Agenda of Council Meeting

TRIM File No. CG-14-1-00897

HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL

COUNCIL MEETING

Thursday, 2 August 2018

VENUE:

Council Chamber

Ground Floor

Civic Administration Building

Lyndon Road East

Hastings

TIME:

1.00pm

A G E N D A

1. Prayer

2. Apologies & Leave of Absence

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

Leave of Absences had previously been granted to Councillor Redstone, Councillor Dixon and Councillor Nixon

3. Seal Register

4. Conflict of Interest

Members need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a Member of the Council and any private or other external interest they might have. This note is provided as a reminder to Members to scan the agenda and assess their own private interests and identify where they may have a pecuniary or other conflict of interest, or where there may be perceptions of conflict of interest.

If a Member feels they do have a conflict of interest, they should publicly declare that at the start of the relevant item of business and withdraw from participating in the meeting. If a Member thinks they may have a conflict of interest, they can seek advice from the General Counsel or the Democratic Support Manager (preferably before the meeting).

It is noted that while Members can seek advice and discuss these matters, the final decision as to whether a conflict exists rests with the member.

5. Confirmation of Minutes

Minutes of the Council Meeting held Thursday 12 July 2018, including minutes while the public were excluded.

(Previously circulated)

6. Hastings Boys High School - Pacifika group 5

7. Designation of Roading and Stormwater Service Corridor at Howard Street 7

8. Notification of Appointment of Independent Hearings Commissioner 77

9. Requests Received under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) Monthly Update 79

10. Additional Business Items

11. Extraordinary Business Items

12. Recommendation to Exclude the Public from Item 13 85

13. Emergency Management Office Project

File Ref: 18/587

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 2 August 2018

FROM: Environmental Planner (Policy)

Craig Scott

SUBJECT: Designation of Roading and Stormwater Service Corridor at Howard Street

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from Council to designate the internal road (including infrastructure services for water, wastewater and stormwater), and a separate stormwater corridor within the Howard Street Urban Development Area. Any designation would reflects the existing structure plan. The designation application has been attached as Attachment 1.

1.2 This reason for the designation arises from the need to achieve a timely and consistent approach to purchasing and constructing the internal infrastructure to allow development to proceed. A designation will ensure that all property owners can achieve access to services in a timely manner by allowing Council to purchase required land to construct roading, internal services and land for stormwater detention and overland flow purposes.

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 to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure

1.5 This report concludes by recommending that Council should proceed with notification of the Designation for a Roading Corridor, which will incorporate servicing for water, wastewater and stormwater, and a separate stormwater corridor on 214 Havelock Road, being PT LOT 2 DP 8367 BLK IV TE MATA SD.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 The Howard Street Urban Residential Rezoning was notified under Variation 3 to the Hasting’s Proposed District Plan. It was notified on the 13^th July 2016, the hearing was held on 16 December 2016 and a Decision on Submissions was released on 25 March 2017.

2.2 There was one appeal received on the Plan Change. The appeal did not challenge the objective of the Plan Change in rezoning the land from Plains to Residential, but rather sought that the location and size of Stormwater Detention Area be reduced or amended, and any subsequent relocation be made to the road adjoining the detention area upon any amendments. The resolution of the appeal is yet to be achieved.

2.3 While mediation has been ongoing, Council has also been approached by a number of landowners to discuss development opportunities once the appeal has been resolved.

2.4 It has become clear to Council through these discussions, that the best way to achieve full service connections from each of these landowners, would be to designate the internal road corridor (and subsequent 3 water services within the corridor) and an additional 10m wide stormwater corridor along the land contained within 214 Havelock Road, PT LOT 2 DP 8367 BLK IV TE MATA SD. This would give Council the opportunity to construct the entire internal road when necessary, and the associated services that will be placed within the corridor, thus allowing each property to connect to downstream services.

2.5 Council’s previous position for the Howard St Development Area was to work with landowners to negotiate the timing and construction of the internal road as part of their individual developments, but in accordance with the structure plan. The primary issue with this approach is that some property owners at the far end of the development will be restricted from development until the internal service road reaches them. These landowners are some of the most eager to develop.

2.6 However to ensure a fair and equitable approach to development of the Howard Street area, all landowners should have the ability to connect to services at the earliest possible time, rather than having to wait for development and construction to come to them.

2.7 There are 3 water servicing solutions for the remainder of properties within the development area. Although 1245 Howard Street may require some form of pumping solution to ensure stormwater and wastewater can be directed to Howard Street.

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 A request to proceed with the development of a Designation Application was brought to the Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting on 10 May 2018. It was recommended to proceed with the application and at this time to be reported back for this Council meeting.

3.2 The recommendation then was to progress with the designation of the roading corridor, the stormwater corridor and the stormwater detention area. However upon advice from Council’s Legal Counsel, it was considered that we should not proceed with the designation of the stormwater detention area. Therefore it is recommended that Council should only proceed with designating the roading corridor and separate stormwater corridor.

3.3 Therefore an application for Notice of Requirement has been drafted on the basis that only the road corridor and stormwater corridor should be designated. (Excluding the stormwater detention area). This application has been attached as Attachment 1.

4.0 OPTIONS

4.1 Option 1: Do not designate and continue with the current situation. This would involve a piecemeal approach where land is developed from the Riverslea Drain side of the structure plan in a lineal fashion to the Parkvale School side. This approach would involve landowners constructing the internal loop road individually as part of their development, but still in accordance with the structure plan. Where landowners adjoin, or a landowner wishes to go ahead of an adjoining site, negotiations would occur.

4.2 Option 2: Do not designate but Council enters a willing buyer/willing seller approach. This would involve the purchase of land for the roading corridor and stormwater areas by Council in line with the structure plan. Council would construct the road and services.

4.3 Option 3: Council designates the internal road corridor, and the stormwater corridor. This would ensure Council has a consistent approach and can purchase and develop land in a timely and efficient manner under the Public Works Act.

5.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1 It is considered that designating the internal roading and servicing for the Howard Street Urban Development Area will trigger Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The designation process and land purchasing will require a reasonable level of Council investment. It will also affect all landowners within the development area.

5.2 It is considered that the Notice of Requirement Process under the Resource Management Act will ensure that the public is appropriately informed and consulted, and will have full opportunity to participate in the decision process.

5.3 The Notice of Requirement assessment will require all affected parties to be notified of the proposed designation, and will give directly affected and wider public the opportunity to submit and participate through the hearing and decision process.

5.4 Furthermore, landowners will be informed and participate in negotiation for the land required for the designation.

6.0 ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

6.1 Option 1:

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Reduces holding costs on council as we do not construct road.

· Reduces Development Contributions for developers as cost of road not included.

· May provide greater flexibility for landowner consultation without Council involvement.

· Removes the Notice of Requirement process which may be appealed.

· Potential for individual land owner to hold development up for upstream sites.

· Relies on key landowners for development of the block to commence.

· Potential for landowners to request higher purchasing prices if the realise they are key for development occurring.

· Difficulties in ensuring a consistent approach to internal road location.

· Savings in development contributions offset by the need to construct the road themselves.

6.2 Option 2:

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Negates the need for the Notice of Requirement process which could be appealed.

· Reduces landowner disagreements holding up development.

· Allows for a fairer consistent approach to development, ensuring upstream properties have same opportunities as those near the Riverslea Drain, as road and services can all be constructed at once.

· Greater difficulties in terms of land purchasing as the designation has not locked the roading corridor and stormwater areas in place.

· Additional costs of Council purchasing and constructing roading corridor.

· Purchasing could not occur under the Public Works Act.

· Individual land owner could still hold up negotiations with Council, or request high price for land if they realise they are key to development of the area.

6.3 Option 3:

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Will provide Council and Landowners with the greatest level of certainty regarding the establishment of internal services to ensure the probability of the rezoning.

· Reduces landowner disagreements holding up development.

· Removes the ability of individual land owners holding up development.

· Will ensure the fairest and timeliest development of land for dwellings in the area, by ensuring all property owners can develop at once, rather than having to wait for downstream owners.

· Notice of Requirement Process could take 9 months, and may still be appealed.

· Additional costs of preparing Notice of Requirement Application and going through a notified process.

· Additional costs of Council purchasing and constructing roading and services corridor.

· Risk of high holding costs if demand for development slows in the future.

7.0 PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

7.1 Option 3.

Given the recognised community demand for more residential greenfield sites, and the readiness of some property owners within the Howard Street block to commence development it is considered that designating the internal road corridor and stormwater corridor is the preferred option. While going through the Notice of Requirement process will take some time upfront, it will ensure that land can be developed more efficiently over the coming years, will prevent individual property owners from holding up development, and will ensure equal opportunities for residential development across the Howard Street Urban Development Area.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Environmental Planner (Policy) titled “Designation of Roading and Stormwater Service Corridor at Howard Street” dated 2/08/2018 be received.

B) That the Council resolve to proceed with the designation of the following infrastructure components of the Howard Street Urban Development Area; The internal road corridor including the infrastructure that sits within the road, and the stormwater corridor over PT LOT 2 DP 8367 BLK IV TE MATA SD as shown by the Designation Plans as shown as part of the attached plan: Attachment 1 ‘Notice Of Requirement for Howard Street’.

C) That the Acting Chief Executive applies for the Notice of Requirement Application

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 (good quality local infrastructure) in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

i. Providing a greater level of certainty that properties in the Howard Street Development Area can be serviced in a timely and efficient manner, that is fair to all property owners within the development area.

Attachments:

1	Notice of requirement Howard Street Roading corridor - July 2018	ENV-9-19-3-18-179
2	Schedule 1 - Land Requirement Drawings for Howard Street Designation	ENV-9-19-3-18-180
3	Schedule 2 - Land Areas to be taken for Designation	ENV-9-19-3-18-181

Notice of requirement Howard Street Roading corridor - July 2018

Attachment 1

PDF Creator

File Ref: 18/645

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 2 August 2018

FROM: Environmental Consents Manager

Murray Arnold

SUBJECT: Notification of Appointment of Independent Hearings Commissioner

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to advise the Council of the appointment of Jenny Hudson, an independent Hearing Commissioner, to hear and decide on a resource consent application lodged by T&J Maurenbrecher and D&A Evans to subdivide the sites at 52 and 80 Raymond Road Haumoana:

1.2 Pursuant to Section 34A(1) of the Resource Management Act 1991, authority to appoint, pursuant to Section 100A and 34A(1) of the Act, Hearings Commissioner(s) to hear and decide an application has been delegated to the Chief Executive, the Group Manager: Planning and Regulatory Services, the Environmental Consents Manager, and the Environmental Policy Manager. This delegation is subject to the requirements that appointed Hearings Commissioners shall hold a valid certificate of accreditation under section 39A of the Act, and that the exercise of this authority will be reported to the next available meeting of Council.

1.3 This report sets out the reasons for the exercise of delegated authority to appoint Jenny Hudson as independent commissioner to hear and decide on the application to subdivide 52 and 80 Raymond Road Haumoana.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 a) T&J Maurenbrecher and D&A Evans applied for resource consent to subdivide their plains production zone sites at 52 and 80 Raymond Road. The application was limited notified and 2 submissions were received.

b) The hearing was scheduled to be heard by the Council’s Hearings Committee on 8 June 2018.

c) At the start of the hearing the applicants counsel raised a point of order and requested that an independent commissioner be appointed to hear the application.

d) The request was made because the applicant had noted that two members of the hearing panel had been involved in decisions on submissions to the Proposed District Plan for rezoning these sites to Rural Residential, and were also on the hearing panel that made a recent decision in regard to a section 357 objection to a decision to decline consent for the subdivision of the adjoining site. Because of that the applicant believed there was a reasonable likelihood of bias on the part of the hearings panel members.

e) Although the Hearings Committee were of the opinion that the previous decisions did not create an issue in terms of their involvement in this hearing and that they would consider the application on its merits; however they agreed to abort the hearing and refer the matter to an independent hearings commissioner whose fees would be paid by the applicant in the usual way.

2.2 Jenny Hudson holds a valid certificate of accreditation under section 39A of the Act with the Chair endorsement.

3.0 ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

3.1 This matter has been delegated to staff who have exercised that delegation and are advising council of the appointment of Commissioners. This report completes the requirement set out in the delegation that Council is informed of the appointment. Further assessment of options is therefore not necessary for this report.

4.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

4.1 The issue of significance has been considered in terms of Council’s Significance Policy and in particular the thresholds and criteria contained within this policy. The decisions required in this report do not trigger any of the thresholds and are subject to Resource Management Act 1991 submissions and decision making processes.

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Environmental Consents Manager titled “Notice of Notification of Appointment of Independent Hearings Commissioner” dated 2 August 2018 be received.

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

File Ref: 18/696

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 2 August 2018

FROM: Democratic Support Manager

Jackie Evans

SUBJECT: Requests Received under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) Monthly Update

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to inform the Council of the number of requests under the local Government official Information Act (LGOIMA) 1987 received in June and July 2018.

1.2 This issue arises from the provision of accurate reporting information to enable effective governance

1.4 The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is to ensure that the Council is meeting its legislative obligations

1.5 This report concludes by recommending that the report be noted.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 The LGOIMA allows people to request official information held by local government agencies. It contains rules for how such requests should be handled, and provides a right to complain to the Ombudsman in certain situations. The LGOIMA also has provisions governing the conduct of meetings.

Principle of Availability

2.2 The principle of availability underpins the whole of the LGOIMA. The Act explicitly states that:

The question whether any official information is to be made available … shall be determined, except where this Act otherwise expressly requires, in accordance with the purposes of this Act and the principle that the information shall be made available unless there is good reason for withholding it.

Purpose of the Act

2.3 The key purposes of the LGOIMA are to:

· progressively increase the availability of official information held by agencies, and promote the open and public transaction of business at meetings, in order to:

o enable more effective public participation in decision making; and

o promote the accountability of members and officials;

and so enhance respect for the law and promote good local government; and

· protect official information and the deliberations of local authorities to the extent consistent with the public interest and the preservation of personal privacy.

2.4 City, district and regional councils, council controlled organisations and community boards are subject to LGOIMA and official information means any information held by an agency subject to the LGOIMA.

2.5 It is not limited to documentary material, and includes material held in any format such as:

· written documents, reports, memoranda, letters, notes, emails and draft documents;

· non-written documentary information, such as material stored on or generated by computers, including databases, video or tape recordings;

· information which is known to an agency, but which has not yet been recorded in writing or otherwise (including knowledge of a particular matter held by an officer, employee or member of an agency in their official capacity);

· documents and manuals which set out the policies, principles, rules or guidelines for decision making by an agency;

· the reasons for any decisions that have been made about a person.

2.6 It does not matter where the information originated, or where it is currently located, as long as it is held by the agency. For example, the information could have been created by a third party and sent to the agency. The information could be held in the memory of an employee of the agency.

What does a LGOIMA request look like?

2.7 There is no set way in which a request must be made. A LGOIMA request is made in any case when a person asks an agency for access to specified official information. In particular:

· a request can be made in any form and communicated by any means, including orally;

· the requester does not need to refer to the LGOIMA; and

· the request can be made to any person in the agency.

2.8 The Council deals with in excess of 14,000 service requests on average each month from written requests, telephone calls and face to face contact. The LGOIMA requests dealt with in this report are specific requests for information logged under formal LGOIMA procedure, which sometimes require collation of information from different sources and/or an assessment about the release of the information requested.

Key Timeframes

2.9 An agency must make a decision and communicate it to the requester ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ and no later than 20 working days after the day on which the request was received.

2.10 The agency’s primary legal obligation is to notify the requester of the decision on the request ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ and without undue delay. The reference to 20 working days is not the de facto goal but the maximum unless it is extended appropriately in accordance with the Act. Failure to comply with time limit may be the subject of a complaint to the ombudsman.

2.11 The Act provides for timeframes and extensions as there is a recognition that organisations have their own work programmes and that official information requests should not unduly interfere with that programme.

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 Council has requested that official information requests be notified via a monthly report.

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Democratic Support Manager titled “Requests Received under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) Monthly Update” dated 2/08/2018 be received.

B) That the LGOIMA requests received in June and July 2018 as set out in Attachment 1 (IRB-2-01-18-1356) of the report in (A) above be noted.

Attachments:

LGOIMA - Cumulative Monthly Report to Council - June/July 2018

IRB-2-01-18-1356

TRIM File No. CG-14-1-00897

HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL

Council MEETING

Thursday, 2 August 2018

RECOMMENDATION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

SECTION 48, LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL INFORMATION AND MEETINGS ACT 1987

THAT the public now be excluded from the following part of the meeting, namely:

13. Emergency Management Office Project

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

GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED

REASON FOR PASSING THIS RESOLUTION IN RELATION TO EACH MATTER, AND

PARTICULAR INTERESTS PROTECTED

GROUND(S) UNDER SECTION 48(1) FOR THE PASSING OF EACH RESOLUTION

13. Emergency Management Office Project

Section 7 (2) (b) (ii)

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely to unreasonably prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information.

Some information contained in the report is commercially sensitive.

Section 48(1)(a)(i)

Where the Local Authority is named or specified in the First Schedule to this Act under Section 6 or 7 (except Section 7(2)(f)(i)) of this Act.

Hastings District Council

Lyndon Road East, Hastings