be developed in incremental stages.

2.4 As part of CMP recommendations (explained in Figure 1), an emphasis is provided to introduce on-street cycle lanes along this study section of Havelock Road, which will provide continuity to the existing Havelock Road cycle facility up to the Havelock North CBD.

Figure 1 – Existing and Proposed cross-sections recommended in CMP

2.5 As part of the 2017-18 maintenance programme, this section of Havelock Road was identified for resealing.

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 The latest traffic count was carried out in March 2017 that indicates the study section carries an average of 13,000 vehicles per day and that 85 percent of those vehicles were travelling at less than 50 km per hour.

3.2 The data indicates the weekday peak is observed during 0800 – 0900 and 1600 -1700 with peak hour traffic between 1,100 and 1,200 vehicles in both directions.

3.3 No specific parking survey was carried out, however, the site observations confirmed that all thirteen car parks have a relatively high occupancy rate, especially during weekdays, and are mainly used for all day parking.

3.4 Currently, cyclists are either sharing traffic lanes with vehicular traffic or riding on the narrow footpath sharing the space with pedestrians to get to the Havelock North CBD.

3.5 The resurfacing of this section of Havelock Road has created an opportunity to evaluate the existing road layout and as recommended in the CMP, to complete the link in the cycle facility along this section of Havelock Road.

4.0 OPTIONS

4.1 The options for Council are to :

A) Approve the proposed changes

B) Maintain the status-quo.

5.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1 The matters in this report are considered as having moderate significance in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and, accordingly an informed level of consultation was carried out with adjacent businesses and the Havelock North Business Association.

5.2 All businesses along the north-east side of Havelock Road are in full support of the proposal and have indicated that they have sufficient off-street parking spaces to cater for their staff and customers.

5.3 Except Flexi Fitness, most businesses along the south-west side of Havelock Road responded positively to the proposal as the parking is being retained on that side of Havelock Road.

5.4 Whilst the Flexi Fitness have dedicated off-street parking spaces they did not support removal of any parking spaces from Havelock Road.

6.0 ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

Option A

6.1 Option A will introduce on-street cycle lanes on this section of Havelock Road and is aligned with the Council’s approved CMP. It completes the link between the existing cycle facility on Havelock Road and Havelock North CBD.

6.2 While the proposal will result in the loss of five on-street car parks on the north eastern side of the road the removal of the kerb extension and remarking the road will gain an additional one parking space on the south-western side.

6.3 The preliminary estimate indicates that the removal of kerb extension will cost approximately $25,000. This is to be funded from the cycleway capital budget.

Option B

6.4 Option B will involve no changes to the existing layout and will require no additional cost. However Option B will result in lack of cycle facility along the study section of Havelock Road.

7.0 PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

7.1 Option A is recommended as the preferred option as it aligns with the Havelock Road/Heretaunga Street CMP and provides a continuous and safe cycle link to the Havelock North CBD. Furthermore, the initial consultation carried out with adjacent businesses indicates that the proposal, including removal of five on-street parking spaces has widespread support.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Strategic Transportation Engineer titled “Havelock North Cycle Lane” dated 16/11/2017 be received.

B) That the Committee resolve to approve Option A including the removal of five on-street car parks on the north-eastern side of Havelock Road between Karanema Drive and Porter Drive and the establishing on-street cycle lanes on both sides of the road.

With the reasons for this decision being that the objective of the decision will contribute to the performance of regulatory functions in a way that is efficient and effective and appropriate to present and future circumstances by:

i) Providing continuous and safe cycle facilities in relevant places within the district.

Attachments:

Havelock Road Cycleway Plan

TR-17-5-17-15

File Ref: 17/1110

REPORT TO: Planning and Regulatory Committee

MEETING DATE: Thursday 16 November 2017

FROM: Special Projects and Parking Management Assistant

Kevin Deacon

SUBJECT: Parking Controls

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Committee on a number of changes to parking controls throughout the District.

1.2 These proposals arise from requests and recommendations for improvements to existing parking controls.

1.4 The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is the provision of quality infrastructure and local public service

1.5 This report concludes by recommending ;

A) That the 3 hour time limit in the Lyndon Road Carpark be revoked and that the carpark have no time limit.

B) That the existing Clearway in Hastings Street South be replaced with a 5 minute time limit.

C) That a 15 minute time limit be established on Heretaunga Street East and on Windsor Avenue.

D) That the bus stop on Heretaunga Street West be revoked and one metered carpark space be established with a 60 minute time limit.

E) That a 5 minute time limit be established for all 5 carpark spaces on Warren Street South in front of the relocated fluoride free water tap.

F) That the 15 minute time limit on Karamu Road North be revoked and a 60 minute time limit be established.

2.0 BACKGROUND AND CURRENT SITUATION

2.1 From time to time it is necessary to introduce parking controls and or amend those that are already in place.

2.2 In order that the changes are legally established these need to be formally resolved by Council.

2.3 The following table provides the background and current situation relevant to the various changes being proposed:

2.4

Lyndon Road Carpark

The carpark currently has a 3 hour time limit.

An occupancy survey was undertaken for the carpark from 28 August to 1 September 2017

The survey confirmed observations that there was very little use being made of the carpark, with an average occupancy of only 9% over the 5 days of the survey.

In an attempt to improve the use of the carpark, Officers are recommending that the 3 hour time limit be revoked and that the carpark have no time limit established.

This will provide the opportunity for those working in the immediate area and or members of the public who are attending meetings, in nearby buildings, which might extend beyond the 3 hours to park for longer periods of time.

The fee of 50 cents per hour to park in the carpark will remain unchanged.

Hastings Street South

There is a section of parking, opposite Hastings Intermediate School entrance that has a Clearway in force between 8.15am and 9am and again between 2:45pm and 3.30pm on school days.

The area is used extensively by parents to drop off children in the mornings and to pick them up in the afternoon.

Legally the area should be free of vehicles during these times but the area is being used as a drop off and pick up zone. The controls need to reflect this.

Directly opposite the Clearway zone there is a section of parking that has a 5 minute time limit that applies between 8.15am and 9am, and again from 2.45 to 3.30pm on school days.

Officers are therefore recommending that the Clearway be revoked and that a similar 5 minute time limit, applying for these same times each school day, be established in its place so that parents can continue to use the area as they do currently without the concern of incurring an infringement notice.

Heretaunga Street East/ Windsor Avenue

Officers were approached by the owner of the 4 Square Superette, who advised there were instances of vehicles parking long term outside the shop frontage, and especially on Windsor Avenue where staff from a neighbouring organisation were parking all day, preventing customers from accessing the shop.

He advised that he had received complaints from some of his customers that due to the lack of parking they had at times chosen not to stop and make their purchases.

An occupancy survey was carried out from 27 July to 2 August 2017 which showed the overall average to be 30%.

This level of occupancy would not normally trigger a need for time limit controls, but 15 minute time limits are established in most similar shopping locations throughout the district.

Officers are therefore recommending that a 15 minute time limit be established on both the Superette’s Heretaunga Street and Windsor Avenue frontages to ensure that parking is readily available for their customers.

Heretaunga Street West

· While the construction of the new water pipeline took place along Heretaunga Street in recent months, Go Bus redirected their buses along Queen Street West. They subsequently found that this was a more convenient route and decided to retain it once the construction work was completed.

This has meant that the bus stop on the northern side of Heretaunga Street West, near the Nelson Street intersection, was no longer required and subsequently an additional carpark space has been established.

Furthermore with establishing the new Bunnings Trade Outlet in the immediate area, 2 carpark spaces were removed in this area of Heretaunga Street to enable new entrances to be established.

The recovery of one carpark means that there has only been a net loss of 1 space.

The carpark spaces in the immediate area are metered, with a 60 minute time limit. It is recommended that this new space also be metered and have a 60 minute time limit.

Warren Street South

· Moving the bus stop on Eastbourne Street East to its present location, between Karamu Road South and Warren Street South saw the removal of two 5 minute parking spaces that had been established for those collecting fluoride free water from the tap.

· Subsequently in March 2017 two parking spaces on Warren Street South, were converted to having a 5 minute time limit, although vehicles were still found to be parking on the Eastbourne Street bus stop and even driving across the grassed area to gain access to the water.

The tap has now been relocated to front onto Warren Street and in recent months the demand for the water appears to have increased substantially and this has in turn created a demand for parking in the spaces close to the taps.

Due to this increased demand, it is proposed that the remaining 3 carpark spaces, that have a 60 minute time limit, be converted to having a 5 minute time limit to provide ready access to the water taps.

Karamu Road North

· Karamu Road has recently been refurbished and all existing parking controls have been reinstated.

· However there is a small section of parking that has a 15 minute time limit that was previously established to provide regular turnover of the carpark spaces for customers accessing a plumbing retail outlet that operated next to the carpark area, fronting Karamu Road.

That building is now occupied by Jetts fitness gym and their clients require a longer period of time while undertaking their workout in the gym.

The parking along that section of Karamu Road has a 60 minute time limit and it is proposed to establish the same time limit for the area that currently has the 15 minute time limit.

3.0 OPTIONS

3.1 The options available to Council are to:

A) Approve the changes being proposed

B) Not approve all or some of the changes being proposed.

4.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

4.1 The matters in this report are not significant in terms of Council’s Significance Policy

4.2 Lyndon Road Carpark

While the carpark has businesses in the surrounding area, it was deemed that no consultation was necessary, given the current low level of occupancy.

4.3 Hastings Street South

Because the area of parking is used primarily by the parents of children who attend the Hastings Intermediate School, contact was made with the school office and they confirmed that establishing the 5 minute time limit would better reflect the current use being made of the carparks.

4.4 Heretaunga Street East/Windsor Avenue

The request for the time limit has come from the shop owner and because there are no other businesses in the immediate area, no other consultation has been undertaken.

4.5 Heretaunga Street West

Establishing an additional carpark space in this section of Heretaunga Street West, as a result of the removal of the bus stop, is a practical use of the vacated space and it was deemed that no consultation with those businesses in the immediate area was required.

4.6 Warren Street South

Because the section of parking being proposed to be changed to a 5 minute time limit has previously been observed as having a low occupancy level and given that there is a good supply of longer term on-street parking readily available for the businesses in the area, no consultation has been undertaken.

4.7 Karamu Road North

The request to have the 15 minute time limit, in the small section of parking, to be amended to a 60 minute time limit has come from the owner of the building that houses the fitness gym and he has confirmed that this length of time would be suitable for the gym’s clients.

Because there are no other businesses in the area likely to be affected by the change no other consultation has been undertaken.

5.0 ASSESSMENT AND PREFERRED OPTIONS

5.1 Lyndon Road Carpark

Officers support the carpark having no time limit.

By removing the time limit it is hoped that it will encourage those working in the immediate area to make use of the off street parking given that there is a high demand for all day parking on the streets in the surrounding area of the carpark and to date the 3 hour time limit has precluded those people from being able to make use of it.

5.2 Hastings Street South

Officers support the removal of the Clearway and establishing the 5 minute time limit parking area for the specific times in the morning and afternoon.

This will enable parents to make use of the carparks to drop off and pick up children from school, yet allow visitors to the school or neighbouring residents to make use of the spaces during the day.

These controls also replicate those that are in place around most school entrances in the district.

5.3 Heretaunga Street East/ Windsor Avenue

While the occupancy survey indicated that parking controls were not really required, it has been the practice to have time limits in front of similar outlets throughout the district and therefore Officers support establishing the time limit, not only to ensure access for the public to the Superette but also to provide a common standard to control parking outside retail outlets of this type.

5.4 Heretaunga Street West

Officer’s support creating the carpark space. Not only is it a practical option but it also reduces the loss of 2 carparks generated by the newly created entrances for the Bunnings Trade facility down to just one.

5.5 Warren Street South

Officer’s support establishing a 5 minute time limit for all 5 carparks that front the recently relocated fluoride free water taps on Warren Street South.

Given the noticeable increase in the number of people accessing the water, ensuring a regular and rapid turnover of the carpark spaces will assist the public to gain ready access to the taps and make it easier for them to carry their containers back to their vehicles.

5.6 Karamu Road North

Officers support the request to have the section of 15 minute parking changed to have a 60 minute time limit.

The use of the adjacent building has changed since the original introduction of the 15 minute time limit.

The time limits for the rest of that section of Karamu Road North has a 60 minute time limit and it is therefore practical to have the same controls for the length of the street.

It will also be of benefit for those clients visiting the fitness gym, which now occupies the building alongside the parking area, providing them with longer term parking close to the gym.

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Special Projects and Parking Management Assistant titled “Parking Controls” dated 16/11/2017 be received.

B) That the Council resolve pursuant to Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016, that the 3 hour time limit applying to the public parking section of the Lyndon Road Carpark be revoked

C) That the Council resolve pursuant to clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016 that the public parking section of the Lyndon Road Carpark be resolved to have no time limit and that the 50 cents per hour parking fee remain unchanged.

D) That the Council resolve pursuant to Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016, that the section of Clearway on the eastern side of Hastings Street South, commencing at a point approximately 41.0 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Akina Street and extending in a southerly direction for approximately 25 metres be revoked.

E) That the Council resolve pursuant to clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016 that 4 carpark spaces on the eastern side of Hastings Street South, commencing at a point approximately 41 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Akina Street and extending in a southerly direction for approximately 25 metres be resolved to have a 5 minute time limit between 8.15am to 9am and between 2.45pm to 3.30pm on school days.

F) That the Council resolve pursuant to clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016 that 2 carpark spaces on the northern side of Heretaunga Street East, commencing at a point approximately 8.6 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Windsor Avenue and extending in a westerly direction for approximately 15 metres be resolved to have a 15 minute time limit.

G) That the Council resolve pursuant to clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016 that 3 carpark spaces on the western side of Windsor Avenue, commencing at a point approximately 16.5 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Heretaunga Street East and extending in a northerly direction for approximately 15.8 metres be resolved to have a 15 minute time limit.

H) That the Council resolve pursuant to Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016, that all parking controls on the northern side of Heretaunga Street West, commencing at a point approximately 48.8 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Nelson Street and extending in a westerly direction for 66.2 metres be revoked.

I) That the Council resolve pursuant to clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016 that 7 carpark spaces on the northern side of Heretaunga Street West, commencing at a point approximately 59.2 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Nelson Street and extending in a westerly direction for approximately 55.8 metres be resolved to have a 60 minute time limit and be controlled by parking meters.

J) That the Council resolve pursuant to Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016, that all parking controls on the western side of Warren Street South, commencing at a point approximately 8.8 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Eastbourne Street East and extending in a southerly direction for approximately 21.5 metres be revoked.

K) That the Council resolve pursuant to clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016 that 5 carpark spaces on the western side of Warren Street South, commencing at a point approximately 8.8 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Eastbourne Street East and extending in a southerly direction for approximately 21.5 metres be resolved to have a 5 minute time limit.

L) That the Council resolve pursuant to Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016, that the 15 minute time limit parking controls for 2 carpark spaces on the eastern side of Karamu Road North, commencing at a point approximately 11.6 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Ellison Road and extending in a southerly direction for approximately 15 metres be revoked.

M) That the Council resolve pursuant to clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016 that 2 carpark spaces on the eastern side of Karamu Road North commencing at a point approximately 11.6 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Ellison Road and extending in a southerly direction for approximately 15 metres be resolved to have a 60 minute time limit.

i) Providing parking spaces in relevant places within the district that are safe and readily available to motorists.

Attachments:

1	Removing time limits Lyndon Road Carpark	REG-22-03-12-17-387
2	Clearway Hastings Street South	REG-22-03-12-17-388
3	Heretaunga Street East 4 Square Superette	REG-22-03-12-17-389
4	Heretaunga Street West parking controls	REG-22-03-12-17-390
5	Warren Street P5 time limit	REG-22-03-12-17-391
6	Karamu Road North P60 time limit	REG-22-03-12-17-392

File Ref: 17/865

REPORT TO: Planning and Regulatory Committee

MEETING DATE: Thursday 16 November 2017

FROM: Community Safety Manager

John Payne

SUBJECT: Roaming Dog Procedure

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the roaming dog procedure used by Hastings District Council and to seek feedback and recommendations on any changes or modifications.

1.2 This issue arises from concerns about roaming dogs in Flaxmere and Councils ability to control the situation using the current procedures. Councillor Poulain has asked staff to investigate the issue and report to Council.

1.3 Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.4 This report concludes by seeking feedback from Council on recommended change, modification or otherwise to the procedures.

2.0 CURRENT SITUATION

2.1 In 2008 Hastings District Council introduced tougher dog policy and procedures in response to a problem involving uncontrolled, unregistered and attacking dogs in the district. The programme had a number of objectives:

· Ensuring owners of dangerous and menacing dogs comply with their obligations

· Reducing the number of roaming dogs through increased patrolling

· Using the increased fees to target recidivist offenders

· Achieving a level of self-funding from offenders

· Reducing the number of dog attacks

2.2 The strategy proved effective at reducing the number of uncontrolled dogs from the streets. However, with 12,600 known dogs in the district roaming will always be an issue. In addition, lower socio economic areas generate more anti-social issues such as noise complaints, graffiti, truancy, crime, unregistered and roaming dogs.

2.3 The current roaming dog procedure has been developed to be fair but firm, balancing a mix of education and enforcement with an aim to target recidivist offenders and change people’s attitudes. However, the issues are not always black and white and sometimes flexibility is needed.

2.4 There have been targeted patrols in Flaxmere as this is one of the areas where there is regular feedback from the community. Council encourages this feedback because it identifies areas in the district where staff should concentrate their efforts.

2.5 With respect to dogs that are roaming which are currently ‘at large’ an officer will respond to a complaint 24 hours per day, 7 days per week if any of the following apply:

· The complainant has restrained the dog

· The call is during daylight hours and the dog is still at large

· The dog is displaying any element of aggression

· The dog is causing a traffic hazard

· There is more than one dog

· There is more than one caller

· The caller phones in twice

· The dog is dragging a chain or other restraint

· The dog is in a high public profile area (City centre, sports field, beach, school, etc.)

· The dog is in the vicinity of stock

· The breed is of high public interest

· Any other situation where the officer feels there is a potential for escalation

2.5 The success rate is 70/30. Thirty percent of the time no dog is found. A roaming dog at night is hard to locate and even harder to catch. When there is more than one dog, pack behaviour is more likely and therefore the potential for stock worrying or group attacks on people are much greater.

2.6 If a dog has been restrained by the complainant or the officer catches it, the dog will be returned to the owner without incurring a fee if ALL the following points are met:

· The dog is currently registered

· The dog has not been impounded or returned home in the last 12 months

· The dog is not classified ‘dangerous’ or ‘menacing’

· The owner (or someone suitable) is at home to take custody of the dog

2.7 If any of the above points are not met the dog will be impounded and several fees may apply. (Impound fee, daily sustenance fees, penalty registration fee, microchip fee, possible dangerous or menacing dog infringement fee).

2.8 If the dog has not been restrained by the complainant or caught by the officer, increased ranging will be undertaken in the area as time permits and depending on the number of complaints.

2.9 During 2016/2017 staff received 1793 calls relating to roaming dogs of which 565 were after hours call outs. 1082 dogs were impounded.

2.10 With respect to dogs that were previously roaming (historical issue) the complainant is asked to provide details of the roaming offence:

· Time the dog was seen roaming

· Date the dog was seen roaming

· Where the dog is from

· How the complainant knows where the dog is from

· Any other information that will help identify the offending dog

2.11 Given that the information provided to Council has not been witnessed by staff it is considered ‘hearsay evidence’. Such evidence is inadmissible in Court unless presented by the actual witness who can testify and be cross examined on the facts.

2.12 Many of our customers do not want the offenders knowing their details and they are not prepared to give evidence in court, therefore we try to resolve the issue initially with education and warning.

2.13 First Complaint - A friendly letter is sent to the alleged offender bringing the matter to their attention. Educational material is enclosed and their file is noted as ‘First Roaming’ letter.

2.14 Second Complaint - A further letter is sent to the alleged offender, this time explaining their legal obligations and the potential penalties under the legislation. Their file is noted as ‘Second Roaming’ letter. This resolves the majority of complaints, however there are some people that do not comply no matter the process.

2.15 Third Complaint -The complainant is asked to provide evidence such as photographs or recordings if possible. Staff will increase ranging in the area. If the dog can be witnessed roaming by the officer this validates the complaint and the officer’s evidence is used rather than the complainants. This means an infringement notice can be issued based on the evidence provided by the officer and the complainant is not required to give evidence should the matter be defended.

In the meantime the alleged offender is sent a notice asking them to provide a written explanation.

· If they fail to respond (most do) an infringement notice is issued

· If they provide an explanation which is unacceptable an infringement notice is issued

· If the explanation is accepted their file is noted as ‘Final Warning’. Staff will concentrate on gathering evidence which doesn’t require a complainant (as above).

2.16 This procedure was developed under the three strikes principle, education, warning, enforcement, however it can be short circuited if the Officer witnesses the dog roaming at any stage through steps one to three.

3.0 OPTIONS

3.1 Option 1 - Status Quo, continue to recognise responsible owners and return dogs where the owner has a clean record and continue to use the three strikes principle.

3.2 Option 2 - Impound all dogs found at large, restrained by complainants or captured by staff and take enforcement action on the information provided by the complainant in the first or second instance.

4.0 ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

Option 1 allows Council to recognise responsible dog owners who may have simply made a mistake, ‘Responsible’ meaning they have a clean record. It also gives the officer the opportunity to educate the owner and suggest some controls, depending on whether or not the escape route can be determined. This allows for one off situations like dogs escaping during Guy Fawkes.

4.1 In addition, if the dog is impounded within the near future, the customer is much less agitated when claiming their dog from the dog pound because they appreciate they have been given a fair chance, which reduces the health and safety risk to staff. Staff have noticed a significant reduction in aggressive customers claiming their dogs since this procedure was introduced at the start of 2015.

4.2 The three strikes principle seems to be an accepted process supported by the Courts (educate, warn, enforce). Council has to be cautious how “hearsay” information is used as it may be inaccurate. This process resolves the majority of roaming dog complaints without the need for regulation.

4.3 The current procedures are endorsed by the Animal Welfare Advisory Group.

4.4 Option 2 would increase impound revenue and ensure everyone is treated the same despite having a good or bad record. This will impact on Council’s reputation as the taking a ‘hard line’ approach did.

4.5 The quicker an action progresses to prosecution the more likely the case is

defended. A prosecution will not be successful without the complainant testifying, which complainants are reluctant to do.

4.6 If this approach is of interest, staff recommend that Council consult with the

Animal Welfare Advisory Group before making a decision to implement it.

5.0 PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

5.1 Option 1 – it is fair but firm, balanced, flexible and appears to be publically acceptable. The number of attacks have been decreasing despite the dog population increasing, indicating that the current processes are working well.

6.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

This report is not significant in terms of Council’s Significance Policy. There is no requirement to consult with the public on this matter as it is internal operational procedure.

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Community Safety Manager titled “Roaming Dog Procedure” dated 16/11/2017 be received.

B) That Council supports the current “roaming dog” procedures with no modifications.

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

File Ref: 17/1007

REPORT TO: Planning and Regulatory Committee

MEETING DATE: Thursday 16 November 2017

FROM: Senior Environmental Planner Policy (Special Projects)

Anna Sanders

SUBJECT: Proposed Plan Appeals and Proposed Iona Rezoning Update

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to update/inform the Committee about the appeals on the Proposed District Plan.

1.2 The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.3 The purpose of this report relevant to the purpose of Local Government is the performance of a regulatory function through the provision of a District Plan which will help to create an attractive and healthy environment for people, which promote the best use of natural resources and which is responsive to community needs. This report concludes by recommending that this report be received for information purposes.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 A total of 47 appeals were received to the Proposed Hastings District Plan. This includes a later appeal by Golden Oaks as this hearing was held by Commissioners after the others were heard by the Hearings Committee. It also includes appeals on later Plan variations 1 (Omahu), 2 (Irongate) and 3 (Howard Street).

2.2 The appeals process is entirely managed by the Environment Court. The Council is automatically a party to the proceedings and must be available to attend any hearing to discuss or clarify matters in the hearing report/s, give evidence to the Court about its planning report and any other relevant information. Council staff will be required to act as witnesses and technical advisers. For each appeal, careful consideration is given to who are the best staff, consultants and/or independent experts needed for each case.

2.3 It is an expectation of the Court that Council have legal representation for all appeals. Council provided the first of its reporting memorandums to the Court in December 2015 and has provided further reports approximately every eight weeks’ since.

2.4 The Court has an expectation that all appeals will involve mediation (where early resolution is not achieved) and memorandums and consent orders signed where an agreement can be reached. Mediation was facilitated by the Environment Court who appointed an independent commissioner to mediate appeals. Where agreement is not reached, the mediation process is useful in refining the issues before any Environment Court hearing. There is a court expectation that a number of appeals be resolved through this process rather than ending up at a hearing.

2.5 Mediation on all appeals has largely concluded, with Council staff involved in approximately 7.5 weeks of mediation. Recently, two days of mediation were held on the Irongate Variation and Te Aute Holdings JV Limited appeals which were pending the variation process and decision on the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy respectively. The remaining appeals requiring mediation is Bourke a residential rezoning in Havelock North, which is pending the completion of further investigations by the appellant and Howard Street once expert caucusing is completed on a stomwater solution.

2.6 Mediation on the Federated Farmers of New Zealand appeal as it relates to Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) has also not yet occurred between parties, with this portion of their appeal placed on hold by the Environment Court. This is due to the scheduling of a High Court hearing which is considered directly relevant to this appeal. The Environment Court issued a decision in Federated Farmers of New Zealand v Northland Regional Council [2015] NZEnvC 159 which confirmed that there is jurisdiction for GMOs to be regulated in Resource Management planning documents. This decision is being challenged by Federated Farmers of New Zealand because the question of whether GMOs should be managed with under the Resource Management Act 1991 as opposed to whether they can be so managed (the latter having already been confirmed) needs to be determined.

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 Appended to this report as Attachment 1 is an appeals tracking document which shows all appeals and where they are at in the appeals process. Included are several tables, broken down into the following categories: matters for which mediation has been held but all matters are not yet resolved (including where they are at in the process); on hold appeals and finally resolved appeals.

3.2 To date 35 appeals have been resolved, either through withdrawal, consent orders which have been lodged by parties and signed off by the Environment Court or through pending consent documents. 8 appeals have been placed on hold by the Environment Court, and are due to the:

· subject land being included in the Irongate Variation. The Irongate Variation was adopted by Council at its meeting on 23 March 2017. A joint appeal was received from Navilluso Holdings, Tumu Timbers, Carrfields Investments and M Walmsley (ENV-2017-WLG-000046). Mediation occurred on this appeal in late September and consent documents have been filed with the Environment Court. It is the intention that the earlier Irongate appeals be withdrawn once the consent order is issued by the Environment Court on the variation.

· as a result of a Council resolution on August 8 2017 an application was lodged with the Environment Minister to adopt a Streamlined Planning Process (SPP) for the rezoning of land at Iona. The benefits of adopting a Streamlined Planning Process versus the standard planning process to rezone this land (by way of Plan Variation under the Resource Management Act 1991) were outlined in a Council Workshop on July 18 2017. While no decision has yet been received from the Minister on the SPP application, structure plan and plan variation work continues.

Council staff prepared and released a draft Structure Plan in August of this year for public comment. The draft Structure Plan incorporated the design elements worked on by the Iona Working Group with specialist input from Isthmus Group (landscape and urban design consultants). Comments received on the draft Structure Plan are being used to shape the Structure Plan which will be incorporated as part of the Plan Variation.

There remains an issue around stormwater management which has been identified through the modelling process. Stormwater management options need further investigation with the landowners engineering representatives involved in this process. Due to the technical nature of these investigations and that no decision has been received by the Minister on the SPP application, the notification date for the plan variation is not yet known;

· structure planning work is carried out at Brookvale by the appellant in consultation with Council staff (Bourke appeal). Mediation will resume once the structure planning work has been completed; and

· due to matters that do not involve Council.

3.3 Two appeals have draft consent documents prepared, but discussions are continuing around their final content or are awaiting signatures. One appeal is set down for an Environment Court hearing with an early 2018 date yet to be set. If hearings are needed on remaining outstanding appeals these will be on refined matters.

3.4 It is anticipated that further appeals update reports will be provided early next year, once Environment Court hearings have been held.

3.5 Changes required to the Proposed Plan as a result of signed consent orders will be incorporated into E-Plan (online version of the District Plan) and for later adoption as part of the new Operative District Plan.

3.6 Council is required under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) to have in place a District Plan. The District Plan has been prepared following an extensive consultation process which has been carried out in accordance with the RMA. Consultation on the draft Structure Plan for Iona has occurred, through individual and neighbourhood meetings and a community open day with an opportunity to provide feedback. Notification of this plan change will occur in accordance with any direction issued under the Streamlined Planning Application lodged or if the regular Schedule 1 process is to be adopted, a decision on its notification will be brought to Council.

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Senior Environmental Planner Policy (Special Projects) titled “Proposed Plan Appeals and Proposed Iona Rezoning Update” dated 16/11/2017 be received.

Attachments:

Regulatory Operations - Environmental Planning - Administration - Appeals Update Table to the Planning and Regulatory Commitee Meeting November 2017

REG-10-8-17-897

File Ref: 17/1088

REPORT TO: Planning and Regulatory Committee

MEETING DATE: Thursday 16 November 2017

FROM: Team Leader Environmental Policy

Megan Gaffaney

SUBJECT: Plan Variation - Inner City Residential

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Planning and Regulatory Committee to prepare a Variation to the Proposed Hastings District Plan to further enable inner city residential living within the Hastings city centre.

1.2 This proposal arises as a request from the Council’s Economic Development team who are leading the revitalisation work for the city centre.

1.4 The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is the provision of good quality local public services which meet the current and future needs of the community by contributing toward establishing a vibrant and fun Hastings City Centre

1.5 This report concludes by recommending that a Variation to the Proposed Hastings District Plan be commenced during the 2017/2018 year.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 Hastings, along with other provincial towns and cities faces challenges arising from changing retail trends. Changes which create questions about the changing functions of provincial city centres. Council has responded to this by developing a strategy and action plans to assist with transforming Hastings city centre.

One of the key objectives of the Hastings City Centre Strategy (Strategy) is to provide opportunities for inner city living. The Strategy states that the benefits are that:

‘it may bring returns to retailers and enterprise (due to the higher density of people in close proximity), improve vibrancy, reduce transport pressures and congestion, provide housing choice (for professionals, retirees, small families), including the opportunity for affordable and retirement housing, while reducing pressure on the natural environment and our productive soil resource.’

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 The Hastings CBD is zoned Central Commercial and provides for Residential Activities above ground floor on sites with a Designated Retail Frontage as a Permitted Activity (see Attachment 1). If outside the Designated Retail Frontage a non complying resource consent is required. In addition, there are rules in the Plan that may contribute making the conversion of commercial buildings to residential use more difficult to achieve, including the requirement for balconies, on-site car parking and a minimum floor area of 50m².

3.2 In addition, the district plan provides for Comprehensive Residential Development and Mixed Use Development in the CBD, both of which are subject to resource consent, but at the lower status of Restricted Discretionary Non Notified. These types of development account for high density, larger scale development.

3.3 This Plan matter was brought to the attention of Councillors at a CBD workshop in August this year. Councillors indicated at the workshop their support to amend the Plan provisions to encourage inner city living.

3.4 These matters need to be worked through a Variation process to achieve the most appropriate outcome for the City.

4.0 OPTIONS

4.1 Essentially there are two options, the first being to undertake a variation to the Plan as discussed above, or, to leave the Plan as it is.

5.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1 This proposal is significant in terms of Council’s Significance & Engagement Policy and consultation will be undertaken under the terms of the Resource Management Act 1991.

6.0 ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

6.1 The options are discussed below:

Option 1 – Undertake a Variation to the Plan

The benefit of undertaking a variation is that it provides an opportunity to explore options to facilitate the development of inner city residential living in the Central Commercial zone. A disadvantage of this is that by reason of it being a consultative process of appeal and delaying the time that the Plan becomes Operative.

This variation is unlikely to require significant external resources and the primary cost will be staff resource. The cost of a parking study should it be required for the consideration of a parking exemption can be accommodated within the Environmental Policy budget.

Option 2 – Status Quo – Do nothing

The benefit of leaving the Plan unchanged is that the risk of delaying the timeframe to making the Plan Operative is avoided. The disadvantage is that developers and landowners will be subject to the resource consent process when seeking to develop inner city residential in the Central Commercial zone, unless sites are in the Designated Retail Frontage area.

7.0 PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

7.1 Option 1, to undertake a Variation is the preferred because allows the opportunity to address the issues of around inner city residential in the central city. Should the proposed changes be made operative, subject to the RMA section 32 and consultation processes, the changes may contribute the positive transformation of Hastings city centre.

7.2 The risk of extending the time frame to which the Proposed Plan becomes operative is not significant. In addition there are other variations proposed in the near future which could have a similar effect on timeframes to making the Plan operative.

7.3 The risk to Council of this option is assessed as low.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Team Leader Environmental Policy titled “Plan Variation - Inner City Residential” dated 16/11/2017 be received.

B) That a Variation to the Proposed Hastings District Plan to address inner city residential living be approved as a priority workstream for the Environmental Policy team.

With the reasons for this decision being that the objective of the decision will contribute to meeting the current and future needs of communities for performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

i) Enabling inner city residential living in the Hastings Central Commercial zone and meet the objective of the Hastings City Centre Strategy to provide opportunities for inner city living.

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

File Ref: 17/1094

REPORT TO: Planning and Regulatory Committee

MEETING DATE: Thursday 16 November 2017

FROM: Environmental Policy Manager

Rowan Wallis

SUBJECT: Environmental Policy Workstream

1.0 SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to inform the Committee on the Workstreams of the Environmental Policy Section, to allow consideration to be given to priorities when new policy issues arise.

1.1 This issue arises from the need to be aware of future policy matters being brought to the Council by the Policy team and the possible changes that will be made to the District Plan.

1.2 The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost–effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.3 The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is in the performance of regulatory functions by providing responsive Council planning services.

1.4 This report concludes by recommending that the information be received.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 Previously the Committee has been kept abreast of the issues that the Environmental Policy Team has been working on to allow the committee to consider whether there should be any change to the priorities that have been established.

2.2 The Appeal process on the Proposed District Plan is now nearing completion with most appeals settled. There is one appeal set down for Hearing by the Environment Court early next year. There is one other appeal that is dependent upon the further work being done by the appellant and the only other outstanding appeal is in relation to the GMO issue.

2.3 In 2016 the Council instructed the Policy team to notify three variations to the Proposed District Plan to bring forward rezoning proposals to provide for additional industrial and residential land. The Industrial rezonings at Omahu and Irongate both attracted appeals that have now been mediated. The Howard Street Variation has an appeal which is currently being mediated.

2.3 With the completion of the Variations and the resolution of the appeals on the Proposed District Plan close to being achieved it is timely to put forward the workstream for the Environmental Policy Team moving forward. This should be considered in the context of the intention to undertake a rolling review of the district plan, rather than complete it in ‘one hit’ within the ten year timeframe.

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 While the majority of the appeals on the Proposed District Plan have been settled, as stated in paragraph 2.2 of this report there are two remaining which are dependent on other actions. These are ;

· the appeal from Mr Bourke on the rezoning of the Brookvale area. At the first round of mediation on this appeal it was agreed that it would be put on hold until the outcome of the submission on the review of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy was known and until a structure plan was completed by the appellant.

· the Federated Farmers appeal which is on hold awaiting the outcome of the High Court appeal on the Environment Court decision on the Northland GMO issue.

The Bourke submission to the HPUDS Review was accepted in full. This identifies the entire block of land bounded by Davidson, Brookvale, Romanes, Napier and Thompson Road as suitable for future greenfield development.

3.2 Projects being undertaken by other departments have identified some areas in the Proposed District Plan that require attention. An example is the work that is being done by the Economic Development Team to enliven the Central Commercial area of the City. One of the identified methods is to encourage people to live within the city centre. While the Proposed District Plan does provide for this as a permitted activity there are some standards that must be met that are currently seen as hindering such development. One of the obstacles is a rule that requires on-site carparking for each inner city dwelling unit and also provides for residential living in areas with designated retail frontage. There is a body of work required to look at how the plan might assist in incentivising inner city living. There is a separate item on this agenda seeking approval to proceed with the variation to amend the Proposed Plan to better provide for Inner City Living.

3.3 Other departmental workstreams that will involve the Policy team are those around issues of providing for the accommodation needs of the growing RSE Workforce and assisting in developing a Council Policy on Affordable Housing.

3.4 In addition to the changes that are required as a result of project work other changes to the Proposed District Plan have been identified as being required as a result of appeals on the Proposed District Plan. These include the need to provide better differentiation between the Light industrial zone performance standards and those of the general industrial zones, and the need for a better process for identifying and protecting wāhi taonga.

3.5 A number of small tidy up matters in the Proposed District Plan have been identified as a result of the Plan being used on a day to day basis. It is normal practice to undertake a variation to the Proposed Plan to tidy up these matters ahead of the Plan being made fully operative.

3.6 The following table summarises the workstream of the Environmental Policy Team

	Task	Suggested Priority
a.	Appeals on the Proposed District Plan and Irongate and Howard Variations	1
b.	Iona Variation	2
c.	Wāhi Taonga Project	5
d.	Changes to the Central Business District (Inner city living)	3
e.	Variation to tidy up matters in the Proposed Plan	4
f.	RSE Workers Accommodation Project	6
g.	Affordable Housing Policy	7
h	Variation to amend the Light Industrial Zone provisions	8

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Environmental Policy Manager titled “Environmental Policy Workstream” dated 16/11/2017 be received.

B) That consideration be given to the priorities outlined in the table in the report.

i) Setting priorities for the policy work that is required for the Council to meet its regulatory functions and deliver outcomes to the community in a timely manner.

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

Hastings District Council

Lyndon Road East, Hastings

Planning and Regulatory Committee – Terms of Reference