Agenda of Council Meeting - 31 January 2019

TRIM File No. CG-14-1-01132

HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL

COUNCIL MEETING

Thursday, 31 January 2019

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 Absence had previously been granted to Councillor Schollum

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, 6 December 2019, including minutes while the public were excluded.

(Previously circulated)

6. Naming of the new arterial link in Whakatū 5

7. Petition - Object to Ebbett Park being Sold 25

8. Parking Controls 27

9. Annual Risk Management Review 2018 31

10. Health & Safety Quarterly Report 61

11. Transfer of Local Purpose Reserve (Utility), State Highway 50, Maraekakaho 73

12. Changes to membership and Terms of Reference for the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Review Committee 79

13. Summary of Recommendations of the Hastings District Rural Community Board held on 17 December 2018 89

14. Updated 2019 Meeting Schedule Changes 91

15. Requests Received under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) Monthly Update 95

16. Monthly Financial Report - December 2018 99

17. Additional Business Items

18. Extraordinary Business Items

19. Recommendation to Exclude the Public from Item 20 109

20. Summary of Recommendations of the Omarunui Refuse Landfill Joint Committee meeting held 7 December 2018 while the Public were Excluded

File Ref: 19/28

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 31 January 2019

FROM: Pou Ahurea Matua - Principal Advisor: Relationships, Responsiveness and Heritage

Dr James Graham

Group Manager: Planning & Regulatory

John O'Shaughnessy

SUBJECT: Naming of the new arterial link in Whakatū

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek approval to name the new arterial route constructed between State Highway 2 North and Pākōwhai Road, as “Te Ara Kahikatea”.

1.2 Hastings District Council is responsible for naming (and renaming) roads within its boundaries, with final acceptance held by Land Information New Zealand (LINZ).

1.3 The physical construction of the new arterial is completed and from a number of perspectives such as emergency service direction, road legalisation and emergency reference, it is essential this new route is named.

1.4 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.

1.5 The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is to include Māori in the decision making processes of Council and to take into account the mana of mana whenua in the Whakatū Arterial Project Area.

1.6 This item was initially considered by Council on 6 December 2018 and was left to lie on the table to enable further consultation with local iwi.

1.6 This report concludes by recommending to Council that the new arterial be named “Te Ara Kahikatea”.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 The Whakatū Arterial project has involved significant mana whenua engagement from the Enquiry by Design phase and then through the regular Project Community Liaison Group. This matter of naming the new arterial was presented to Council’s Māori Joint Committee on 16 August 2017. However prior to this, Council’s former Strategic Advisor Culture & Heritage Officer sought input from Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated (NKII) Chairman Mr Ngahiwi Tomoana, to suggest possible names for the new arterial.

2.2 Further to those initial discussions it was decided that more broadly based consultation be undertaken with appropriate Māori interests with a view to determining a name acceptable to that community. The original suggestion of “Ahikā” by Mr Tomoana was included for consideration.

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 To facilitate this process Council engaged Mr Marei Apatu from Te Taiwhenua o Heretaunga (TTOH) on a contract basis.

Outlined below are whakaaro received on the naming issue:

· The expressway should not be named after a tipuna.

· Pākōwhai – dog park across the way and everyone knows this name. For the entire expressway.

· Mangateretere West Land Expressway – name of the block.

· Mangateretere Whakatū Expressway – can’t leave out Whakatū.

3.2 Following the initial whakaaro at a meeting of the Whakatū Arterial Project Group (held 25 October 2018) there was unanimous support for “Mangateretere Whakatū Expressway” as the name for the new road.

3.3 Subsequently approval was sought from Land Information New Zealand (LINZ). This name was not considered to meet LINZ policies. The Whakatū Arterial Project Group met again on 12 December 2018 and requested LINZ reconsider the name with the hyphen removed and using the road types of “Arterial” or “Expressway”. This further request was also declined however LINZ staff made some helpful suggestions around road types.

3.4 At a further meeting held on 9 January 2019 consensus was reached and there was unanimous support for “Te Ara Kahikatea” (first priority) and “Te Ara Whakarere” (second priority). A copy of the minutes of this meeting are included as Attachment 1.

3.5 Council again then sent both names to LINZ for their approval, and approval was obtained (a copy of this email is included as Attachment 2).

4.0 BACKGROUND TO NAME OPTIONS

Te Ara

4.1 It is becoming common practice now across Aotearoa New Zealand to use a Māori format road type with a Māori road name. Land Information New Zealand have in recent times considered and accepted several roads that use “Ara’ or Te Ara”’ (Māori for “path”) as the road type. For example, the Wellington waterfront was recently named Ara Moana and there are other names such as Te Ara Kawakahia and Ara Hereke on the Kapiti Coast. The nature of these roads is quite different, with Ara Moana being a primarily pedestrian pathway and Te Ara Kawakahia and Ara Hereke in Waikanae being residential roads. While “Ara” or “Te Ara” aren’t listed in Appendix B of the Standard, Land Information New Zealand have in conjunction with the Surveyor General’s Office started to consider “Ara” or “Te Ara” as options for road types. It is therefore quite fitting for this new road to have a wholly Māori name including the road type.

Te Ara Kahikatea

4.2 The name Kahikatea is significant for a number of reasons besides its primary existence as Aotearoa New Zealand’s tallest indigenous tree. Up until the late 19^th century when much of Heretaunga (modern day Hastings) was covered in swamps, these conditions favoured the Kahikatea, which grew prevalently across Heretaunga and in particular, in the area through which the arterial link traverses. The stand of forest known as Pakiaka or Pakiaka Bush, which lay between Napier and Lawn Roads was surrounded in swamps and was heavily populated with Kahikatea. The first European settlers to Heretaunga procured Kahikatea from Pakiaka to build their houses as settlement increased, development ensued, and Hastings grew.

4.3 Local cultural narratives give reference to the Kahikatea being an offspring of Tānemahuta and Hine – waoriki whose siblings were Matai, Rimu, Pukatea, Kauri and Tanekaha (conifers with small rough foliage). However, unlike its siblings, Tāne located Kahikatea to the wetlands and swampy marshes and gave it a shallow root system; thus requiring Kahikatea to adapt and grow forth by developing an underground buttressed root system. The large and great Kahikatea forests such as Pakiaka Bush were reminiscent of the Kahikatea grouping closely with other Kahikatea, intertwining their buttressed roots with each other for support in the unstable swampy ground. This underground root subsequently gained strength in this way to better support the large trees that the Kahikatea eventually matured in to, albeit in swampy wetlands.

4.4 The stability of this buttressed root system serves as a metaphor to encapsulate the essence of how the Whakatū Arterial Link Project has progressed. That is, there has been significant work behind the scenes between mana whenua, Hastings District Council and a number of other entities to maintain and strengthen the holistic integrity of the project. The name Kahikatea is therefore fitting and testament to the stability of the Whakatū Arterial link Project. For instance, that collaboration, co-construction and partnership that has manifest through notions of working ‘kanohi ki te kanohi, pakihiwi ki te pakihiwi – face to face, shoulder to shoulder’ is indicative of the Kahikatea’s buttressed root system.

Te Ara Whakarere

4.5 The name Whakarere has both a number of literal meanings as well as a figurative (contextual) meaning for this particular new road. From a literal perspective, the word whakarere is associated with a number of [different] meanings including that whakarere is an intensifier where Te Ara Whakarere would mean “the path of all paths”. However, whakarere also has contextual relevance too in that it takes in the names Whakatū and Mangateretere as significant places within the landscape, and that the new road ‘links’ together along the Karamū Stream (old Ngaruroro) that meanders and flows towards Pākōwhai and into the Ngaruroro (Clive River). Whakarere in this sense is associated with increasing the flow and or to ‘get things moving’; no doubt a key aim of the Whakatū Arterial Link.

5.0 ROAD NAMING POLICY

5.1 In accordance with HDC Road Naming policy, a name for the new arterial is required.

Note: Recent aerial photos of the constructed arterial are shown in Attachment 2

5.2 Arterial Name Suggestions

In this instance due to the process already undertaken by Mr Apatu, Council officers believe the appropriate approach is to take the name suggested from this process and consider it against the criteria of the road naming policy.

5.3 Councillor Road Name Suggestions

The Heretaunga ward Councillors (Councillors Rod Heaps (not in attendance), George Lyons, Ann Redstone) and the Chair of Works and Services Committee (Councillor Kevin Watkins) were asked for their input on the naming of the new arterial.

Following extensive discussions the parties mentioned above did not reach a consensus on the name for the new arterial.

5.4 History

Some of the background history of the land in this area is included as Attachment 3. This information is an extract from a report by NZ Infrastructure Services, May 2015.

5.5 Iwi Consultation (considered in section 3.0 of this report)

4.6 Approval Criteria

4.6.1 The Hastings District Council Road Naming Policy lists the following criteria for evaluation of the suitability of proposed road names:

· Cultural Significance

· Existing or common theme

· Significant feature

· Historical event or person, and

· Personal name for special services

In addition, in order to be accepted by Land Information New Zealand the road name will also have to fit with the criteria set out in the Australia / New Zealand Standard for Rural and Urban Addressing Standard.

4.6.2 Road Type

Section 11.1 of Council’s Road Naming policy states that The Australian/New Zealand Rural and Urban Addressing Standard (NZS 4819:2003) Appendix B contains a list of Road Types for New Zealand. The above standard has now been replaced by ‘AS/NZS 4819:2011’.

The suggested name “Te Ara Kahikatea” accurately reflects the scale, function and built form of the new road.

4.6.3 Evaluation of Proposed Names:

Section 4.4.5 of ASNZ2011 states that a road name “shall be easily pronounced and spelt, however, in the case of indigenous languages it is accepted that a traditional name which may appear at first to be complex will, over time, become familiar and easy to use within the community”.

In this case, it is my opinion that the proposed name “Te Ara Kahikatea” could not be considered to be difficult to spell.

Section 4.4.7 of ASNZ2011 states that there shall be no duplication of road names within the same locality, adjoining locality or local government area. The name “Te Ara Kahikatea” is not already used in our District.

Section 4.4.8 of ASNZ2011 sates that indigenous road names should be endorsed by the local indigenous community. In this case endorsement has been obtained and the proposed name originated from this community.

Section 4.4.10 of ASNZ2011 states the length of a name should be shorter, rather than longer, especially where the road itself is short. The proposed name “Te Ara Kahikatea” is not considered to be long.

Note that 4.4.9 of NZSS states that road names shall not consist of conjoined names of places along the route.

For these reasons the name has been referred to LINZ for confirmation of acceptability.

4.5.4 Cultural and Existing or Common Theme

The proposed name recognises indigenous local culture and this is the first instance in Hawke’s Bay where “Te Ara”, which means path, has been used.

4.5.5 Topographical Features

The proposed name from the consultation process does not follow a topographical feature.

4.5.6 Conclusion

Given the assessments above, it is recommended that the public road be named “Te Ara Kahikatea”.

6.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

6.1 The completion of construction of this project is significant from a capital works perspective having a value of a total project value of approximately $25.6m.

The naming aspect of this project in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy is not significant.

5.2 In terms of engagement, there has been significant engagement with the local Maori community.

7.0 ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS

7.1 The options are discussed below:

Option 1 - Te Ara Kahikatea

7.2 This option has been consulted with through mechanisms such as the Whakatū Arterial Project Working Group meeting and other engagements outlined in section 3.0 of this report. There is support for this name.

7.3 The financial implications of choosing a specific name have already been made allowance for in terms of road signage and legalisation costs.

Option 2 – Do Nothing

7.4 Council is required to consider the “Do Nothing” option as part of its decision making process. In this instance this option will not give effect to Council’s Road Naming policy or contribute to wayfinding in locality for the general public or industry users.

8.0 SUMMARY

8.1 Council has the option to choose an alternative option to those outlined in this report, however considering the process to date it is recommended that Council name the new road “Te Ara Kahikatea”.

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Pou Ahurea Matua - Principal Advisor: Relationships, Responsiveness and Heritage titled “Naming of the new arterial link in Whakatū” dated 31/01/2019 be received.

B) That Council resolve to name the new road between State Highway 2 and Pākōwhai Road as “Te Ara Kahikatea”.

With the reasons for this decision being that the objective of the decision will contribute to good quality local infrastructure in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

i) Providing the name Te Ara Kahikatea to this new road clearly resonates with a sense of place, a sense of history, and the empowerment of the wider community on a collaborative journey that has linked Council, mana whenua and other key stakeholders throughout the project including the enablement of both business’ and households to better access and travel throughout this area.

Attachments:

1	Whakatū-Mangateretere Working Group Minutes	CG-14-1-01134
2	Email from LINZ	CG-14-1-01130
3	Aerial Photos of new arterial link	CG-14-1-01131
4	Background history of land	CG-14-1-01084

File Ref: 19/20

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 31 January 2019

FROM: Parking Transportation Officer

Mel England

SUBJECT: Parking Controls

1.0 SUMMARY

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

1.2 These proposals arise from requests for new parking controls and an amendment to an existing control.

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 the provision of quality infrastructure and local public service.

1.4 This report concludes by recommending;

A) That a P5 minute time limit be established in the Southern Carpark to cover 3 carparks.

2.0 BACKGROUND

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 information provides the background and current situation relevant to the various changes being proposed:

Southern Carpark

2.4 The Hastings District Council was approached by Grey Power HB to establish P5 parking time limit outside of Paper Plus Hastings located in the Southern Carpark.

2.5 This request was submitted as the Post boxes and Post Office functions are now being carried out by Paper Plus Hastings. With the Southern car park having all day and parts 3 hour parking, there is nowhere to temporarily park vehicles to check post boxes.

2.6 An occupancy survey was carried out which showed the overall average to be 98%.

2.7 It is generally accepted as a national standard that if occupancy levels are in excess of 85% a motorist will normally have difficulty finding a carpark within close proximity to their destination.

2.8 Consultation was carried out with businesses nearby and there was no objections to the P5 parking proposal. See Attachment 1.

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.

P5 Southern Carpark

4.2 Three parking spaces proposed to have a 5 minute time limit, are directly outside of businesses for the requested controls to be established, consultation has been undertaken. The consulted businesses are in favour of introducing 5 minute time limit in the proposed area.

5.0 PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

Southern Car park P5 parking spaces

5.1 Officers and nearby businesses support the introduction of the time limit for the 3 carpark spaces.

5.2 This will help provide ready parking for customers, couriers and delivery vehicles wanting to access the Post Boxes and Post office functions now carried out by Paper Plus Hastings, and will ensure there is a regular turnover of the spaces.

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Parking Transportation Officer titled “Parking Controls” dated 31/01/2019 be received.

B) That Council resolve pursuant to Clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Consolidated Bylaw 2016, that 3 carpark spaces in Southern Carpark, be resolved to have a 5 minute time limit. (REG-22-03-12-19-446)

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

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

Attachments:

Southern Carpark Proposed P5 Parking

REG-22-03-12-19-446

File Ref: 19/44

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 31 January 2019

FROM: Risk and Corporate Services Manager

Regan Smith

District Customer Services Manager

Greg Brittin

SUBJECT: Annual Risk Management Review 2018

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Council to adopt the updated Hastings District Council Enterprise Risk Management Framework and revised Strategic Risk Register.

1.2 This issue arises from the requirement to undertaken an annual review of the Council’s Enterprise Risk Management Framework and Policy.

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 This report concludes by recommending that the Council adopt the updated Hastings District Council Risk Management Framework and Policy V3.4 (Attachment 1), and confirm the Council’s strategic risk register including Governance Risk dated 23 January 2019 (Attachment 2).

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 “All activities of an organisation involve risk. Organisations manage risk by anticipating, understanding and deciding whether to modify it.” (ISO 31000 Risk Management Principles and Guidelines). Risk management is a systematic and logical process to anticipate, understand and act to mitigate risks in order to avoid undesirable outcomes.

2.2 The HDC Enterprise Risk Management Policy and Framework provides guidance for implementation of effective risk management at strategic and operational levels within Council.

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 A review of the current risk framework and policy has been undertaken against the latest version of the ISO 31000 risk management standard. Feedback on the document has also be obtained through a Council risk workshop.

3.2 Based on this review and consultation the following changes have been incorporated in to the risk framework and policy;

· Hastings District Council added to document title.

· Architecture section added.

· Councillor roles & responsibilities clarified.

· Risk escalation requirements clarified.

· Risk principles updated to match ISO31000:2018

· Risk Appetite and Tolerance section updated.

· Risk Impact and matrix tables revised.

· Minor amendments to Risk Process, Analysis and Evaluation sections.

3.3 After extensive research and consultation, the details of Governance Risk were confirmed during the risk workshop on 15 November 2018.

3.4 The revised strategic risk register therefore includes Governance Risk and a one page summary (Attachment 3) for this risk is included for reference.

4.0 OPTIONS

4.1 Not adopt the updated HDC Enterprise Risk Management Framework and Policy, and revised Strategic Risk Register.

4.2 Adopt the HDC Enterprise Risk Management Framework and Policy (Attachment 1), and revised Strategic Risk Register (Attachment 2).

5.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1 While risk management is a significant administrative practice, the Risk Framework and Policy, and risk register are internal documents that do not trigger Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and no consultation is required.

6.0 ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

6.1 The updated risk policy and associated strategic risk register will help Council to implement effective risk management through clarified expectations and responsibilities, as well as defining strategic issues that must be managed to ensure intended outcomes are delivered.

6.2 Not adopting the proposed changes means council will continue to operate under the current policy. This defers implementation of the enhancements to the risk management practice that have been identified.

6.3 There are no direct financial implications of the decision.

7.0 PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

7.1 Adopt the HDC Enterprise Risk Management Framework and Policy, and revised Strategic Risk Register including Governance Risk dated 23 January 2019.

7.2 The policy and framework, and strategic risk register set a clear direction for council to follow, which supports achievement of strategic objectives.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Risk and Corporate Services Manager titled “Annual Risk Management Review 2018” dated 31/01/2019 be received.

B) Council adopt the updated HDC Enterprise Risk Management Framework and Policy Version 3.4, and revised Strategic Risk Register including Governance Risk dated 23 January 2019.

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 and local public services in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

i) Providing a robust framework that promotes effective and efficient core business processes through comprehensive risk management practices.

Attachments:

1	Hastings District Council Enterprise Risk Management Policy and Framework V3.4 for Council meeting 31 January 2019	PMD-03-81-19-168
2	HDC Strategic Risk Register and Commentary	PMD-03-81-19-171
3	Governance Strategic Risk One Page Summary	PMD-03-81-19-169

File Ref: 19/13

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 31 January 2019

FROM: Senior Projects Engineer

Steve Cave

SUBJECT: Transfer of Local Purpose Reserve (Utility), State Highway 50, Maraekakaho

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from Council authorising the Chief Executive to take all steps necessary to transfer a Council-owned Local Purpose Reserve (Utility), hereon referred to as “the Reserve”, of 556m², described as Lot 4 DP 11536, on State Highway 50 in Maraekakaho, to Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC) for a public work, being Soil Conservation and Rivers Control purposes.

1.2 This request arises from an approach to Hastings District Council (HDC) from HBRC regarding the need to secure long-term river management access to the Ngaruroro River in the Maraekakaho area.

1.3 This report concludes by identifying this particular section of land as being surplus to HDC requirements and recommending that the Chief Executive be authorised to take all practical steps necessary to transfer the Reserve to HBRC for Soil Conservation and Rivers Control purposes for a fair and reasonable price based on the 2016 rating valuation for this land of $25,000.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 HBRC has management and control responsibilities for rivers within the Hawke’s Bay region which includes the Ngaruroro River. The Hawke’s Bay Regional Resource Management Plan, (HBRRMP), along with Local Government Act and Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Act provides the legislative context for this responsibility. The HBRRMP Plan Objective OBJ45 is ‘The maintenance or enhancement of the natural and physical resources, and use and values, of the beds of rivers and lakes within the region as a whole.’

2.2 The management and control of the three main Heretaunga Plains Rivers (Ngaruroro, Tutaekuri and Tukituki) form part of the Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme. Activities including maintenance of river edge protection and berm maintenance, channel maintenance activities such as beach raking and shingle extraction, along with spraying and mowing activities are undertaken. These activities ensure a consistent level of service is maintained for the Scheme.

2.3 Access to these rivers for river management and control purposes are provided for at strategic locations and this includes an access to the Ngaruroro River at Maraekakaho.

2.4 As part of a suite of river management activities HBRC administers shingle extraction activities at various locations on the Ngaruroro River, including the Maraekakaho area.

2.5 Current access to the Ngaruroro at Maraekakaho is from Kereru Road through an unsealed legal road approximately 675 metres long. This access is also used by the general public to access the Ngaruroro River. There is a further 1.1 kilometre section of river access from the legal road to the river, which also crosses a section of private land.

2.6 HBRC desires a separate vehicular access to the Ngaruroro River for river management purposes from State Highway 50. The objectives of the new access are to separate these activities from the general public access to the Ngaruroro River off Kereru Rd and to provide a more direct route to SH50 than the existing alignment of 1.775 kilometres.

2.7 While HBRC has been negotiating with a private landowner in this area to acquire a Right of Way easement for access, this proposal with HDC provides for more long term certainty and security for access for river management activities and provides separation from the publically accessible areas of the river. Discussions have been held with the adjoining landowner to this proposal who has indicated support for the proposed initiative.

2.8 HBRC has identified an alignment that accomplishes their objectives (see attached). This proposed route passes through the Hastings District Council owned Reserve to access SH50.

2.9 The Reserve has an area of 556 square metres (0.0556 hectares) and is legally described as Lot 4 DP 11536. The Reserve, originally classified as a “Utility Reserve”, was vested in the Hawke’s Bay County Council on the deposit of DP 11536 in April 1967. The Reserve was reclassified as a Local Purpose Reserve through the enactment of the Reserves Act 1977. Reasons for the original “Utility Reserve” status for local authority activities are unknown.

2.10 The last rating valuation for the Reserve is dated 1 August 2016 and the capital value was assessed at $25,000.00.

2.11 HBRC has advised HDC that they would like to obtain this Council owned reserve, for a public work (in terms of the Public Works Act 1981) being the legal and physical access to and from the Ngaruroro River.

2.12 With this access and ownership over the Reserve (including the inherent accretion claim rights), HBRC could construct a straight-line access from State Highway 50 to the Ngaruroro River, including the shingle extraction site currently used by Russell Roads Ltd.

2.13 The new access would meet HBRC objectives by:

· being separate from the general public Ngaruroro River access off Kereru Rd,

· being located on publicly owned land,

· having a straight alignment, and

· having a length of 470 lineal metres, compared with the existing 1,775 lineal metres access.

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 The Reserve is an unused section of land physically indistinguishable from the adjoining land which is covered in willow trees and owned by HDC.

3.2 The proposal to transfer the Reserve to HBRC has been reviewed by relevant HDC staff including the HDC Parks and Property Manager and General Counsel. Council has no current or foreseeable future use for the Utility Reserve and no complications are expected through transferral of the Utility Reserve to HBRC.

4.0 OPTIONS

4.1 The three options available are:

4.2 Option A – Do nothing.

4.3 Option B – Sell the land to HBRC.

4.4 Option C – Grant a Right of Way Easement to HBRC.

5.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1 The Public Works Act 1981 have provisions that allow sale and transfer of land to another Crown or Territorial Local Authority.

5.2 Under the Public Works Act 1981 the offer-back provisions of section 40 of the Public Works Act do not apply if the property is required by a Crown or Territorial Local Authority for another public work.

6.0 ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

6.1 Option A – Do nothing.

6.2 If Council does nothing, access for river management activities, including shingle extraction, will continue to be carried out through the existing access from Kereru Road, which is also used for public access to the river. Competing demands and compatibility issues are ongoing in this area. River maintenance activities, including shingle extraction, are necessary in this area as part of maintaining the Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme.

6.3 Option B – Sell the land to HBRC for a fair and reasonable price using the 2016 rating valuation of $25,000 as the basis for price negotiations and on the understanding that HBRC will cover all reasonable legal and survey costs to facilitate the transaction.

6.4 This will allow HBRC to construct a new access with no private landowner interests and continue to provide their obligation of river control to ensure scheme and flood control standards are maintained. The proposed access is 1.2 km’s from the existing Kereru Road access.

6.5 Option C – Grant a Right of Way Easement to HBRC.

6.6 The benefits are the same as Option B, with an increased set up cost, and a much smaller compensation settlement. In terms of Public Works Act 1981 principles, Council should dispose of land it no longer requires for a public work.

7.0 PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

7.1 Option B. Sell the land to HBRC.

7.2 As Council doesn’t require the land (the Reserve) for any public purpose it can be sold and transferred to another administering body. There is no reason for Council to hold land for which it has no purpose. The land will assist HBRC to fulfil its obligations under the LGA, RMA and Soil Conservation and Rivers Control act to maintain and enhance rivers within the region.

7.3 HBRC have confirmed that the land is required for another public work and agree to the proposal to sell and transfer the land via the Public Works Act for a fair and reasonable price based on the 2016 rating valuation of $25,000.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Senior Projects Engineer titled “Transfer of Local Purpose Reserve (Utility), State Highway 50, Maraekakaho” dated 31/01/2019 be received.

B) That the Chief Executive be authorised to take all practical steps necessary to transfer the Reserve to Hawke’s Bay Regional Council for a fair and reasonable price based on the 2016 rating valuation for this land of $25,000.

· Assisting Hawke’s Bay Regional Council to fulfil its obligations under their Regional Resource Management Plan to maintain and enhance rivers within the region, promoting sustainable use of land and water resources and providing for community resilience to hazards and shocks.

Attachments:

Utility Reserve Maraekakaho Plan

53943#0029

File Ref: 18/1107

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 31 January 2019

FROM: Manager: Democracy and Governance Services

Jackie Evans

SUBJECT: Changes to membership and Terms of Reference for the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Review Committee

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from Council to amend the terms of reference and membership of both the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee following recent changes.

1.2 This issue arises following:-

· the resignation of Peter Kay as elected representative of the Maraekakaho Subdivision of the Rural Community Board, and

· the successful completion of the Making Good Decisions Foundation Course and certification of Councillor Wendy Schollum.

1.3 This report concludes by recommending that the terms of reference be amended to enable Cr Wendy Schollum to be appointed as an additional member of the Hearings Committee and Peter Kay to be made an external appointee to ensure independent rural representation on both the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 The membership of the Hearings Committee was approved following the last triennial election in November 2016. The composition of the Hearings Committee is such to enable any three members to hear and determine matters where a formal hearing is required under the provisions of a number of Acts.

2.2 The membership of the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee was confirmed by Council on 24 May 2018 with a quorum being a minimum of any three members. This committee was established to hear and determine matters where a formal hearing is required under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991.

2.3 All members of both committees must have attended the Making Good Decisions Programme foundation course and passed an assessment and received a certificate valid for 3 years. There is a requirement to refresh training every 5 years after that, to retain accreditation.

2.4 It is important to have a pool of accredited elected members to enable sufficient capacity to form a quorum of independent members for each committee free from potential conflicts of interest and the perception of bias for the determination of resource consents and other regulatory matters. It is equally important that the membership of these Committees has representation from all areas of the District, thus the requirement of a member of the Rural Community Board to be included in the membership of the existing terms of reference for both committees.

3.0 CURRENT SITUATION

3.1 In 2018 Councillor Wendy Schollum was trained and certified on the Making Good Decisions Foundation Course. It would be sensible to create another place on the Committee so that she can gain experience and apply her learning.

3.2 At the Council meeting on 24 May 2018, Councillor Schollum had been appointed to the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee following her election to Council.

3.3 Mr Peter Kay has resigned from the Rural Community Board and therefore is no longer a member of the Hearings Committee or of the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee as he was the Rural Community Board representative. Mr Kay is a longstanding and very experienced member of these Hearings Committees. He is also certified, and apart from Mr Mick Lester who has a chairing endorsement and is employed as a Hearings Commissioner throughout New Zealand, there are no other qualified members on the Rural Community Board. Up until his resignation Mr Kay was a member of the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee and is keen to continue his membership if possible.

3.4 It is therefore recommended to amend the respective Terms of Reference to accommodate an additional member of the Hearings Committee and to enable Mr Kay to continue as an externally appointed member of that Committee and the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee, rather than requiring a representative of the Rural Community Board.

3.5 This will ensure the Hearings Committee retains resilience and a full complement of trained members up until the triennial elections in 2019.

3.6 With the inclusion of Mr Kay as an externally appointed member, the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee will also retain its resilience but will still have one vacancy in its complement of trained members up until the triennial elections in 2019.

3.7 Within the relevant legislation, there is provision for committees to have non-elected appointed members to committees and subcommittees. The Local Government Act 2002 Schedule 7 Section 31 (3) states:-

The members of a committee or subcommittee may, but need not be, elected members of the local authority, and a local authority or committee may appoint to a committee or subcommittee a person who is not a member of the local authority or committee, if, in the opinion of the local authority, that person has the skills, attributes, or knowledge that will assist the work of a committee or subcommittee.

4.0 OPTIONS

4.1 Option 1 – To amend the membership and terms of reference as outlined above.

4.2 Option 2 – To retain status quo and a Rural Community Board representative vacancy on the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee.

5.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1 The appointment of members to the Hearings Committee or the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee does not trigger the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy

6.0 PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

6.1 It is recommended to amend the terms of reference and membership of the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee to enable Councillor Schollum and Mr Peter Kay to be members of those Committees for the reasons outlined above.

6.2 There are no financial implications.

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Manager: Democracy and Governance Services titled “Changes to membership and Terms of Reference for the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Review Committee” dated 31/01/2019 be received.

B) That the Terms of Reference for the Hearings Committee (CG-14-1-00572) be amended as follows:

Membership

Chairman appointed by the Council from the membership of:-

6 councillors

1 externally appointed member with relevant qualifications and experience

C) That the Terms of Reference for the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee (CG-14-29-0001) be amended as follows:

Membership

Chairman of the Hearings Committee

3 members appointed by the Council

1 member appointed by the Council from the HDC: Maori Joint Committee not being a councillor (a vacancy currently exists)

1 externally appointed member with relevant qualifications and experience

D) That Councillor Wendy Schollum be appointed as member of the Hearings Committee.

E) That Mr Peter Kay be appointed as an external member of both the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee.

F) That the Hastings District Council Committees and Rural Community Board Delegations Register (CG-08-9-18-291) be accordingly amended to include the amendment of the Terms of Reference for the Hearings Committee and the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee.

Attachments:

1	Proposed amendments to the Hearings Committee Terms of Reference	CG-14-1-00572
2	Proposed amendments to the Hastings District Plan Hearings Committee Terms of Reference	CG-14-29-00001

File Ref: 18/1308

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 31 January 2019

FROM: Manager, Democracy and Governance Services

Jackie Evans

SUBJECT: Updated 2019 Meeting Schedule Changes

1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this report is to consider amendments to the schedule of Council and Committee Meetings for the 2019 Meeting Calendar which was adopted by Council 6 December 2018.

1.2 This report recommends that the 2019 Meeting Schedule as amended below be adopted.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 The Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, Clause 19 states:

(4) A local authority must hold meetings at the times and places that it appoints”.

(5) If a local authority adopts a schedule of meetings-

a) The schedule-

i) may cover any future period that the local authority considers appropriate, and

ii) may be amended

2.2 Although a local authority must hold the ordinary meetings appointed, it is competent for the authority at a meeting to amend the schedule of dates, times and number of meetings to enable the business of the Council to be managed in an effective way.

2.3 The following meetings are proposed to be included or amended in the 2019 meeting schedule:

Committee	Date	Time	Venue
Tenders	15 February (was 14 February)	9.00am	Landmarks Room
HDC: Maori Joint	6 March 2018 (was 27 February)	10.00am	Council Chamber
Community Grants	23 May 2019	9.00am	Council Chamber
Risk & Audit	17 June 2019 (was 24 June)	10.00am	Council Chamber
Risk & Audit	6 May 2019 (was 29 April)	10.00am	Council Chamber
Joint Councils Waste Project Steering	22 March 2019	9.00am	Council Chamber
Joint Councils Waste Project Steering	21 June 2019	9.00am	Council Chamber
Joint Councils Waste Project Steering	20 September 2019	9.00am	Council Chamber
Works and Services	16 May 2019 (was 20 June)	10.30am	Council Chamber
Reserve Management Plan (Raureka Park)	12 February 2019	10.00am (was 9.00am)	Council Chamber

2.4 Councillors will be kept informed of specific changes on a day to day basis through the centralised calendar system.

3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A) That the report of the Manager, Democracy and Governance Services titled “Updated 2019 Meeting Schedule Changes” dated 31/01/2019 be received.

B) That the 2019 Meeting Schedule be amended as follows:-

Committee	Date	Time	Venue
Tenders	15 February (was 14 February)	9.00am	Landmarks Room
HDC: Maori Joint	6 March 2018 (was 27 February)	10.00am	Council Chamber
Community Grants	23 May 2019	9.00am	Council Chamber
Risk & Audit	17 June 2019 (was 24 June)	10.00am	Council Chamber
Risk & Audit	6 May 2019 (was 29 April)	10.00am	Council Chamber
Joint Councils Waste Project Steering	22 March 2019	9.00am	Council Chamber
Joint Councils Waste Project Steering	21 June 2019	9.00am	Council Chamber
Joint Councils Waste Project Steering	20 September 2019	9.00am	Council Chamber
Works and Services	16 May 2019 (was 20 June)	10.30am	Council Chamber
Reserve Management Plan (Raureka Park)	12 February 2019	10.00am (was 9.00am)	Council Chamber

Attachments:

2019 meeting schedule with amendments

CG-14-1-01126

File Ref: 18/1267

REPORT TO: Council

MEETING DATE: Thursday 31 January 2019

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 November and December 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

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

o 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 31/01/2019 be received.

B) That the LGOIMA requests received in November and December 2018 as set out in Attachment 1 (IRB-2-01-18-1485) of the report in (A) above be noted.

Attachments:

Information Mgmt & Reporting - Information Requests - LGOIMA - LGOIMA Monthly Report to Council November/December 2018

IRB-2-01-18-1485

Hastings District Council

Lyndon Road East, Hastings