Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council

Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Kaupapataka
Agenda

 

 

Te Rā Hui:
Meeting date:

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Wā:
Time:

1.00pm

Te Wāhi:
Venue:

Council Chamber

Ground Floor

Civic Administration Building

Lyndon Road East

Hastings

Te Hoapā:
Contact:

Democracy and Governance Services

P: 06 871 5000  |  E: democracy@hdc.govt.nz

Te Āpiha Matua:
Responsible Officer:

Group Manager: Strategy & Development - Craig Cameron

 


Strategy and Policy Committee – Terms of Reference

 

Fields of Activity

 

The purpose of the Strategy and Policy Committee is to develop all strategic, policy and planning frameworks for approval by Council.

 

Membership (Mayor and 14 Councillors)

 

·         Chair appointed by Council.

·         Deputy Chair appointed by Council.

·         1 Heretaunga Takoto Noa Māori Standing Committee Member appointed by Council.

·         Chair of the Rural Community Board appointed by Council.

 

Quorum – 8 members

 

Delegated Powers

1)         Authority to exercise all of Council’s powers, functions and authorities (except where prohibited by law or otherwise delegated to another committee) in relation to all matters detailed in this delegation.

2)            Authority to exercise all of Council’s powers, functions and authorities (except where prohibited by law) at any time when the Chief Executive certifies in a report that;

a)      the matter is of such urgency that it requires to be dealt with, or

b)      the matter is required to be dealt with, prior to the next ordinary meeting of the Council.

3)            Establish strategic direction to deliver Council Objectives and District Vision.

4)            Establish policies and guidelines for decision making to assist in achieving strategic outcomes.

5)            Establish levels of service across Council services in line with strategic goals and priorities.

6)            Receive and consider reports from Subcommittees.

7)            Develop draft bylaws for adoption by Council.

8)            Develop and recommend the financial and infrastructure strategies and budgets for the Long-Term Plan, Annual Plan and Annual Report.

9)            Consider and approve constitutions and any shareholder agreements for Council Controlled Organisations and other organisations that Council has an interest in.

10)          Develop the Rating Policy for recommendation to Council for adoption.

11)          Develop Funding Policies for recommendation to Council for adoption.

12)          Delegations of powers to sub-committee(s) if so established.

13)          Approve the purchase of and disposal of land (If included in the Long Term Plan).

14)          Making submissions on behalf of Council to proposals by other organisations/authorities (Local and Regional).

15)          Conversion of terminating leases to renewable leases and the settlement of terms except in the case of leases under the Reserves Act.


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council

Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Kaupapataka
Agenda

Mematanga:
Membership:

Koromatua

Chair: Councillor Bayden Barber

Ngā KaiKaunihera

Councillors: Alwyn Corban, Malcolm Dixon, Damon Harvey (Deputy Chair), Tania Kerr, Eileen Lawson, Simon Nixon, Henare O’Keefe, Peleti Oli, Ann Redstone, Wendy Schollum, Sophie Siers, GeraldineTravers and Kevin Watkins.

Mayor Sandra Hazlehurst

Hastings District Rural Community Board Chair appointee: Nick Dawson

Heretaunga Takoto Noa Māori Standing Committee appointee: Tania Eden

Tokamatua:
Quorum:

8 members

Apiha Matua
Officer Responsible:

Group Manager: Strategy & Development – Craig Cameron

Group Manager: Corporate – Bruce Allan

Strategy Manager – Lex Verhoeven

Principal Advisor: District Development – Mark Clews

Director of Strategic Projects, Key Account Services Council Investment Partnerships: Raoul Oosterkamp

 

Te Rōpū Manapori me te Kāwanatanga
Democracy & Governance Services:

Lynne Cox (Extn 5632)

 

 

 


Te Rārangi Take
Order of Business

1.0

Apologies – Ngā Whakapāhatanga

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

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

 

2.0

Conflict of Interest – He Ngākau Kōnatunatu

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 Manager: Democracy and Governance (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.

 

3.0

Confirmation of Minutes – Te Whakamana i Ngā Miniti

Minutes of the Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting held Tuesday 3 August 2021.

(Previously circulated)   

 

4.0

Chairperson's Update 

9

5.0

Homelessness in Hastings - A Discovery Study 

15

6.0

Havelock North - Business Improvement District 

23

7.0

Strategic Land Acquisition and Disposal Policy 

33

8.0

Napier Hastings Housing Capacity Assessment 2021 - National Policy Statement on Urban Development 

53

9.0

Eco District Strategic Overview 

79

10.0

District Development Strategic Overview 

81

11.0

Summary of Recommendations of the District Development Subcommittee meeting held 12 October 2021 

83

12.0

Report on Activity from the Great Communities Subcommittee 

85

13.0

Report on Activity from the District Development Subcommittee 

89

14.0

Report on Activity from the Eco District Subcommittee 

91

15.0

Report on Activity from the District Planning and Bylaws Subcommittee 

95

16.0

Minor Items – Ngā Take Iti

 

17.0

Urgent Items – Ngā Take Whakahihiri   

 

18.0

Recommendation to Exclude the Public from Item 19 

99

19.0

COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 

 

 

     


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Craig Cameron, Group Manager: Strategy and Development

Te Take:

Subject:

Chairperson's Update

        

 

1.0    Purpose  - Te Kaupapa Me Te Whakarāpopototanga

1.1       The Chairperson of the Strategy and Policy (S&P) Committee, Councillor Barber will provide an update on Council strategy and policy development since the previous meeting and confirm the ongoing direction for strategy and policy development. This is on the basis of his Chairperson’s Update.

 

1.2       Council has established 4 subcommittees (District Development, Eco District, Great Communities, and District Planning & Bylaws) to work with staff and stakeholders on behalf of the Committee to ensure the 8 Focus Areas in the Council Long Term Plan (LTP) are advanced in a well-co-ordinated, effective and efficient way.

 

1.3       The scope of activity under each subcommittee is wide and often overlapping with other subcommittee scopes of activity. The subcommittees are aggregating what have historically been at times disparate Council activities into interconnected collections of activities under one strategic umbrella. This should assist the Committee going forward to remain focused on Councils strategic priority outcomes whilst the subcommittees are busy on the Committee’s behalf working at a more detailed/delivery level. 

 

1.4       I take this opportunity to acknowledge the significant progress being made with vaccinations for the COVID 19 Pandemic. It is a strategic priority for our social, cultural and economic wellbeing outcomes to achieve at least a 90% full vaccination rate for our eligible population.

Council in collaboration with the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board and Te Taiwhenua O Heretaunga supported two very successful vaccination events at Splash Planet and in Camberley on ‘Super Saturday’ that took place on the 16th of October. 1,007 members of our community received a vaccination. 

 

2.0    Recommendations – Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Strategy & Policy Committee receives the report titled Chairperson's Update dated 2 November 2021.

 

 

3.0    Agenda

3.1       Homelessness in Hastings District

An independent study on Homelessness in Hastings has been completed. It is very concerning to see that based on the 2018 Census, Hastings has circa 1000 people living in deprived conditions and circa 57 people living without shelter. It is also concerning to see that the pre-cursor contributors to homelessness can include loss of income, domestic violence, loss of connection with whanau, mental illness, and substance abuse challenges.

It is pleasing to see the study has identified a series of recommendations where Council can partner, participate and contribute to improving the wellbeing of our fellow community members who are living in distress and consequently causing further distress to their circles of family and friends.

 

3.2       Havelock North Business Improvement District

The Havelock North Business Association (HNBA) is seeking to enter into a Business Improvement District (BID) relationship with Council and expand the catchment of commercial properties to pay the Havelock North targeted rate.

A BID would be a partnership with Council and the HNBA to deliver projects and services to benefit the Havelock North business community trading environment.

 

3.3       Strategic Land Acquisition and Disposal Policy

Staff are bringing this Policy to the Committee, as directed under a previous resolution. The Policy will provide a useful framework for Council to benchmark our decisions against, and help ensure our decision making is consistent, predictable, equitable and compliant with legislation.

The Policy will be a public document, so parties involved in land acquisition and disposal transactions have an opportunity to understand the necessity and rationale for Councils actions. These transactions can at times be understandably overshadowed by emotion and the fear of perceived missed opportunities to secure profit.

 

 

 

3.4       Napier and Hastings Housing Capacity Assessment 2021 – for The National Policy Statement on Urban Development

The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPSUD) requires Tier 2 councils, which includes, Hastings District, Napier City and Hawkes Bay Regional Councils (the Council’s), to undertake an assessment of the expected demand and supply of housing in their areas over the next 30 years.

The purpose of the housing assessment is to ensure Councils planning and infrastructure decisions enable at least sufficient development capacity to meet expected demand for housing and to assess the impact of our decisions on the affordability and competitiveness of the local housing market. This is a very complex, technical and substantial field of work. Officers have commissioned Barker & Associates to provide a summary paper on the study and provide recommendations for Councils consequential actions.

Our officers have also completed a summary note’s paper, where they discuss finding the ‘sweet spot’ in terms of land supply and new housing demand, acknowledging this is not an area of exact science, rather one of understanding & interpreting business information and  forecasting demand and supply drivers.

I encourage Councillors to read/study the summary paper and officer’s notes in particular.

Officers and consultants are now embarking on a similar capacity study to advise generally on the ‘sweet spot’ in respect of Commercial & Industrial Land.

The Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy (HPUDS), remains in force as our Forward Development Strategy, until such time as it is replaced by a Regional Spatial Strategy, potentially in 2-3 years’ time.

This Assessment was based on the Statistics New Zealand medium to high growth population projection. On this projection the headline conclusion for Hastings is that there is, on paper, likely to be sufficient capacity in total to meet the growth anticipated in the short to medium term, assuming that our Greenfield growth areas are delivered according to our current LTP programme.

Officers are however concerned that under these projected levels of growth a break in the continuity of Greenfield land supply may result over the early to middle part of the programme, particularly if pent up demand is added. This may put too much reliance on the market switching to intensification more rapidly and at a greater scale than originally anticipated, posing a potentially significant risk to housing supply and affordability if the market is too slow to respond. Officers are therefore suggesting work be done to enable a re-balancing of the programme to bring forward some Greenfield land supply earlier if needed.

Our officers are recommending a report is put to Council seeking funding for the Chief Executive to have discretion to commission planning works that can provide some agility in our future programme subject to ongoing demand and supply drivers.  We may need to consider bringing forward Brookvale Stages 2&3, Lyndhurst Stage 3 and Havelock Hills in our programme.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have copied the Officers graphic which summaries our overall situation well.

 

 

The Chief Executive is committing resource to generate and maintain the ‘Business Information’ Council needs to make our risk based investment decisions in respect of ‘Structure Planning’ and ‘Infrastructure Provision’. We should note that despite our efforts to ensure Council capacity to provide ongoing planning and public infrastructure provision services, there are ongoing constraints in consultancy services, trades and civil construction. Accordingly the ‘Market’ may struggle to continue to meet supply demands over the next 3-10 years in a timely manner.  

Council is only one link in the Commercial and Residential Service Delivery Chain that has challenges with securing sufficient resources and coping generally with demand for our services. Unlike other market participants, we generally have no discretion to turn away work, no matter the quality of the application or proposal.

In the long term (i.e. beyond 10 years), there is  uncertainty about our infrastructure capacity needed to support otherwise sufficient commercially feasible opportunities to meet growth demands, when combined with planned Greenfields developments included in HPUDS and our 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy. These infrastructural issues need to be addressed as part of Councils normal LTP and Thirty Year Infrastructure Strategy processes.

Under the NPSUD, Council is required to inform the ‘Minister of Housing’ of the projected deficiency and our Officers have a recommendation to this effect.

The Chief Executive has Officers working on our funding proposals to Government Infrastructure Funds seeking to secure  investment funds to help bridge the forecast gap between the escalation costs of infrastructure provision & increasing public service expectations and our ability to recover ‘whole of project life delivery’ costs from ‘Development Contributions’ payments.

At the time of writing, it is pleasing to note that Council has progressed through the ‘Expression of Interest’ phase to being invited for a ‘Request for Detailed Proposal’.

 

3.5       District Development Sub Committee and Eco District Subcommittee Strategic Overviews.

The District Development and Eco District Great Communities Subcommittees are presenting their Strategic Overview Documents. These Documents are ‘living documents’ that will continue to be updated over time to reflect our current and future context.

The Documents are tools to support effective delivery of the Subcommittees responsibilities. I’ve found that when you take the time to read these Documents and attend the Sub- Committee working meetings, you get a real insight into the scale and breadth of activity our staff and governance are overseeing and undertaking on a daily basis.

It is understandable, that with large items on the Council priority list such as;

·    Maori Wards and Representation Review,

·    3 Waters Strategic Changes,

·    Resource Management Legislation Reform,

·    Local Government Reform,

·    Housing Supply Crisis,

·    COVID 19 Pandemic and Containment Measures,

·    ETC.

We can underestimate the importance of the Chief Executive and his team and our Subcommittees ensuring our daily service delivery activities continue, as well as the work required to inform Council about how we embrace future challenges and opportunities.

So in anticipation of hearing the programme updates from our Subcommittee Chairs, I wish to express my appreciation for everything that is being delivered to contribute positively to the wellbeing outcomes for our community.

4.0    Conclusion

4.1       At a Strategic Level, I note that with our;

·    COVID19  Pandemic Response,

·    Historically High Consents Processing Demands,

·    Historically Ambitious Budgeted Capital Programme Delivery,

·    Extraordinary Supply Chain Constraints & Supplier Price Inflation,

·    Housing Supply Deficits,

·    Senior Housing Waiting Lists,

·    Homelessness,

·    Labour Shortages,

·    ETC.

We are contextually (in our adult lifetimes) in an extraordinary period of both adversity and opportunity. As we enter deliberations for the 2022/2023 Annual Plan, I note that as Governance we will have to more than ever before, apply ourselves to diligent/risk managed decision making as we rely heavily on the quality of information and interpretive advice provided by Officers.

I am pleased to see that the Chief Executive has commissioned a review of Council ‘Growth’ and ‘Business as Usual’ delivery capacity.  He will be coming to Council with options and recommendations for what he needs to lead the delivery of our Business as Usual programme and Council Response to Growth in accord with Councils Performance Standards and Values.

 

Ends

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Dennise Elers, Community Development Manager

Te Take:

Subject:

Homelessness in Hastings - A Discovery Study

        

1.0    Executive Summary – Te Kaupapa Me Te Whakarāpopototanga

1.1       The purpose of this report it to seek endorsement of the Homelessness in Hastings – A Discovery Study (the Study) (Attachment 1).

1.2       The Study is an action from “Kāinga Paneke, Kāinga Pānuku - Hastings Medium and Long Term Housing Strategy” which was endorsed by Council on the 11th February 2021.

1.3       This report contributes to the social wellbeing of our homeless whānau as stated in Section 10 of the Local Government Act and the achievement of the Council’s Community outcomes as set out in the Long Term Plan.

1.4       This report contributes to the purpose of local government by primarily promoting social wellbeing and more specifically through Council’s outcomes under our Great Communities Strategic Overview – Priority 1: Our communities are safe, vibrant and resilient.

1.5       Independent Consultant Kelly Richards, MHSc, Dip SW was commissioned by Council to undertake the Study and will attend the Committee meeting to present the Study and its findings.  A copy of the Study is attached.

1.6       The Study has been discussed with the Great Communities Subcommittee and will be presented to the Housing Governance Group on the 5th November; the Rural Community Board and the Heretaunga Takoto Noa Māori Standing Committee.

1.7       Study Scope

1.7.1   The scope of the study was to:

1.7.2   Understand the characteristics, needs, and causes of homelessness in the Hastings District.

1.7.3   Complete a stocktake of service providers in the Hastings District to understand what support is available to the homeless.

1.7.4   Understand the New Zealand Aotearoa Homelessness Action Plan 2020-2023 and how this links to the Hastings District.

1.8       Key Findings

1.9       The key findings of the Study were to understand the characteristics, needs and causes of homelessness, specifically in the Hastings District include:

1.9.1   On Census night 2018, 1,039 people in the Hastings District were identified as severely housing deprived, of which 57 were living without shelter.

1.9.2   Focus group participants identified a range of reasons why the homeless were living rough. Most identified loss of work (income), barriers to affordable housing, family violence, disconnection with whānau, mental health and substance abuse challenges.

1.9.3   Reports of homeless numbers in the Hastings Central Business District (CBD) varied, with most providers citing 20-30 on any given day. Alternatively, the Hastings Church reported larger numbers, with up to 50 accessing outreach services on a daily basis.

1.9.4   Providers reported the majority who live rough in the CBD are Māori males.

1.9.5   Council Parks and Security teams, and Recreational Services have seen an increase in people sleeping in cars at rural parks and reserves across the district.

1.9.6   Police and service providers report anti-social behaviour is predominately occurring within the CBD such as, drug and alcohol use and begging at fast food outlets.

1.10    Recommendations

1.10.1 The Study’s six recommendations that are aligned to the Aotearoa New Zealand Homelessness Action Plan framework are outlined below.

1.10.2 Prevention:

·    Councils form a Regional Taskforce with iwi partners, the homeless, and regional and local agencies concerned with homelessness to develop a regional homeless strategy.

1.10.3 Supply:

·    Continue through the Hastings Place Based Plan to identify social and community housing opportunities, such as prioritising housing procurement for the homeless.

1.10.4 Support:

·    Conduct research with the homeless to identify their views and perspectives of homelessness to better understand what they want.

·    Support a sector wide approach to drive collaboration to respond to the needs of the homeless.

·    Investigate the development and feasibility of an integrated community hub for homeless that provides wrap around support services which could include overnight accommodation.

1.10.5 System Enablers

·    Bring together a sector wide provider network to identify barriers and challenges in service delivery, with the aim of developing a common system of care to support the homeless.

 

2.0    Recommendations - Ngā Tūtohunga

A)        That the Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting receive the report titled “Homelessness in Hastings - a Discovery Study” dated 2 November 2021.

B)        That the Committee endorse the study “Homelessness in Hastings - A Discovery Study”.

C)         That the Committee approve the recommendations within the “Homelessness in Hastings - a Discovery Study”.

D)         Note that Council officers have submitted a budget bid to the Annual Plan process and are seeking external funding options.  Officers will progress with the cash neutral activities and activities that require further funding will follow the Annual Plan process.

 

 

3.0    Background – Te Horopaki

3.1       On the 11th February 2021 Council endorsed Kāinga Paneke, Kāinga Pānuku - Hastings Medium and Long Term Housing Strategy.

3.2       The Strategy has six Pou and 26 Actions managed in accordance with project management methodology with oversight and co-ordination led by Hastings District Council.

3.3       This Study relates to Work stream 1 “Social and Affordable Housing” action 1.8 “Council undertake a discovery on homeless people in the Hastings District to understand their characteristics, needs and causes of their homelessness.  Subject to the outcome of the discovery, determine any initiatives that can be taken to improve the housing situation of the homeless”.

3.4       Study Scope

3.4.1   The scope of the study was to:

·        Understand the characteristics, needs, and causes of homelessness in the Hastings District.

·        Complete a stock take of service providers in the Hastings District to understand what support is available to the homeless.

·        Understand the New Zealand Aotearoa Homelessness Action Plan 2020-2023 and how this links to the Hastings District.

3.4.2   Research involved stakeholder engagement with agencies, service providers and those who support the homeless through chance encounters.

3.4.3   The following identifies the groups and the method applied to collect the data.

3.4.4   Partner agencies from the Safer Hastings Coalition - organisations completed an online survey to identify which agencies deliver services directly to whānau pounamu via contractual obligations and/or charitable means and sought information on their service provision.

3.4.5   Māori/Iwi groups; government and non-government - meetings held with key organisations.

3.4.6   Organisations who have fortuitous or by chance encounters with whānau pounamu - focus groups were held to gather information on characteristics, needs, causes and aspirations and included a mapping exercise to identify behaviours and ephemeral movements across the region, anti-social behaviour, and rough sleeping.

3.4.7 The study’s recommendations are aligned to the Aotearoa New Zealand Homelessness Action Plan framework. This government strategy sets out the vision, guiding principles and action areas to reduce and prevent homelessness across the following work streams: prevention, supply, support, and system enablers.

4.0    Discussion – Te Matapakitanga

4.1       Methodology

4.1.1   A mixed method of quantitative and qualitative research has been used to identify the characteristics, needs, and causes of homelessness in the Hastings district. The study combines both approaches when presenting key points.

4.1.2   The study does not investigate beyond Hastings District Council’s boundaries, however it is important to note that Napier, Wairoa, and Central Hawke’s Bay as neighbouring Territorial Authorities (TAs) in the region are not exclusive of homelessness.

4.1.3   Research involved stakeholder engagement with agencies, service providers and those who support the homeless through chance encounters.

4.1.4   The following identifies the groups and the method applied to collect the data.

4.1.5   Partner agencies from the Safer Hastings Coalition - organisations completed an online survey to identify which agencies deliver services directly to whānau pounamu via contractual obligations and/or charitable means and sought information on their service provision.

4.1.6   Māori/Iwi groups; government and non-government - meetings held with key organisations

4.1.7   Organisations who have fortuitous or by chance encounters with whānau pounamu - focus groups were held to gather information on characteristics, needs, causes and aspirations and included a mapping exercise to identify behaviours and ephemeral movements across the region, anti-social behaviour, and rough sleeping.

4.2       Homelessness presents itself in different ways and contexts. The most common and visible are Homeless people who live in the open, eating, sleeping, and staying in public spaces. They are often subject to daily public scrutiny, condemnation and sometimes violence. Others are invisible and living in precarious housing conditions without basic services and security of tenure.

4.3       In 2019, Council joined with MHUD to lead a pilot for the government’s Hastings Place-Based housing initiative. The work programme aims to identify suitable housing solutions for individuals and communities. There is a significant pipeline of work underway to provide a mix of public housing, affordable housing, papakāinga and transitional housing for Hastings.

4.4       During the 2019 Covid-19 lockdown, the Hastings Welfare Response Plan identified homeless and rough sleepers as a high priority. Council took the lead to implement a coordinated approach to assist this vulnerable group, working with several partner agencies. Due to the urgency of the response required, a three-phase approach was adopted which saw rough sleepers supported to relocate to safe accommodation. These whānau pounamu continued to be supported through the Covid-19 alert levels.

4.5       Due to scope, the research did not include the participation of homeless people, therefore, future research needs to be undertaken with this population. Without the voice of those who are impacted it is difficult to understand the root cause and system failures which have led to their homelessness. Additionally, community perspectives were also outside the parameters of the study. As a result, the study is deemed low risk and does not require ethical approval by the New Zealand Health and Disability Ethics Committee.

4.6       The scope of the study was to:

·        Understand the characteristics, needs, and causes of homelessness in the Hastings District.

·        Complete a stock take of service providers in the Hastings District to understand what support is available to the homeless.

·        Understand the New Zealand Aotearoa Homelessness Action Plan 2020-2023 and how this links to the Hastings District

Key Findings

4.7       Characteristics, needs and causes of homelessness in Hastings District Council

4.7.1   The key findings of the Study to understand the characteristics, needs and causes of homelessness, specifically in the Hastings District include:

4.7.2   On Census night 2018, 1,039 people in the Hastings District were identified as severely housing deprived, of which 57 were living without shelter.

4.7.3   Focus group participants identified a range of reasons why the homeless were living rough. Most identified loss of work (income), barriers to affordable housing, family violence, disconnection with whānau, mental health and substance abuse challenges.

4.7.4   Reports of homeless numbers in the Hastings Central Business District (CBD) varied, with most providers citing 20-30 on any given day. Alternatively, the Hastings Church reported larger numbers, with up to 50 accessing outreach services on a daily basis.

4.7.5   Providers reported the majority who live rough in the CBD are Māori males.

4.7.6   Council Parks and Security teams, and Recreational Services have seen an increase in people sleeping in cars at rural parks and reserves across the district.

4.7.7   Police and service providers report anti-social behaviour is predominately occurring within the CBD such as, drug and alcohol use and begging at fast food outlets.

4.8       Support services available for the homeless in Hastings.

4.8.1   Of the 36 Safer Hastings Coalition partners who responded to the survey 50% provide support services to whānau pounamu, with the greatest provision being for food, clothing, and bedding.

4.8.2   Almost half of the organisations (47%) noted an increase in the demand for services such as, family harm support, access to healthcare, somewhere to stay and mental health and addiction support.

4.8.3   Service providers stated most referrals came from a range of government agencies and programmes such as Hawke’s Bay District Health Board (HBDHB), Community Housing Providers (CHP), Ministry of Social Development (MSD), and Police.

4.8.4   HBDHB mental health services report emergency housing is a challenge for mental health service users as their connections with housing services and accommodation is ad hoc. Thus suggesting a stronger connection with key agencies would better support the discharge process and a positive step forward.

4.8.5   Focus group participants commonly felt a lack of integration between agencies and expressed a sense of frustration as they are doing their best to support whānau pounamu.

4.8.6   Commonly service providers called for an effective safety net and a long-term solution backed by funding.

4.8.7   Focus group participants overwhelmingly agreed that a community hub that provided wrap around services and/or a shelter would better support whānau pounamu. Importantly, they believed accessible and consistent support services needed to be delivered by a specialist workforce.

4.8.8   Faith-based organisations are ready and willing to serve their communities and whānau pounamu. Established partnerships are already working together to provide a number of services, with a readiness to do more with some asking, ‘just show us how we can do more’. They have identified challenges such as compliance and regulatory factors, and the need to build capacity of individuals or groups within their congregation.

4.8.9   Focus groups participants were heartfelt in their connections with whānau pounamu and expressed how they went beyond their roles, at times feeling more like a social worker or a guardian that looked out for them, even buying them kai.

4.9       Recommendations

4.9.1   Six recommendations have been identified and are aligned to the Aotearoa New Zealand Homelessness Action Plan strategic framework;

 

            

4.9.2   Prevention:

·    Councils form a Regional Taskforce with iwi partners, the homeless, and regional and local agencies concerned with homelessness to develop a regional homeless strategy.

4.9.3   Supply:

·    Continue through the Hastings Place Based Plan to identify social and community housing opportunities, such as prioritising housing procurement for the homeless.

4.9.4   Support:

·    Conduct research with the homeless to identify their views and perspectives of homelessness to better understand what they want.

4.9.5   Support a sector wide approach to drive collaboration to respond to the needs of the homeless.

·    Investigate the development and feasibility of an integrated community hub for homeless that provides wrap around support services which could include overnight accommodation.

4.9.6   System Enablers

·    Bring together a sector wide provider network to identify barriers and challenges in service delivery, with the aim of developing a common system of care to support the homeless.

5.0    Options – Ngā Kōwhiringa

Option One - Recommended Option - Te Kōwhiringa Tuatahi – Te Kōwhiringa Tūtohunga

5.1       The Committee endorse the Study and approve the recommendations within the Study.

Advantages

·        Council has shown commitment to working with stakeholders, partners and the homeless to identify and implement appropriate solutions.

Disadvantages

·        The situation will increase and become more visible.

Option Two – Status Quo - Te Kōwhiringa Tuarua – Te Āhuatanga o nāianei

5.2       The Committee does not approve the Study

Advantages

·        Nil

             Disadvantages

·        No action is taken to improve the situation of our homeless.

6.0    Next steps – Te Anga Whakamua

6.1       Should the paper be endorsed then the following steps will occur:

·        A comprehensive implementation plan to achieve intended outcomes is developed, with key partners.

·        Form a Regional Taskforce

 

Attachments:

 

1

Homelessness in Hastings - A Discovery Study

COP-03-06-8-21-2

Under Separate Cover Vol 1

 

 

 

 

Summary of Considerations - He Whakarāpopoto Whakaarohanga

Fit with purpose of Local Government - E noho hāngai pū ai ki te Rangatōpū-ā-Rohe

The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as set out in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to enable democratic local decision-making and action by (and on behalf of) communities, and to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing of communities in the present and for the future.

Link to the Council’s Community Outcomes – Ngā Hononga ki Ngā Putanga ā-Hapori

This proposal promotes the Local Public Services which help meet the needs of young and old, people in need, visitors and locals businesses and households wellbeing of communities in the present and for the future.

Māori Impact Statement - Te Tauākī Kaupapa Māori

Maori are disproportionally represented with respect to homelessness in the Hastings District.

Face to face hui were held with Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Inc, Te Puni Kōkiri – Ikaroa-Rāwhiti and Te Taiwhenua o Heretaunga to understand their local service provision to our homeless whanau and providers reported the majority of homeless who live rough in the CBD are Māori males.

Sustainability - Te Toitūtanga

N/A

Financial considerations - Ngā Whakaarohanga Ahumoni

Committee endorsement of the Study will signal a commitment from Council to support approaches with an appropriate budget attached.

Council officers have submitted a budget bid to the annual plan process and are seeking external funding options.  Officers will progress with the cash neutral activities and activities that require further funding will follow the annual plan process.

Significance and Engagement - Te Hiranga me te Tūhonotanga

This report has been assessed under the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy as being of low significance.

Consultation – internal and/or external - Whakawhiti Whakaaro-ā-roto / ā-waho

The research gathered information and experiences from agencies who deliver services and/or have fortuitous encounters with whānau pounamu.

 

Study participants consisted of government and non-government agencies. Methods included interviews, group meetings, online surveys and focus groups.

 

The following identifies the groups and the method applied to collect the data.

 

Partner agencies from the Safer Hastings Coalition

-      Organisations completed an online survey to identify which agencies deliver services directly to whānau pounamu via contractual obligations and/or charitable means and sought information on their service provision.

 

Māori/Iwi groups; government and non-government

-      Meetings were held with key organisations.

 

Organisations who have fortuitous or by chance encounters with whānau pounamu

-     Focus groups were held to gather information on characteristics, needs, causes and aspirations and included a mapping exercise to identify behaviours and ephemeral movements across the region, anti-social behaviour, and rough sleeping.

 

Due to scope, the research did not include the participation of our homeless whānau (whānau pounamu). Additionally, community perspectives were also outside the parameters of the study. As a result, the study is deemed low risk and does not require ethical approval by the New Zealand Health and Disability Ethics Committee.

Risks

It matters how we think about, and talk about our homeless whanau.  Societal actions need to move beyond charitable approaches.  It will require a deeper understanding of homelessness to address and restore their justice and dignity.

 

REWARD – Te Utu

RISK – Te Tūraru

A Regional Taskforce formed to identify and implement approaches to address homelessness

Engagement with homeless whanau to better understand their situation

A joined up approach to service delivery through partner agencies

Stronger support for those organisations already working in this space

A better understanding of the Homeless situation in Hastings

Opportunity for more partner agencies to be involved

An increase of homelessness is the CBD

An increase of public perception of perceived anti-social behaviour in the CBD

Increased workload for partner agencies

Community resources not fully utilised

 

 

 

 

Rural Community Board – Te Poari Tuawhenua-ā-Hapori

A mapping exercise was conducted with the focus groups to identify locations of interest across the Hastings district. The map on page 43 of the Study highlights that homelessness is not confined to our urban areas. A number of our rural Council reserves have been highlighted as areas commonly used for rough sleeping, homelessness and anti-social behaviour.

 


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Kevin Carter, Community Grants and Partnerships Advisor

Te Take:

Subject:

Havelock North - Business Improvement District        

        

1.0    Executive Summary – Te Kaupapa Me Te Whakarāpopototanga

1.1       At the Havelock North Business Association (HNBA) Meeting on the 15th September 2021 the HNBA Board resolved to progress requesting to establish a Business Improvement District (BID).

1.2       The current Havelock North Business Association is not a BID, therefore, as per the BID Policy, this process will be considered as establishing a BID rather than increasing the BID Boundary.

1.3       The HNBA has proposed that the new BID zone will be larger than the current HNBA area and will be the same as the existing Havelock North CBD upgrade zone.

1.4       This report concludes by recommending that the committee, in accordance with Council’s BID Policy, approves the engagement of Electionz.com, to complete a poll of property owners to confirm the level of support for, or against, the formation of the Havelock North Business Improvement District.

 

2.0    Recommendations - Ngā Tūtohunga

A)        That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled 2 November 2021.

B)        That the Committee accepts the request from the Havelock North Business Association and in accordance with Council’s BID Policy, approves the engagement of Electionz.com, to complete a poll of property owners to confirm the level of support for, or against, the formation of the Havelock North Business Improvement District.

 

3.0    Background – Te Horopaki

3.1       The current Havelock North Business Association (HNBA) was established with the purpose of supporting and promoting businesses in Havelock North. Whilst the HNBA do receive voluntary membership contributions from the wider business community, the majority of their funding ($60,950 incl GST) comes via the Havelock North Promotion Rate, which is levied by Council and passed to the association to carry out their activities. This levy was established prior to Council adopting the current BID Policy.

3.2       This targeted rate is currently applied across 45 commercially rated properties located within the current catchment area (Attachment 2), on a land value basis, at a rate of $107.20 Incl GST per $100,000 of land value.

3.3       The current catchment area was originally established in 1994, and whilst the Havelock North CBD has evolved over time, the catchment area has remained largely unchanged.

3.4       Since the current targeted rate was established, Council has introduced other rates levied on Havelock North businesses: the Havelock North CBD Commercial General Rate Differential, and the Havelock North CBD Upgrades Targeted Rate. The catchment area for these rates are aligned and cover a wider catchment area encompassing 113 commercially rated properties. (Attachment 3)

3.5       The HNBA have for a number of years considered extending the existing Havelock North Promotion Rate catchment area, as it does not reflect the growth and evolution of the Havelock North CBD, and those properties benefiting from the activities carried out by the association, however it remained unchanged.

3.6       A Business Improvement District (BID) is a partnership between a local authority and a defined local business community to develop projects and services that benefit the trading environment and which align with the local authority’s objectives. A BID is supported by a targeted rate, levied on and collected from non-residential properties within the defined boundary. Hastings District Council Adopted the current BID Policy in 2018.

3.7       Council officers have been working in partnership with the HNBA to transition towards a Business Improvement District in accordance with Council Policy, which would also provide consistency with the approach recently undertaken in the Hastings CBD and the Hastings City Business Association. 

3.8       The HNBA has undertaken initial consultation with the local business community on the potential range of services a BID could undertake to determine its level of support for forming a BID. As per the BID Policy the HNBA has indicated that there is sufficient interest to support a BID approach and to extend the catchment area to align with the Havelock North CBD Commercial General Rate Differential and the Havelock North CBD Upgrades Targeted Rate catchment areas. (Attachment 1)

4.0    Discussion – Te Matapakitanga

4.1       It’s suggested that the proposed area of the Havelock North Business Improvement District is the same as the existing Havelock North CBD upgrade zone and Havelock North CBD Commercial General Rate Differential area (Attachment 3).  The rating team will continue to incrementally add new commercial building into the area as new commercial buildings are developed on the boundary.

4.2      

Blue – Current Havelock North Promotion Targeted Rate Map

Purple – Current Havelock North CBD Upgrades Targeted Rate Map (proposed new BID Boundary)

 

4.3       In essence this would increase the number of properties from 45 to 113 and increase the ‘chargeable LV’ from $56.855m to $121.065m and encompasses the more Industrial areas (Cooper Street / Donnelly Street / Martin Place etc).

4.4       If the HNBA request to keep the current rate in the dollar (which works out at $107.20 per $100,000) and apply that across the ‘wider area’, this would generate total funds of $129,785 incl GST (from $60,950 incl GST). This $129,785 would still be provided to the Havelock North Business Association to action their business plan which is approved by their board each year. This would lead to an average rates increase of 5.9% across those 58 additional properties.

4.5       The HNBA have not yet decided what target rate that will be seeking form Council, this info will come to council as part of the Annual Planning process early 2022.

4.6       This would increase the number of properties subject to the Business Improvement District targeted rate for Havelock North from 45 to 113 properties, and the rate would be applied across land values of $121.1m (previously $56.9m).

4.7       No change to the way the rate is applied (I.e land value) is proposed. Additional voluntary contributions being made from the properties outside the current catchment area but within the new catchment area would cease. Additional voluntary contributions being made from the properties outside the new catchment would remain as voluntary and continue to be collected directly by the association.

4.8       The HNBA are currently working on a revised budget to support the activities carried out under BID approach, and are likely to approve this at their 17th November board meeting.  Once confirmed, officers will be able to illustrate the financial impact on every property within the proposed catchment area as part of the consultation undertaken. Based on current land values, as a guide:

Number of Properties

HNBA Budget Required

(Incl GST)

Rates Incl GST

(per $100,000 of Land Value)

Average change

(for the current 45 properties)

Average change

(for the additional 5properties)

45*

$60,950*

$107.20*

0%*

0%*

113

$80,000

$66.80

-2.0%

+3.7%

113

$100,000

$82.60

-1.2%

+4.6%

113

$129,785

$107.20

0%

+5.9%

113

$150,000

$123.90

+0.8%

+6.9%

 

*current

4.9       In accordance with the guidelines set out under our BID Policy, it is proposed to contract ElectionsNZ to poll the proposed catchment area to establish if there is sufficient support to commence the proposed Business Improvement District targeted rate for the Havelock North CBD from 01 July 2022.

4.10    This approach is consistent with the consultation undertaken prior to the formation of the Hastings CBD BID targeted rate. The cost is anticipated to be $4,500 which can be absorbed through current budgets.

 

5.0    Options – Ngā Kōwhiringa

Option One - Recommended Option - Te Kōwhiringa Tuatahi – Te Kōwhiringa Tūtohunga

5.1       That the committee accepts the request from the Havelock North Business Association and in accordance with Council’s BID Policy, approves the engagement of Electionz.com, to complete a poll of property owners to confirm the level of support for, or against, the formation of the Havelock North Business Improvement District.

5.2       It is proposed that the catchment area underpinning the BID targeted rate would be aligned with the existing Havelock North CBD General Rate and Havelock North CBD Upgrades targeted rate catchment areas.

Advantages

·    The BID Policy enables local business associations, which have a clear mandate from their communities, to develop a range of services that complement existing Council services and improvements.

·    The proposed catchment area is aligned with other rating catchment areas and more accurately reflects those properties benefiting from the activities carried out by the association. 

·    The community appears to support this approach

·    Consistent with the Hastings CBD approach

·    Catchment area reflects existing beneficiaries of the activities provided by the HNBA

 

Disadvantages

·    Increasing the BID area will create additional work for Council and the HNBA especially during the  referendum period

Option Two – Status Quo - Te Kōwhiringa Tuarua – Te Āhuatanga o nāianei

5.3       That the committee declines the request from the Havelock North Business Association to consult on the setting up of a Business Improvement District for the Havelock North CBD, and continue with the existing targeted rate approach and current catchment area.

 

6.0    Next steps – Te Anga Whakamua

6.1       If the committee approve the consideration of setting up a targeted rate for the purpose of a Business Improvement District targeted rate council will contract Electionz.com to poll this new area on the targeted rate.

6.2       The Havelock North Business Association board will continue consultant with their members and will work towards agreeing on BID boundaries, Full budget and approved business plan.

6.3       Depending on the outcome of the referendum, the HNBA may request a targeted rate in time for the council Annual Planning meeting in March.

6.4       Indicative Timeline from Electionz.com:

·        Lodgement of voter packs, voting opens Friday 4 February

·        First email blast of voting credentials Friday 11 February

·        Second voting reminder email blast Thursday 17 February

·        Third voting reminder email blast Thursday 24 February

·        Voting closes 12 noon Monday 28 February

·        Progress Result provided to HDC by EO approx 1pm Monday 28 February

·        Final Result (after postal system flush) Friday 4 March

 

 

Attachments:

 

1

Havelock North BID letter 2021

CG-14-160

 

2

Havelock North Promotion Targeted Rate Map

CG-14-158

 

3

Havelock North CBD Upgrades Targeted Rate Map

CG-14-157

 

 

 

 

 

Summary of Considerations - He Whakarāpopoto Whakaarohanga

Fit with purpose of Local Government - E noho hāngai pū ai ki te Rangatōpū-ā-Rohe

The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as set out in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to enable democratic local decision-making and action by (and on behalf of) communities, and to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing of communities in the present and for the future.

Link to the Council’s Community Outcomes – Ngā Hononga ki Ngā Putanga ā-Hapori

This proposal promotes the Economic wellbeing of communities in the present and for the future.

Māori Impact Statement - Te Tauākī Kaupapa Māori

No Additional Considerations

Sustainability - Te Toitūtanga

No Additional Considerations

Financial considerations - Ngā Whakaarohanga Ahumoni

A new targeted rate is proposed.

Significance and Engagement - Te Hiranga me te Tūhonotanga

This decision/report has been assessed under the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy as being of Moderate significance.

Consultation – internal and/or external - Whakawhiti Whakaaro-ā-roto / ā-waho

The local affected businesses will be invited to participate in this consultation by way of a Referendum

participatory process

 

To involve the community in various aspects of decision making, including the development of alternatives and identifying preferred solutions. Involvement could range from working together, to sharing resources, through to placing decisions in public hands.

 

Risks

No  significant risks or threats

Rural Community Board – Te Poari Tuawhenua-ā-Hapori

No Additional Considerations

 


Item 6       Havelock North - Business Improvement District

Havelock North BID letter 2021

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


Item 6       Havelock North - Business Improvement District

Havelock North Promotion Targeted Rate Map

Attachment 2

 

PDF Creator


Item 6       Havelock North - Business Improvement District

Havelock North CBD Upgrades Targeted Rate Map

Attachment 3

 

PDF Creator


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Sam Faulknor, Project Manager - Strategic

Te Take:

Subject:

Strategic Land Acquisition and Disposal Policy

        

1.0    Executive Summary – Te Kaupapa Me Te Whakarāpopototanga

1.1       The Hastings District Council (Council) undertakes land acquisition and disposal, to provide for public infrastructure and public recreation spaces.

1.2       In recent years there has been a high demand for growth delivery where acquisition and disposal of land is often required.

1.3       The main purpose of a land Acquisition and Disposal Policy Framework is to guide Council decision making and help ensure the rationale for Council decision making is consistent, predictable, equitable, and compliant with legislation.

 

2.0    Recommendations - Ngā Tūtohunga

A)        That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled Strategic Land Acquisition and Disposal Policy dated 2 November 2021.

B)        That the Committee adopt the proposed land Acquisition and Disposal Policy Framework.

C)        That the Committee notes Council’s responsibility to comply with its statutory obligations, particularly in relation to the Public Works Act 1981 and Treaty of Waitangi responsibilities.

 

3.0    Background – Te Horopaki

3.1       Land acquisition is a key component of delivering Infrastructure/public works for major projects throughout the district.

3.2       Recent experience with land acquisition for public works has shown that the acquisition process is time consuming and resource intensive.

3.3       Due to high growth demand, the general steer from Central Government has been for local authorities to plan for and construct public works in a timely and efficient manner.

3.4       Land acquisition is a critical step in the implementation of services and infrastructure required to service residential, industrial, and commercial developments.

3.5       Discussions around a land acquisition and disposal policy framework have been ongoing through 2021.

3.6       A report was presented the Strategy and Policy Committee on the 1 April 2021 where the following recommendation was received:

B)        That the Committee directs officers to draft a land acquisition policy framework document for future consideration and adoption by the Committee.

3.7       An informal item (Land Acquisition Policy Progress Update Overview) was presented in the District Development Sub-Committee on the 15 June 2021. Officers were directed to hold a workshop which has occurred prior to the Strategy & Policy Committee report on the 3/8/21.

4.0    Discussion – Te Matapakitanga

4.1       The Land Acquisition and Disposal Policy Framework (Attachment 1) is based on case studies from other New Zealand Territorial Authorities. In particular the Waikato District Council provided a relevant example of an effective and transparent public document for land acquisition and disposal.

4.2       The main purpose of the Policy Framework is to set out the criteria to guide Council decision making for acquiring or disposing of land. This policy helps ensure the rationale for Council decision making is consistent, predictable, equitable, and compliant with law.

4.3       The proposed Policy Framework complements the guidance provided by Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) in their document Guideline for the acquisition of land under the Public Works Act 1981 LINZG15703.

4.4       The Policy Frameworks has undergone internal review as well as external legal review.

4.5       Officers note that any final administrative edits to the documents that arise out of the meeting, can be made following adoption by the Committee.

5.0    Options – Ngā Kōwhiringa

Option One - Recommended Option - Te Kōwhiringa Tuatahi – Te Kōwhiringa Tūtohunga

5.1       Approve the presented Strategic land Acquisition and Disposal Policy Framework, acknowledging minor changes may be required.

Advantages

·        Allows Council to implement land acquisition for public works in an efficient and effective manner.

·        Provides a framework to benchmark decisions against to help ensure ore consistency in decisions at the operational and governance levels of Council.

Disadvantages

·        No perceived disadvantages.

Option Two – Status Quo - Te Kōwhiringa Tuarua – Te Āhuatanga o nāianei

5.2       Do not adopt a Strategic land Acquisition and Disposal Policy Framework.

Advantages

·        No change in acquisition process for landowners and affected parties.

Disadvantages

·        Slower acquisition of land public works.

·        Slower release of land for residential, industrial and other purposes.

·        Potential confusion, inconsistency, and lack of transparency for future acquisition and disposals of land.

6.0    Next steps – Te Anga Whakamua

6.1       That the Committee approves the land acquisition and disposal policy which allows for its use for future acquisitions and disposals.

 

 

Attachments:

 

1

Strategic Land Acquisition and Disposal Policy Framework - 02.11.21

STR-15-3-21-157

 

 

 

 

 

Summary of Considerations - He Whakarāpopoto Whakaarohanga

Fit with purpose of Local Government - E noho hāngai pū ai ki te Rangatōpū-ā-Rohe

The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as set out in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to enable democratic local decision-making and action by (and on behalf of) communities, and to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing of communities in the present and for the future.

Link to the Council’s Community Outcomes – Ngā Hononga ki Ngā Putanga ā-Hapori

This proposal promotes the development of local infrastructure which contributes to public health and safety, supports growth, connects communities, activates communications and helps protect the natural environment.

Māori Impact Statement - Te Tauākī Kaupapa Māori

This document acknowledges legislative requirements and stakeholder requirements when acquiring and disposing of land.

The policy will have an important impact on mana whenua and Māori land issues moving forward here at Council and will ensure that dialogue between Council and its Tiriti partners remains paramount at all times. Hastings District Council sits in the heart of Ngāti Kahungunu (iwi) and has the greatest Māori demographic across the iwi. With Council’s obligations to and partnerships across each of the other five post-settlement governance entities (mana whenua), land acquisition and land disposal will ensure Council’s obligations to its Tiriti partners are upheld at all times.

 

Sustainability - Te Toitūtanga

This report is procedural in nature however acknowledges sustainability principles and environmental best practices.

Financial considerations - Ngā Whakaarohanga Ahumoni

N/A.

Significance and Engagement - Te Hiranga me te Tūhonotanga

This report has been assessed under the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy as being of medium significance. All acquisitions and disposals are driven by legislation we are required to work within.

Consultation – internal and/or external - Whakawhiti Whakaaro-ā-roto / ā-waho

The idea of a Policy Framework has been socialised with governance.

Risks

 

Opportunity:

 

REWARD – Te Utu

RISK – Te Tūraru

This policy helps ensure the rationale for Council decision making is consistent, predictable, equitable, and compliant with law.

There are risks if the Policy is not adopted such as a potentially slower acquisition of land public works. Potentially slower release of land for residential, industrial and other purposes.

Potential confusion, inconsistency, and lack of transparency for future acquisition and disposals of land.

Rural Community Board – Te Poari Tuawhenua-ā-Hapori

There are no implications for the Rural Community Board.

 


Item 7       Strategic Land Acquisition and Disposal Policy

Strategic Land Acquisition and Disposal Policy Framework - 02.11.21

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Mark Clews, Principal Advisor: District Development

Te Take:

Subject:

Napier Hastings Housing Capacity Assessment 2021 - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

        

1.0    Executive Summary – Te Kaupapa Me Te Whakarāpopototanga

1.1       The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPSUD) requires Tier 2 councils, which includes, Hastings District, Napier City and Hawkes Bay Regional Councils (the Council’s), to undertake an assessment of the expected demand and supply of housing in their areas over the next 30 years.

1.2       The purpose of the housing assessment is to ensure councils planning and infrastructure decisions enable at least sufficient development capacity to meet expected demand for housing and to assess the impact of those decisions on the affordability and competitiveness of the local housing market. 

1.3       The assessments must be undertaken every three years and in time to inform the Long Term Plan (LTP). The first assessment was required to be prepared this year (July), one year after the NPSU2020 was approved by Government. The NPSUD requires that Councils with overlapping or interrelated housing markets prepare a joint assessment and a jointly commissioned assessment has now been completed and is attached under separate cover.

1.4       The assessment is a comprehensive and highly technical piece of work, but one which will provide fundamental evidence based information for forthcoming planning processes such the replacement of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy (HPUDS) in the form of a Future Development Strategy (FDS) component of a Regional Spatial Plan (RSP) and ultimately the District Plans and LTPs. Given the nature of the document, Councillors are not necessarily expected to familiarise themselves with the details contained within it. Instead an independent high level summary report has been prepared by Barker and Associates (Barkers), Urban and Environmental Planners, and this is attached as Appendix 1.

1.5       That report contains a number of recommendations for the Council(s) to consider, which potentially will impact on Council’s immediate forward work programme and potentially lead into the next Annual Plan, while the broader FDS/RSP processes referred to above unfold. Those recommendations are incorporated in the recommendations below albeit in a slightly modified form.

1.6       This report also signals some near term potential responses to some of the growth challenges foreshadowed in the Barker’s report.

 

2.0    Recommendations - Ngā Tūtohunga

A)        That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled Napier Hastings Housing Capacity Assessment 2021 - National Policy Statement on Urban Development dated 2 November 2021, and the attached reports namely:

Memorandum to Hastings District Council, Napier City Council, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council from Barker and Associates dated 23 September 2021 Re -  Housing Assessment 2021 –NPSUD.

And

Housing Development Capacity Assessment 2021 – Napier District Council, Hastings District Council, and Hawke’s Bay Regional Council by Market Economics Limited dated August 2021.

B)        That the Committee endorse the recommendations contained in the memorandum from Barker and Associates and instruct officers to progress those recommendations as follows through the District Development and or District Plan and Bylaws Sub-committees as appropriate and report  back to the Strategy and Policy Committee as required:

(1)       That the Housing Capacity Assessment be published and made publicly available as required by the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020.

(2)       Implement an updated monitoring programme (in line with the requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020).

(3)       Continue to monitor and review the capital works programme for greenfields development over the next 5-10 years and precursor structure planning in the light of the report, the need to deal with the current backlog of housing demand and expectations for realising increasing intensification, to inform the next Annual Plan round.

(4)       Undertake a detailed review of the operative planning provisions to ensure the urban provisions are enabling growth, aligning with the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 requirements and not unnecessarily constraining development potential and opportunities.

(5)       Complete the project brief and commission the Business Component of the Housing and Business Capacity Assessment.

(6)       Build on and translate the key findings and outcomes from the Housing Capacity Assessment and the outcomes of recommendations (3) (4) and (5) in the preparation of a Regional Spatial Plan, or review/replacement of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy including:

(a)       Reviewing the infrastructure strategies based on the new growth projections, including confirming or otherwise the capacity of existing infrastructure that is uncertain at this time.

(b)       Considering whether an updated intensification strategy is required, building on the Medium Density Housing Strategy already adopted by the Council.

(7)       That Officers prepare a report to Council regarding the allocation of funding for advancement of priority growth workstreams referred to in recommendation B3 above.

 

C)        Advise the Minister of Housing that a housing capacity deficiency is predicted in the long term due to uncertainty and limitations about the capacity of bulk service infrastructure and noting:

(1)       Even if that uncertainty is resolved through further investigation a possible deficiency may still exist.

(2)       The situation arises in part due to Statistics New Zealand’s Sub-National Population Projections released in 2021, predicting significantly increased growth for the District over past projections, and the use of a medium-high projection for the assessment.

(3)       That any capacity issues that remain after due investigation are proposed to be addressed through the Councils normal Long Term and Annual Planning processes now the issues have been identified.

(4)       That the situation is also proposed to be addressed through recommendation B6.

(5)       That the Council may need financial assistance to address these long term issues, noting that the operational context is subject to potential change under the Governments Three Waters Reform proposals.

D)         Instruct Officers to insert Housing Bottom Lines as outlined in the report from Barker and Associates into the District Plan as required by the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 as follows:

 

There is sufficient development capacity to meet expected demand for housing in Hastings over the short-medium and long term as follows:

 

Area

Housing Bottom Lines (number of dwellings)

Short to medium term (2020 to 2030)

includes an additional margin of 20%

Long term
(2031 – 2050)

includes an additional margin of 15%

2020 – 2050
TOTAL
(includes margins)

Hastings Environment

5,190

7,640

12,830

 

 

 

3.0    Background – Te Horopaki

3.1       The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPSUD) requires councils to plan for growth and ensure the delivery of a ‘well-functioning urban environment’ for all people, communities and future generations. To support well-functioning urban environments, the NPSUD requires Councils to improve the responsiveness and competitiveness of their land and development markets.

3.2       In particular, the NPSUD requires local authorities to provide ‘at least sufficient development capacity’ to enable sufficient housing in response to demand and to create more affordable housing. To demonstrate this, a Housing and Business Capacity Assessment (HBA) must be completed by councils every three years, with the first being due on 31 July 2021. A similar assessment is required for business land in time to inform the next iteration of the LTP, so was not under the same time constraints, but is scheduled to be commissioned shortly.

3.3       The NPSUD requires that Councils with overlapping or interrelated housing markets prepare a joint assessment. Accordingly a Housing Capacity Assessment (HCA) was commissioned and funded jointly by the Councils, consistent with the joint approach to urban development management established in 2010 through the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy (HPUDS).

3.4       The required HCA has now been completed and is attached under separate cover. Two mandatory outcomes of the assessment that are required under the NPS are firstly; to set bottom lines for future housing provision in the Regional Policy Statement and District Plans and secondly, in relation to those bottom lines, to advise the Minister of Housing if a capacity deficiency is likely to occur in the short, medium or long term (3, 10 and 30 years).

4.0    Discussion – Te Matapakitanga

Housing Capacity Assessment

4.1       The current HCA was completed by Market Economics Limited (MEL). They have completed a number of such assessments across the Country under the current NPSUD and previously under the earlier NPSUD-C 2016 for both Tier 1 (larger metropolitan centres) and Tier 2 (larger regional centres) Councils. The project was managed on behalf of the three Councils by Barkers, who have some allied experience with the NPSUD, and they have also provided some independent advice in relation to what the findings mean for the Councils forward planning.

4.2       The MEL report reflects the technical nature of the assessments required under the NPSUD. The assessments are comprehensive in terms of not just total housing demand and supply, but also factors relating to size, typology, price, tenure and demographics including ethnicity implications. The report and the work behind it, including a model that estimated the capacity for intensification enabled by the District Plan and assessed as commercially viable for developers, will provide part of the evidence for the Regional Spatial Plan/FDS. In other words it is a technical resource rather than a policy document. Accordingly Council is not being asked to approve the document, but receive it and to take its findings into consideration as part of its forward planning processes.

Barkers have prepared a summary of the report findings and their high level independent advice of those mean for the Councils future work programmes.

Key Findings

4.3       The assessment was based on the Statistics New Zealand medium to high growth population projection. On this projection the headline conclusion for Hastings is that there is, on paper, likely to be sufficient capacity in total to meet the growth anticipated in the short to medium term, assuming that greenfield growth areas are delivered according to the current LTP programme, which was based on an earlier projection that more closely resembles the current Statistics New Zealand medium projection. The extra capacity required is expected to be drawn from intensification opportunities enabled by the District Plan that are commercially feasible, plus some potential within rural residential zones and coastal settlements.

4.4       In the long term however (i.e. beyond 10 years), there is either uncertainty about or actual limits to the infrastructure capacity needed to support otherwise sufficient commercially feasible opportunities to meet growth demands, when combined with planned greenfields developments included in HPUDS and the 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy. These infrastructural issues need to be addressed as part of the RSP/FDS and/or Councils normal LTP and Thirty Year Infrastructure Strategy processes. Under NPSUD Council is required to inform the Minister of Housing of the projected deficiency.

4.5       The conclusions about the sufficiency of the short to medium term capacity, while demonstrating compliance with the NPSUD, are finely balanced under the medium to high scenario. In addition they do not include provision for pent up demand (backlog), created by the extraordinary levels of immigration driven growth over the past five years, that have not been able to be met by new housing construction. The higher growth expectations, coupled with this backlog, means the greenfield areas planned at the beginning of the programme are likely to be consumed more rapidly than anticipated in the LTP, creating the potential risk of gaps in the planned continuity of supply. This may result in uneven changes in the mix of greenfields and intensification, which the market may struggle to respond positively to. In the absence of any change to the current greenfields programme, there would need to be a greater overall reliance on intensification making a much larger contribution to meeting housing needs. These issues may be a significant risk to housing supply and affordability if the market does not respond (in the way assumed in the capacity assessment) rapidly enough and a practical deficiency could materialise toward the end of the ten year programme.

4.6       Accordingly officers have undertaken some further analysis on this point with a view to rebalancing the desired mix of greenfields and intensification based development and its transition over the short to medium term. This is intended to address these issues pending development of the RPS/FDS and the implementation of initial tangible outcomes for development from that process. The objective here was to find the “sweetspot” that de-risks over reliance on the assumed capacity for significantly increased intensification to meet greater projected demand, while retaining sufficient restraint in greenfields supply to encourage higher density redevelopment and greater housing diversity.

Possible Programme Changes

4.7       Attached as Appendix 3 are some officers briefing notes for the Chief Executive that support Council taking steps to be ready to make programme adjustments to address these issues, if monitoring demonstrates that the greater uptake rates predicted  are actually occurring in the market (given there are other factors external to Council that influence supply/uptake).

4.8       Officers consider it prudent that Council should plan for the medium-high growth projection scenario that was used for the Housing Capacity Assessment.  This gives Council some contingency (13% approx.) on top of the 20% NPSUD margin against even greater growth than is now projected under the medium growth scenario, which has traditionally been regarded as the most likely.

4.9       The capacity assessment is focussed on future growth and did not account for the accumulated backlog coming from a period of higher than anticipated growth. Given Councils objective on “Housing for our People“ and its commitment to the collaborative placed based Housing Plan, Officers consider that Council’s land supply and intensification programme should aim to make provision to help address this, even though the NPSUD does not require this. Officers have estimated the backlog at around 1250 dwellings (compared to the 750 households on the Social Housing Register requiring a suitable dwelling to live in) and a five year target to clear this does not seem unreasonable. 

4.10    The current relative proportions of greenfield, intensification and rural housing development (45%, 35% and 25%) may be a reasonable objective for the Council to hold to in the short to medium term, even under the under the medium to high growth projection, pending the outcome of the Regional Spatial Plan/FDS.  This would still result in a need to actively promote intensification to achieve the higher overall uptake rates that would be needed to maintain that share. In that respect it would be prudent to look at whether there are ways the District Plan can be tweaked to provide further feasible intensification capacity in the short to medium term, to increase the pool of realisable intensification opportunities to facilitate this shift.

4.11    On the basis of these assumptions a greenfield shortage could manifest itself from 2024-2025 on the current LTP programme. That would need to be addressed, by bringing areas in HPUDS and scheduled in the LTP and thirty year infrastructure strategy forward. Given that land development is not straight forward and delays can occur for a variety of reasons, the likely changes needed to Council’s greenfields land development programme need to also be agile and adaptable. Council ideally needs to have interchangeable areas ready to go in the event of even higher growth or unforeseen delays in particular projects occuring. 

4.12    Officers therefore consider that rebalancing of the programme should be prepared to advance both Lyndhurst Extension and Brookvale to give Council options in both Hastings and Havelock North, with consequential changes throughout the rest of the programme and accounting for likely new developments such as Irongate which Council has already decided to support. This reinforces and emphasises the points made to Council in May of this year concerning the advancement of structure planning for greenfields growth areas, although Council may need to review the conditions for these to reflect this new evidence base and changing circumstances.

4.13    To deliver the sweetspot, the current forward programme may need some adjustment based on monitoring over the next year or two.  This means the following should be provided for prior to the Regional Spatial Plan/FDS process being completed:

 

·    Bring forward Brookvale Stages 2 and 3, by 2024 and 2027

·    Bring forward Lyndhurst Stage 3 and the Havelock Hills by 2025.

·    Bring forward stages of Kaiapo Road and Irongate by 2026.

·    Further staging can be considered as part of the Regional Spatial Plan/FDS implementation from 2028.

 

This is depicted below: The highlighted circle shows the pre Regional Spatial Plan/FDS focus.

 

Note: Quarterly and Annual Monitoring can allow for these or further programme adjustments as required and a fresh Housing Capacity Assessment will need to be done to inform the next LTP in 2023/2024.  This could mean bringing forward the remaining stages of Brookvale, Kaiapo, Irongate and Copeland Road and introducing some of the 860 lot capacity held in Reserve areas if even higher growth is anticipated at that time..

4.14    On this basis the estimated growth of 5630 new households[1] over the next ten years (6530 when the 20% competitiveness margin is added) can be met by development capacity for 6870 dwellings through greenfields, serviced feasible intensification and rural areas, which is slightly above the 20% required under the NPSUD. There will however, likely be a bigger deficit in the longer term for additional serviced intensification capacity, as well as greenfields and rural residential/rural capacity, which will need to be addressed through the RSP/FDS.

4.15    For this plan to be able to be implemented, structure planning and rezoning processes would need to commence in earnest  for Lyndhurst, Kaiapo Road and Irongate Road and completed as follows:

·    Structure planning for Lyndhurst completed by the end of 2022.

·    The structure planning for Kaiapo and Irongate completed by the end of 2023.

·    Engineering/legal processes completed for Brookvale Stage 2 by the end of 2022.

 

4.16    This approach is summarised in the diagram below:

4.17    The above programme is not the only way to rebalance the programme and would not be cast in stone. Further refinement can occur through the District Development Sub-Committee as monitoring and other new evidence or circumstances arise; with agility and responsiveness being a key objective. Any substantive decisions on programme adjustment will need to come through the appropriate Council Committee e.g. changes to work priorities, District Plan, or capital programmes through the Annual Plan.  It needs to be recognised that the adaptability and agility desired is dependent on the time and resources needed to get into a position where capital programme changes can be made quickly as shown in the preparedness plan below shared with Council during the preparation of the LTP:

5.0    Options – Ngā Kōwhiringa

5.1       As the HCA is a mandatory requirement of the NPSUD the options is to receive the reports, notify the Minister of the long term deficiency identified due to infrastructure limitations. Council can make future decisions on potentially refining the Council land development programme as suggested or not.

5.2       Given the risks identified around housing supply continuity, officers consider that not investigating adjustments to the capital land development programme and precursor structure planning could result in further housing shortages and house price escalation.

5.3       Rebalancing the programme, is part of Councils normal activity leading into Annual Plan processes and no decisions or resolutions are required at this stage.  The review of priorities and timeframes around structure planning will need further work to understand the capacity and resourcing needs and be reported back to Council in due course.

6.0    Next steps – Te Anga Whakamua

6.1       Apart from the mandatory requirement of the NPSUD relating to Housing Bottom lines and advising the Minister of a potential capacity deficiency, the next steps generally relate to further work and investigations as set out in the recommendations, including commissioning the Business Capacity Assessment by the three HPUDS partner Councils, to inform the RSP/FDS.

 

Attachments:

 

1

Napier and Hastings Housing Assessment Summary Report 2021-10-21 Final Barker and Associates

STR-4-2-21-993

 

2

Napier Hastings Housing Capacity Assessment NPSUD Market Economics Limited FINAL VERSION

STR-4-2-21-986

Under Separate Cover Vol 1

3

Briefing Notes on Responding to New Housing Demand October 2021

STR-4-2-21-991

 

 

 

 

 

 


Item 8       Napier Hastings Housing Capacity Assessment 2021 - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Napier and Hastings Housing Assessment Summary Report 2021-10-21 Final Barker and Associates

Attachment 1

 

 

To:      Hastings District Council, Napier City Council, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

From: Barker & Associates

Date:  23 September 2021

Re:      Housing Assessment 2021 - NPSUD

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...

1.   Purpose

The purpose of this memo is to:

·    Provide a summary of the relevant statutory context;

·    Provide a high-level summary of the results of the housing capacity assessment that has been prepared under the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPSUD); and

·    Provide information on the next steps to fulfil the NPSUD requirements.

This memo provides a simple summary of the housing assessment report for Napier Hastings urban area prepared by Market Economics. Please refer to that report for further details.

2.   NPSUD context

The NPSUD came into effect on 20 August 2020. It is part of the urban planning pillar of the government’s Urban Growth Agenda. The purpose of the NPSUD is to require councils to plan for growth and ensure the delivery of a ‘well-functioning urban environment’ for all people, communities and future generations.

To support well-functioning urban environments, the NPSUD seeks to improve the responsiveness and competitiveness of land and development markets. In particular, the NPSUD requires local authorities to provide ‘at least sufficient development capacity’ to enable sufficient housing in response to demand and to create more affordable housing. To demonstrate this, a Housing and Business Assessment (HBA) must be completed by councils every three years.

3.   What is a Housing Assessment?

As Tier 2 councils under the NPSUD, Hastings District Council, Napier City Council and Hawke’s Bay Regional Council are required to complete a housing assessment.

The housing assessment is required to estimate the expected demand and supply of housing in Napier/Hastings over the next 30 years. The purpose of the housing assessment is to ensure councils are providing at least sufficient development capacity in its region/district to meet expected demand for housing. The housing assessment must also assess the impact of planning and infrastructure decisions on the affordability and competitiveness of the local housing market. 

Expected housing demand must be estimated over the short (3 year), medium (10 year) and long term (30 year) and it must estimate the number of dwellings required by housing type and location. The NPSUD requires the councils to add on a competitiveness margin, or buffer, onto the projected demand. This margin is 20% over the short and medium terms and 15% over the long term. The margin is added with a view to enable competition in the marketplace, and provide some resilience if higher than expected growth occurs. 

Housing capacity must also be calculated over the short, medium and long term, based on whether it is plan enabled, infrastructure ready, and feasible and reasonably expected to be realised. Table 1 below illustrates how the NPSUD provides for these factors to change over time.

 

Short term (3 years)

Medium term (10 years)

Long term (30 years)

Plan enabled

Zoned in the Napier / Hastings District Plans

And zoned in any Proposed District Plan (N/A for Napier Hastings)

And identified in a Future Development Strategy (i.e. HPUDS)

Infrastructure ready

Can be serviced with existing infrastructure

And can be serviced with planned and funded infrastructure (LTP)

And can be serviced with planned infrastructure (infrastructure strategy)

Feasible and reasonably expected to be realised

A feasibility model and/or other methodology to evaluate the amount of housing that the market will actually deliver.

Table 1: Showing how housing capacity is calculated under the NPSUD.

The diagram below shows how the demand and capacity assessments interact under the NPSUD.

4.   What happens if there is a shortfall?

If the housing assessment shows that there is a capacity shortfall in the short, medium or long term, then the councils must immediately notify the Minister for the Environment. If the insufficiency is wholly or partly a result of the Napier and Hastings District Plans, then the councils must change those documents to increase development capacity, or consider other options for increasing development capacity and otherwise enabling development. We discuss this further below.

 

 

5.   Results/key findings

The results are described in terms of the demand and supply outlook. The development capacity is reconciled with demand following that to determine sufficiency.

5.1 Housing demand

The housing assessment provides an outlook of housing demand, broken down by household types, income groups and ethnicities. StatsNZ’s recently released population projects underpin the outlook. The assessment uses the average between the medium-and high series population estimates.

The current housing demand is for detached dwellings, but the combination of shifting demographics and changes in housing costs (i.e. affordability pressures) means that a transition to higher density housing types is expected.

 

Key points regarding Napier:

·    The population is estimated at 65,300 – 66,000 and is expected to grow to between 72,300 – 83,700 over the next 30 years;

·    Household numbers (dwellings) are estimated at 26,430; and

·    Households are currently skewed towards lower income bands with 43% earning less than $50,000.

 

Key points regarding Hastings:

·    The population is estimated at 86,800 – 87,500 and is expected to grow to between 104,600 – 119,800 over the next 30 years;

·    Household numbers (dwellings) are estimated at 31,300; and

·    Households are currently skewed towards lower income bands with 39% earning less $50,000.

 

Table 2 below summarises the growth outlook[2].

 

 

Hastings

Napier

2020 Population

86,000 – 87,500

65,300 - 66,000

2020 Households*

31,300

26,430

2023 Households (short term)

32,900 (+1,600)

27,400 (+970)

2030 Households (medium term)

35,700 (+ 4,400)

29,100 (+2,670)

2050 Households (long term)

42,300 (+10,970)

32,600 (+6,200)

Housing bottom lines (cumulative long term)

Including competitiveness margin

See Table 7 below

12,830 dwellings

7,160 dwellings

* estimate

Table 2: Growth outlook for Hastings and Napier.

 

5.2 Housing supply and affordability

The assessment considered the current dwelling composition and property values for both Napier and Hastings. Generally, houses in Napier and Hastings are relatively cheaper than the New Zealand average, but like the rest of NZ, house prices have seen very strong growth over the recent decade which is impacting affordability.

 

House prices have shifted 332% for Hastings and 284% for Napier over the last 20 years. These shifts were both higher than the New Zealand average. Prices have increased by 78% and 74% for Hastings and Napier respectively since June 2000, which is double the New Zealand rate.

 

Consent data reveals evidence of recent shifts in housing typologies and the effects of the price movements through:

·    Observed shift towards higher density typologies, and with intermittent increases in retirement dwellings; and

·    The weighted average size of consents (in square metres) is tracking down, influenced by higher density developments in response to price-affordability pressures, retirement village growth and recent increases in social housing construction.

Regardless of these movements however, detached houses still dominate activity and town houses, and other higher density typologies, still form only a small portion of the overall delivery.  But a change is taking place. 

In the future, housing prices are expected to increase in value, reflecting shifts in land values and the value of improvement, which will negatively affect affordability given the lower income average of the population:

·    In Hastings, most properties currently fall in the $400,000 - $999,000 band and by 2050 only 38% of properties are expected to be below $700,000;

·    In Napier[3], 61% of properties fall in the $400,000 - $600,000 band but this will shift over time. By 2050, the $700,000 - $1m band is expected to account for almost half (48%) of properties.

Importantly, the changing land values interact with development costs to change the construction economics.  Over time, redevelopment and infill development options become more viable. 

 

5.3 Development Capacity

The development capacity (i.e. supply) covers different aspects. This includes plan enabled capacity, commercially feasible capacity and infrastructure supported (or ready) capacity.  The main points regarding these aspects follow. 

 

Plan-enabled, Feasible and Infrastructure Ready

The two tables below show the estimated development capacity for Napier and Hastings over the short, medium and long term. The figures in the table are cumulative and are simplified (showing multiple categories in aggregate[4]). B&A and Market Economics make broad observations about the implications of these numbers, however, this does not replace the more fine-grained analysis that is contained in the Market Economics report. 

 

Napier

 

Short (3 years)

Medium (10 years)

Long (30 years)

Plan-enabled capacity

16,360

20,220

20,220

Feasible capacity (greenfield)

1,151

2,118

3,064

Feasible capacity (urban)

2,578

4,890

10,300

Feasible capacity TOTAL

3,729

7,008

13,364

Infrastructure ready capacity

All feasible capacity is infrastructure ready

Feasible and infrastructure ready capacity TOTAL

3,729

7,008

13,364

Table 3: Napier’s plan-enabled, feasible and infrastructure ready development capacity.

For Napier, this analysis shows that plan-enabled capacity stays relatively constant over the medium to long term, after increasing over the short to medium term. This is because the planning rules are based on the Napier District Plan. In reality however, the planning rules will change considerably over a 30-year period. Some increase in plan-enabled capacity is observed given that there are no density controls in the Napier District Plan residential zones, and the housing assessment assumes that housing types will become more intensive over time.

 

Urban feasible capacity increases over time. This increase is due to increasing land values, which opens up redevelopment opportunities across more sites as well as the move towards higher densities. All greenfield capacity is assumed to be feasible. In Napier, infrastructure capacity is not identified as a core constraint on feasibility.

 

Hastings

 

Short (3 years)

Medium (10 years)

Long (30 years)

Plan-enabled capacity

11,290

11,290

11,290

Feasible and infrastructure ready capacity (greenfield)

1,152

1,680

2,667

Feasible capacity (Redevelopment)

5,550

5,980

8,395

Feasible and infrastructure ready capacity (Redevelopment)

3,495

3,735

3,815

Feasible and infrastructure ready TOTAL

4,647

5,415

6,482

Unconfirmed infrastructure capacity over the long term (30 year):  +3,065

Table 4: Hastings’s plan-enabled, feasible and infrastructure ready development capacity.

For Hastings, as above, plan-enabled capacity is constant over time, reflecting the Operative District Plan rules, which include density controls. Feasible capacity also increases over time trending towards 75% of the plan-enabled capacity in the long term. There will be at least two District Plan reviews prior to this time, so this matter is not particularly material to the overall outcome. Like Napier, feasible capacity increases over time within the urban area, reflecting the general trends in land values and development patterns. 

 

Some drop off can be observed between feasible capacity, and capacity that will be supported by infrastructure. A provisional amount of additional capacity that may be serviced by infrastructure is shown. However, that needs to be confirmed through additional testing and analysis by the Hastings District Council infrastructure team. 

Reasonably Expected to be Realised

The NPSUD also requires an assessment of whether development capacity is ‘reasonably expected to be realised’ (RER). The key purpose of this is to understand whether the feasible and infrastructure ready development would be taken up by the development sector. The RER capacity is then contrasted against the expected demand.

The RER component is a way to test how the feasible capacity aligns with the type of properties that the market could demand in future, as well as the supply side, considering development costs, and development trends.  Importantly, the RER capacity is not a forecast of how development activity will take place. 

The reasonableness of achieving the feasible capacity is considered by looking at several aspects, like: historic development patterns in the mix of housing typologies, the broad location of development (greenfield vs brownfield) as well as the trends observed in other NZ cities that are further along the growth curve. This analysis helps us understand if the capacity that is modelled as feasible could actually be delivered in local market conditions.

The RER is not an absolute position or a guaranteed outcome, but is a broad guide of how the market might deliver housing. In light of this, the Councils may want to undertake some further analysis to inform any changes to the mix of greenfield and intensification over the short to medium term, which may be needed to ensure that there is adequate supply of land for housing. 

5.4 Reconciling supply and demand

The tables below reconcile the estimated demand for housing including the competitiveness margin over the short, medium and long term, with the feasible, infrastructure ready and reasonably expected to be realised development capacity over that period. These tables include the total housing estate[5] in Napier and Hastings and therefore the dwelling numbers are higher than the dwellings numbers outlined in the tables above. It is important to note that the sufficiency test is about meeting new demand for housing and does not included any existing housing shortage assessment, so Council and Government initiatives (such as the Hastings Housing Strategy) to resolve current housing shortage issues that have built up over time over the short to medium term remain critical.

Napier

The analysis suggests that Napier has sufficient development capacity over the short, medium and long term even when the competitiveness margin is added to demand.  The analysis also shows that there is significantly greater demand for housing up to $399,000 than the market is likely to provide generally as a result of lower household incomes in Napier.

Demand

Capacity

3y

10y

30y

3y

10y

30y

Napier

Base demand

27,400

29,050

32,550

RER Capacity

27,400

29,100

32,600

+Comp. Margin

27,600

29,400

33,100

27,600

29,600

33,650

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3y

10y

30y

 

 

 

 

þ

þ

þ

 

 

Table 5: Napier development capacity.

Hastings

Hastings has sufficient development capacity over the short and medium term to meet demand plus the competitiveness margin. However, in the long term a deficiency is identified. This is due to the strong growth in the demand side, as well as the effects of infrastructure capacity constraints. This deficit remains even if the unconfirmed infrastructure capacity is included in the sufficiency calculation.  

 

Demand

Capacity

3y

10y

30y

3y

10y

30y

Hastings

Base

32,920

35,650

42,290

RER to accommodate

32,950

35,700

37,950

+Comp. Margin

33,240

36,200

43,290

33,400

36,250

39,000

Unconf. Infras.

42,100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3y

10y

30y

 

 

 

 

 

þ

þ

T

 

 

Table 6: Hastings development capacity.

The infrastructure ready capacity for the housing assessment was derived from the infrastructure strategy and associated funding set out in the Hastings LTP 2021-2023. The LTP was based on a series of growth projections for Hastings that are significantly lower than the growth projections contained in the housing assessment – this difference is due to the higher growth pathway identified in the recently released population projections (from StatsNZ). 

To resolve this issue, additional infrastructure planning is required based on the latest growth projections contained in the housing assessment. This could be addressed comprehensively either through an HPUDS review for Napier Hastings, which would essentially be a ‘Future Development Strategy’ in NPSUD terms; or if it more appropriate to do so, on a wider regional basis through a Regional Spatial Strategy (“RSS”) for Hawke’s Bay as it emerges through Government’s reform of the resource management system. Either of those processes would provide the vehicle for integrating land use and infrastructure planning and funding decisions. Hastings District Council may wish to undertake some early preparatory work to inform this wider planning exercise.

It is also important to note that over the medium to longer term the assessment assumes a greater take up of intensification opportunities, represented by the feasible urban capacity, earlier than may have been anticipated under the existing growth plans, due to the higher projected growth rate.

Related to this, the Housing Assessment highlights a gap in the greenfield capacity pipeline toward the end of the 2023-2030 period (for the combined programme), but for Hastings that gap is earlier (around 2023-2025) and for Napier it is later (around 2027-2030). Some element of development activity is likely to continue through the gaps, with developers working to smooth delivery.

During these gaps, the Housing Assessment places greater reliance on intensification in the urban area in order to meet expected demand. Further work may be required to understand if this is realistic and achievable in local market conifitions, or if a steadier supply greenfield land is required to improve alignment between market demand and supply.

6.   Housing Bottom Lines

The NPSUD requires that a housing bottom line for the short, medium and long term be included in the relevant regional policy statement and district plans as soon as practicable after the housing assessment is made publicly available (Clause 3.6).

The purpose of housing bottom lines is to clearly articulate the amount of development capacity that is sufficient to meet the expected demand, as identified through the housing assessment, plus a competitiveness margin.

Table 7 below, identifies the housing bottom lines for Hastings and Napier based on the findings from the housing capacity assessment. These are not expressed cumulatively.

 

Hastings

Napier

Short term (2020 – 2023)

1,920

1,190

Medium term (2023 – 2030)

3,270

1,990

Long term (2030 – 2050)

7,640

4,010

Table 7: Housing Bottom Lines.

The housing bottom lines must be inserted into the Hawke’s Bay Regional Policy Statement, Napier District Plan and Hastings District Plan without using the Schedule 1 process as soon as possible.

We recommend that the housing bottom lines are inserted as an objective in the respective plans. Our suggested wording is as follows:

There is sufficient development capacity to meet expected demand for housing in [Napier Hastings / Napier / Hastings] over the short-medium and long term as follows: [choose which is relevant]

Area

Housing bottom lines (number of dwellings)

Short to medium term (2020 to 2030)

includes an additional margin of 20%

Long term
(2031 – 2050)

includes an additional margin of 15%

2020 – 2050
TOTAL
(includes margins)

Napier-Hastings environment [RPS]

8,370

11,650

20,020

Hastings environment [Hastings DP]

5,190

7,640

12,830

Napier environment [Napier DP]

3,180

4,010

7,190

 

7.   Next steps and recommendations

The following is a summary of the key next steps for the housing assessment, and the key recommendations for additional work:

·    Publish the housing capacity assessment and make it publicly available;

·    Implement a monitoring programme (in line with the NPSUD requirements);

·    Prepare the business component of the HBA to inform the upcoming RSS or HPUDS review and in any case prior to the 2024 LTP. The business assessment must estimate the demand from each business sector for additional business land in the region over the short, medium and long term;

·    Prepare an RSS, or undertake the HPUDS review in accordance with the requirements of the NPSUD, which builds on and translates the key findings and outcomes from the housing assessment. Additional tasks that can be undertaken as part of that include:

Reviewing the infrastructure strategies based on the new growth projections. This could include more immediate preliminary work by Hastings District Council;

Considering whether an intensification strategy is required, building on the work that has already been done in this space by the Councils.

·    Undertake a detailed review of the operative planning provisions to ensure the urban provisions are enabling growth, aligning with the NPSUD requirements in terms of encouraging growth both up and out, and ensure they are not unnecessarily constraining development potential and opportunities;

·    As part of the FDS/RSS, consider the timing of greenfield growth over the medium term, taking into account the market expectations around transitioning to intensification set out in the Housing Assessment.


Item 8       Napier Hastings Housing Capacity Assessment 2021 - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Briefing Notes on Responding to New Housing Demand October 2021

Attachment 3

 

OUR GROWTH GAME PLAN

Finding the “sweetspot”

1.         Let’s plan for the medium-high growth projection scenario as the starting point for our sweetspot- it gives us some buffer (13% approx.) on top of the 20% NPSUD margin – that’s 30% more than the medium growth scenario, which has traditionally been regarded as the most likely.

2.         We should also plan to address the accumulated backlog (coming from a period of higher than anticipated growth) even though some of that is likely to be addressed by social housing providers. The sweetspot assumes a five year target to clear this backlog, estimated at around 1200 dwellings and does not discount the social housing component adding a further contingency.

3.         That’s the sweetspot we should plan for but Council could stretch this further by testing the High Growth scenario (which would give another 13% buffer).  Probably best to monitor this for now and adjust the programme if required latter on.

4.         The sweetspot assumes the current relative proportions of greenfield, intensification and rural housing development hold true under the medium to high growth projection and on this basis a greenfield shortage could manifest itself from 2024-2025 on the current LTP programme – our sweetspot needs to address this potential greenfield shortage situation.

5.         We also know that land development is not straight forward and history shows us the inevitable delays which can occur for a variety of reasons – we need to have a programme that’s agile and adaptable (Howard Street and Iona are two examples of potential risk exposure for us).

6.         The sweetspot therefore needs to have interchangeable areas ready to go.  The programme below looks to advance the necessary planning for both Lyndhurst and Brookvale to give us other options in both Hastings and Havelock North.

7.         To deliver the sweetspot the current forward programme therefore could need some adjustment based on monitoring over the next year or two.  In short that means the following should occur prior to the spatial plan outcomes being available for implementation:

§ Bring forward Brookvale Stages 2 and 3, by 2024 and 2027

§ Bring forward Lyndhurst Stage 3 and the Havelock Hills by 2025.

§ Bring forward stages of Kaiapo Road and Irongate by, by 2026.

§ Further staging can be considered as part of the spatial plan implementation from 2028.

This is depicted below: The highlighted circle shows the pre spatial plan focus.

cid:image001.png@01D7B922.3944DD40

Note: Quarterly and Annual Monitoring can allow for these or further programme adjustments as required and a fresh Housing capacity Assessment will need to be done to inform the next LTP in 2023/2024.  This could mean bringing forward the remaining stages of Brookvale, Kaiapo, Irongate and Copeland Road and introducing some of the 860 lot capacity held in Reserve areas.

So In Summary – Our High Level Game Plan is:

 

 

8.         What does this mean in terms of actions required?

§ Structure Planning and rezoning processes should commence shortly for Lyndhurst, Kaiapo Road and Irongate Road. In particular Structure Planning for Lyndhurst should be completed by the end of 2022. The structure planning for Kaiapo and Irongate would also need to be completed by the end of 2023.

§ Engineering and legal processes need to be completed for the whole of Brookvale by the end of 2022 as well.

9.       What shape are we in to get this done – does anything need to change?

§ Additional in-house or consultancy support will be needed.  However industry capacity is very short at present (what’s our strategy to respond)?

10.     Can we still mitigate our financial risk exposure – what does that look like?

§ A financial risk analysis will be needed to inform the next Annual Plan – if programme changes are confirmed.


GROWTH CAPACITY – WHATS IN THE TANK?

Zeroing in on the “sweetspot”

In Summary:

§ Having reviewed various forecast growth demands, the Housing Capacity Assessment concluded that we have sufficient urban development capacity to meet the demand scenarios in the short to medium term (3-10 years).

§ More investigation is required to assess our longer term capacity due to the lack of certainty regarding potential infrastructure servicing constraints (noting that further infrastructure will also be required to support our identified intensification areas). Over half of our longer term capacity has some uncertainty (which may be able to be resolved with more investigation) in respect of infrastructure servicing.

§ In the short to medium term the capacity conclusion is however, subject to some uncertainty and there are questions in officers minds about the influence of pent up demand or backlog arising from the recent period of higher than anticipated growth.

§ “Backlog” or “pent up demand” and assumptions have been added into our demand scenario (although this is not specifically required) – this provides us some buffer around various uncertainties (such as slow market adoption and acceptance in respect of intensification), and some form of oversupply may help with price easing and assistance to those trying to enter the market.

§ In terms of backlog its proposed to use the range of 1,000 to 1,500 dwellings which whilst more than the social housing register (750 households), this provides some buffer as noted above.

§ It is estimated that about 45 - 50% of total housing demand will need to be met by intensification over the next ten years depending on the amount of backlog included - greater than the 35% currently being experienced; at 50% this equates to circa 310 dwellings per year for 10 years (3,100 dwellings total) or 70% higher than in recent times – this is the intensification and here lies a significant challenge and potential risk.

§ That challenge is made more difficult as the greenfield programme is somewhat front loaded. It’s likely that the desired transition from greenfield to intensification under the current programme could be too sharp for the current market to deliver (i.e. easier greenfields will get delivered first). It’s also challenging given 25% of the intensification is in commercial settings with greater challenges to overcome.

§ Given the challenges above a transitional sweetspot (greenfield to intensification) needs to be determined.  Suggested changes to the LTP growth programme (i.e. bringing forward some greenfield areas) is our best lever to manage this transition.  The suggested programme amendments (discussed latter) would see the ten year programme try to achieve a balance of 40% greenfield, 35% intensification and 25% rural.

§ Despite the above challenges, assuming infrastructure issues can be addressed we could still be broadly on track to meet the (greenfield/intensification/rural) targets in HPUD’s (greenfield 35%, intensification 55%, rural 10%) over the longer term (beyond 10 years), although the effect of bringing forward the greenfield opportunities would mean around another 2,250 greenfields sites would be needed on these proportions beyond the ten year period.

 

Supporting Notes

1.    Our capacity for growth is defined by what is in our LTP for greenfield areas, what our District Plan allows in our existing urban area, and what can and does go on in the rural areas in response to growth demand.

2.    The National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPSUD) requires us to assess our capacity to meet forecast growth demands over the short, medium and long term being 3, 10 and 30 years.

3.    Stats NZ population growth forecasts provide a range (sensitivity) between high medium and low scenarios. Stats NZ sub-nation population forecasts were released earlier this year, i.e. not in time for our LTP, but our LTP forecast are very close to their medium growth scenario.

4.    After a period of extraordinary immigration driven growth over the last five years the latest scenarios see a dropping back from 2021-2023, and steadying after that, but at a higher levels than previously published.

5.    The Housing Capacity Assessment Report received recently compares our capacity to meet a    growth demand mid-way between the Stats NZ Medium and High Scenarios.

6.    The report concludes that we have sufficient feasible urban development capacity within our existing urban areas, rural residential zones and coastal settlements when combined with our LTP scheduled greenfield growth areas to meet that demand scenario in the short to medium term (3-10 years).

7.    In the long term our feasible intensification capacity is limited by infrastructure capacity, which reduces otherwise feasible capacity by 4581 units (of a total of 7520), 3055 of those may be feasible, but the infrastructure capacity for these is uncertain and requires further investigation. Even then a further infrastructure will be needed to support a projected additional 1500 intensification units, in the absence of any new greenfield growth areas being added to the programme.

8.    In the short to medium term the capacity conclusion is subject to some uncertainty and there are questions in officers minds about the influence of pent up demand or backlog arising from the recent period of higher than anticipated growth as well as a risk of slow adoption by the market to the feasible intensification opportunities modelled in the capacity study.

9.    While the NPSUD does not specifically require backlog to be dealt with in a commercially founded capacity assessment, it would accord with its intent to provide head room capacity for the market to allow some extra supply to facilitate price easing and allow some households that were forced out of the property market due to the earlier demand pressure to return, and for filtering up the property market to occur.

Intensification Targets

10. In order to meet demand in the short to medium term the greenfield capacity is augmented by the rural and intensification capacity. Developers will prefer greenfield development and in the first instance while the rural/rural residential demand component is more limited by price and lifestyle choices. This mean that the intensification component is effectively left to make up the rest of the balance and this creates some potential volatility and uncertainty for the intensification uptake expectations depending upon the size and nature of the greenfield programme delivery.

11. On the basis that these greenfield opportunities are taken up first and rural retains its current share at 25%, the remaining demand segment to be met by intensification is approximately 2060 or around 43%, compared to 35% currently, while greenfield would be 32% against 40% currently. – in other words this relationship would flip around. This would represent an uptake rate for intensification averaging 210 per year or 17% higher than those experienced over last few years (despite the investments undertaken by Kainga Ora over the last few years).

12. The proportions would shift to 50% and 25% if a backlog demand of 1200 dwellings was added (see below), an uptake rate of 310 per year or 70% higher than in recent times, but because the competiveness margin is intended to apply for capacity purposes, rather than real demand, the actual uptake impacts, may be overstated.

13. In addition the greenfield programme is somewhat front loaded with new capacity in the first three years becoming available, so greenfield/intensification shares over the first three years in theory would drop from 60% and 15% to 16% and 59% over the following seven years (or 44% and 31% over the first three years and 14% and 61% over the following seven with the backlog added). While in practice the developments will not all occur and be provided and taken up in such a rapid fashion, the point is the transition from greenfield to intensification under the current programme could be too sharp for the current market to respond effectively.

14. In addition available 25% of the feasible intensification capacity available over the initial ten year period around is in commercial environments. There is a risk associated with over reliance on this capacity as uptake will require larger investors and developer reticence may be greater than in residential settings, at least to begin with.

15. It may be less risky from a market perspective to rebalance the programme to deal with market backlog and transitioning issues by bringing forward some of the planned greenfield capacity earlier in the programme, without providing so much greenfield capacity that the intensification objective is undermined by the easier opportunities greenfield redevelopment represents.

Rebalancing

16. A balance based on the current pattern, which is in itself closer to the HPUDS transition, (after allowing for a greater share of rural development than HPUDS predicted in 2010 and 2017) is preferred. This still represents a challenge for intensification as the higher growth rates and backlog expectation will mean higher uptake rates than have currently been experienced will be needed.

17. That would see the ten year programme try to achieve a balance of 40% greenfield, 35% intensification and 25% rural  closer to the 44%,31%, 25% starting point referred to in paragraph 12 above). This would also reflect the likelihood that the greenfields developments planned in the first three years are not likely to be all consumed within that period but should extend into 2024 at a minimum.

18. While it will be a matter form the regional spatial plan a longer term transition as envisaged by HPUDS to achieve a 35% greenfield (in appropriate places), 55% intensification and 10 % rural balance will still be achievable once the infrastructure issues have been addressed, although the effect of bringing forward the greenfield opportunities would mean around another 2,250 greenfields sites would be needed on these proportions beyond the ten year period.

 

Backlog

19. For the purpose of finding the programme sweetspot a range of between 1000 and 1500 dwellings could be applied to the medium, medium-high and high growth scenarios. This compares with 750 households on the Social Housing register as representing the base value for any estimate.

 


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Diana Paynter, Project Manager

Te Take:

Subject:

Eco District Strategic Overview

        

 

1.0    Purpose and summary - Te Kaupapa Me Te Whakarāpopototanga

1.1       This report presents the Eco District Strategic Overview as developed by the Eco District Subcommittee with support from Council officers.  It is intended to be a “living document” that will continue to be updated over time to reflect our current and future context.

1.2       The Chair of the Eco District Subcommittee, Councillor Redstone will provide a verbal outline of the Strategic Overview at the meeting.

1.3       The Eco District Subcommittee is responsible for advising the Strategy and Policy Committee by:

§ Providing guidance to Council Officers in respect of the drafting of Councils Eco District Strategy and providing oversight of community engagement through the Special Consultative Procedures.

§ Providing oversight of the implementation of Council’s Eco District Strategies.

§ Providing oversight of the implementation of Council’s Green Corridor, Reserve Management Plans, Climate Change, Coastal Hazards, Sustainability and Biodiversity strategies, along with sustainability considerations within Council’s key infrastructural areas.

1.4       The Strategic Overview is primarily intended as a tool to support the effective delivery of the Eco District Subcommittee’s responsibilities that contributes to environmental sustainability of our district.  It outlines a high level overview of Council’s planned activities for each priority area. As noted above it will evolve as our context and priorities change.

 

1.5       The strategic overview highlights 4 priority areas of focus:

·        Water and Land resources used wisely

·        A better climate and carbon future

·        The natural environment is enhanced and protected

·        Council Services are green and healthy

1.6       The strategy contains a wide range of actions with many of the initial items around improving Councils awareness and an understanding to better inform likely more significant future decisions. It also highlights the approach of closer working with key partners to reduce duplication and where appropriate shared initiatives.

1.7       Some of the actions will require additional investment, these will be included in the Annual Plan process to enable Council to consider these requests within the wider funding request scope.

 

 

2.0    Recommendations - Ngā Tūtohunga

A)        That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled Eco District Strategic Overview  dated 2 November 2021.

B)        That the Strategy and Policy Committee approve the Eco District Strategic Overview document.

 

 

Attachments:

 

1

Eco District Strategy (unformatted version)

STR-7-10-21-202

Under Separate Cover Vol 2

 

 

 


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Lex Verhoeven, Strategy Manager

Te Take:

Subject:

District Development Strategic Overview

        

 

1.0    Purpose and summary - Te Kaupapa Me Te Whakarāpopototanga

1.1       This report presents District Development Strategic Overview (Strategic Overview) as developed by the District Development Subcommittee with support from Council officers.  It is intended to be a “living document” that will continue to be updated over time to reflect our current and future context.

1.2       The Chair of the District Development Subcommittee, Councillor Schollum will provide a verbal outline of the Strategic Overview at the meeting.

1.3       The District Development Subcommittee is responsible for advising the Strategy and Policy Committee by:

§ Providing guidance to Council officers in respect of the drafting of Council’s District Development strategies;

§ Providing oversight of the implementation of Councils housing development, transport development, economic development, urban zone development, city centre revitalisation and central business districts development;

§ Providing guidance to Council officers relating to development of rating policies and reviews of existing rating policy.

1.4       The Strategic Overview is primarily intended as a tool to support the effective delivery of the District Development Subcommittee’s responsibilities.  It outlines current work taking place and notes future strategic work to be undertaken at this point of time.  As noted above it will evolve as our context and priorities change.  The District Development Subcommittee have for some time also been focused on the work programme that drives the more specific projects and actions that give effect to Council’s strategic intent.

1.5       “A sufficient and supportive economy” is one of four community outcomes for our district contained in the Long Term Plan.  The strategic overview has been developed to show how this community outcome will be achieved, through various strategies and plans.  The content of the strategic overview is consistent with the Long Term Plan and any new funding arrangements are subject to Council deliberation and approval.

1.6       The strategic overview highlights 3 priority areas of focus:

·        Employment and growth

·        Housing

·        Transportation

 

2.0    Recommendations - Ngā Tūtohunga

A)        That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled District Development Strategic Overview dated 2 November 2021.

B)        That the Strategy and Policy Committee approve the District Development Strategic Overview document.

 

 

Attachments:

 

1

District Development Strategy

CG-16-3-00095

Under Separate Cover Vol 2

 

 

 


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Lee Neville, Economic Development Manager

Te Take:

Subject:

Summary of Recommendations of the District Development Subcommittee meeting held 12 October 2021

        

1.0    Summary

1.1       The purpose of this report is to advise that the recommendations from the District Development Subcommittee held on 12 October 2021 require ratification by Council.

1.2       The relevant District Development Subcommittee recommendations to be ratified are set out below.

 

2.0    Recommendation– Ngā Tūtohunga

A)   That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled Summary of Recommendations of the District Development Subcommittee meeting held 12 October 2021.

B)   The following recommendations of the District Development Subcommittee meeting held 12 October 2021 be ratified:

 

4.  Parking Policy Matters

             That the Strategy and Policy Committee adopt the draft policy relating to:

i.          Mobility parking

ii.         Criteria for waiving parking infringements

iii.         Providing parking exemptions for non-profit Charities, Non-Government                  Organisations, and volunteers working in the Hastings central business district

 

 

Attachments:

 

1

Parking Policy

CG-16-3-00094

Under Separate Cover Vol 1

 

 

 

 

 


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Rebekah Dinwoodie, Group Manager: Community Wellbeing & Services

Te Take:

Subject:

Report on Activity from the Great Communities Subcommittee

        

 

1.0    Executive Summary

1.1       The Chair of the Great Communities Subcommittee, Councillor Lawson will update the Strategy and Policy Committee on the recent work of the Great Communities Subcommittee.

The Great Communities Subcommittee work contributes to the purpose of local government by helping ensure Council’s Strategy & Policy settings enable Council’s efficient delivery of services and infrastructure to support delivery of Council’s strategic priorities.

 

2.0    Background

2.1       The Great Communities Subcommittee is responsible for advising the Strategy and Policy Committee by:

 

·    Providing guidance to Council officers in respect of the drafting of Council’s Great Community Strategic Overview, and providing oversight of any relevant Special Consultative Procedures.

·    Providing oversight of the implementation of Council’s Community Strategies.

·    Providing oversight of the implementation of Council’s Community Plans, Fabulous Flaxmere, Safer Hastings, Civic Pride and events, Youth Pathways, Keep Hastings Beautiful, Health, Cultural, Education, Sports, Arts and Heritage strategies.

3.0    Work Programme Update

3.1       The subcommittee continues to contribute to the development of the Great Communities Strategic Overview.

3.2       It has been agreed that the Great Communities Strategic Overview document will be updated annually.

3.3       A member of the Rural Community Board has been appointed to the Great Communities Sub-Committee.

3.4       Progress updates on all aspects of the Great Communities Strategic Overview are provided quarterly and can be found on the Hub for Councillors.

3.5       Below updates are from Great Community Workshops held on 24 August and 21 September 2021:

 

Communities are safe, vibrant and resilient

Priority

Status

Next Steps

1

HDC/NCC Smokefree Policy Review:

A joint review of the Smokefree Policy is being planned and a proposed review process developed.  A submission has been made on the Ministry of Health’s proposals for a new Action Plan for Smokefree 2025.

Joint Working Group with the Napier City Council has been established and are due to meet Monday 8 November 2021.

1

Joint Alcohol Policy Review:

This review is in its early stages and the commitment is to complete this body of work in a very similar fashion to the Smokefree Policy with the Napier City Council.

This will come back to Great Communities Subcommittee 16 November 2021 with details in terms of the approach.

1 & 3

Camberley Masterplan:

Further progress is pending key partner discussions.

Officers will keep Councillors updated.

1

Homelessness:

The Homelessness Discovery Study has been completed by an independent consultant and this was presented to the Sub-Committee along with the recommendations. 

The study will be presented to all Councillors at the S&P Committee 2 November.

1&5

Mayor’s Taskforce for Jobs (MTFJ):

The National Co-ordinator for the MTFJ, Noa Wooloff, provided an overview of what is occurring Nationally.

 

Officers are working with National Co-ordinator to ascertain how he can support what HDC are already doing in this space.

1

Safer Hastings:

The 2020 Safer Hastings’ Annual report and 4 case studies were presented to the Sub-Committee.  The Safer Communities Foundation New Zealand noted the impressive governance group membership and commended the high quality of the case studies.

No further action required.

 

 

There are great spaces for all people

Priority

Status

Next Steps

3

 

 

Splash/Windsor Park Project Update:

An overview of past work completed and options for the future for both Splash Planet and Windsor Park was provided to the Sub-Committee.

 

Coming to a full Council Workshop on the 11th of November.

3

Sport NZ Play, Active Recreation and Sport Plan Development:

Ryan Hambleton (Sport HB) led the Sub-Committee through the current environment, what the purpose of the plan is and why it is needed.

Sport Hawke’s Bay to lead the development of this plan with support from Hastings District Council, Napier City Council, Central Hawke’s Bay District Council, Wairoa District Council and Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

Support.

 

3

Aquatics Review Update:

An overview of the facilities, services, visitor numbers, feedback, rating requirement and potential impact of the new Sports Park aquatics centre on HDC Aquatics facilities was provided to the Sub-Committee. 

Officers to continue the review and this will come back through the Sub-Committee.

 

Our Youth have positive pathways

Priority

Status

Next Steps

5

Youth Strategy:

The new Youth Strategy is in development.  Engagement with youth has commenced and a draft strategy should be received before the end of 2021.

 

The strategy will be presented to the Great Communities Sub-Committee early in 2022.

5

Education:

Daniel Murfitt, Director of Education Hawke’s Bay/Tairawhiti, MoE provided an update to Councillors on current priorities including the Attendance Project.

Officers will continue to work with MoE to support Attendance and other Projects wherever requested.

 

 

4.0    Recommendations – Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled Report on Activity from the Great Communities Subcommittee dated 2 November 2021.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 

 


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Lee Neville, Economic Development Manager

Lex Verhoeven, Strategy Manager

Te Take:

Subject:

Report on Activity from the District Development Subcommittee

        

 

1.0    Executive Summary

1.1       The purpose of this report is to update the Strategy and Policy Committee on the delivery of the District Development Strategy.

1.2       The Chair of the District Development Subcommittee (Subcommittee), Councillor Schollum will update the Committee on the delivery of the Subcommittee’s work programme.

1.3       The Subcommittee received informal updates from Council officers on the following areas of work on 31 August:

·    Spatial Plan Partner Engagement Scoping Process

·    Parking Masterplan Strategy-Process Needs

·    H.B. Business Hub Hastings Update

·    Business Attraction-progress on major employer relocations to/from Hastings

·    What is HDC doing to attract quality retailers/hospitality to Hastings Central Business District.

·    NPS on highly productive land

·    Public Housing Medium Term Plan Update

·    Report quarterly on Residential, commercial, industrial land uptake, forwarded to Strategy and Policy Committee quarterly.

 

1.4       The Subcommittee received met on 12 October with a report on Parking Policy Matters and recommends that the Strategy and Policy Committee approve the Parking Policy Matters recommendations.

1.5       The Subcommittee received informal updates from the Council officer on the Hastings District Council and Hastings District Identity Review.

2.0    Background

             The District Development Subcommittee (DDC) is responsible for advising the Strategy and Policy Committee by providing guidance to Council officers in respect of drafting of Council’s District Development Strategy and providing oversight of community engagement through Special Consultative Procedures.

3.0    Work Programme Update

3.1       The District Development Strategy will be sent to the Strategy and Policy Committee for approval.

 

INFORMAL UPDATES

WE ENABLE EMPLOYMENT AND GROWTH

Priority

Status

Progress Indicator

Next Steps

H.B Business Hub Hastings pilot

Utilised until 31 October

Options provided in informal update

Hub lease expires in October

Business Attraction employer relocations

Supporting information

Information available www.hastingsnz.com

Development of landing page

Retailers/Hospitality attraction CBD

Information gathering

Identify the number of vacancies

Report back to Subcommittee

HOUSING SUPPLY MATCHES NEEDS

Spatial Plan Partner Engagement

Partner engagement

Background work on-going

Partner & stakeholder engagement on-going

Parking Masterplan Strategy

Parking masterplan development

Feedback from stakeholders received

Scoping report to Subcommittee

NPS on highly productive land

Updated Subcommittee

Working on a draft of NPS-HPL

Update to Youth Council

Public Housing medium Term Plan

HDC engaged with partners

Regional place based housing plan

Update Subcommittee on progress

Residential, commercial, industrial land uptake

Land supply monitoring by officers

Report compiled for NPS

Report back to Subcommittee

 

 

4.0    Recommendations – Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled Report on Activity from the District Development Subcommittee dated 2 November 2021.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 

 


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

Craig Thew, Group Manager: Asset Management

Te Take:

Subject:

Report on Activity from the Eco District Subcommittee

        

 

 

1.0    Executive Summary

1.1       The Chair of the Eco District Subcommittee, Councillor Redstone will update the Strategy and Policy Committee on the recent work of the Eco District Subcommittee.

1.2       The Eco District Subcommittee work contributes to the purpose of local government by helping ensure Council’s Strategy & Policy settings enable Council’s efficient delivery of services and infrastructure to support delivery of Council’s strategic priorities.

2.0    Background

2.1       The Eco District Subcommittee is responsible for advising the Strategy and Policy Committee by:

 

·    Providing guidance to Council officers in respect of the drafting of Council’s Eco District Strategies and providing oversight of any relevant Special Consultative Procedures.

·    Providing oversight of the implementation of the Councils Eco District Strategies

·    Providing oversight of the implementation of Council’s Green Corridor, Reserve Management Plans, Climate Change, Coastal Hazards, Sustainability and Biodiversity strategies.

 

3.0    Priorities

3.1       The strategic overview highlights 4 priority areas of focus:

·        Water and Land resources used wisely

·        A better climate and carbon future

·        The natural environment is enhanced and protected

·        Council Services are green and healthy

4.0    Eco District Strategic Overview Update

4.1       The Eco District Subcommittee met on the 18th of October and after a final robust discussion the draft strategy was signed off by subcommittee members and the chair.

4.2       It has been agreed that the Eco District Strategic Overview document will be reviewed and updated annually.

4.3       The Strategic Overview is primarily intended as a tool to support the effective delivery of the Eco District Subcommittee’s responsibilities that contributes to environmental sustainability of our district.  It outlines a high level overview of Council’s planned activities for each priority area. As noted above it will evolve as global and local context and priorities change.

 

5.0    Eco District Work Programme Update

5.1       The subcommittee has spent significant amount of time to develop Council’s first Eco District Strategic Overview with support from Council officers and the strategy has been signed.

5.2       A member of the Rural Community Board has been appointed to the Eco District Subcommittee

5.3       The work to commence will focus on partnership & engagement as well as gathering information to be able to establish a baseline for future activities.

5.4       A full council workshop was had with HBRC to consider areas of shared outcomes and work. Officers have been tasked to work up a multi-point plan of shared opportunities and areas of focus between the 2 organisations. A joint working group between HBRC and HDC is being formed to develop shared initiatives and associated work streams in the relevant priority areas.  This planning will be reported back.

5.5       The work programme will have an overall focus on working with NKII to identity strategic alignments.

Solid Waste and Waste Minimisation:

5.6       A report is being presented to the Joint Waste Futures Project Steering Committee to inform them of the current and upcoming consultation(s) that the Ministry of the Environment is undertaking regarding waste minimisation. The Emission Reduction Plan, Waste Minimisation Act and New Zealand Waste Strategy discussion documents were released during the week ending 15th October and consultation period closes on 24 November 2021.

5.7       Officers will provide a verbal update and presentation to the Committee meeting on 3 November regarding the detail of each of the consultations. The report is recommending that the Waste Futures Committee Chair (who is also the Eco District Committee Chair) and Deputy Chair (Napier CC) work with Officers to compile joint submissions on both the consultations.

5.8       Te hau mārohi ki anamata - Transitioning to a low-emissions and climate-resilient future (Emission Reductions Plan). The first emissions reduction plan will set the direction for climate action for the next 15 years. It will also set us on a pathway to meeting our 2050 net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and biogenic methane targets by implementing policies and strategies for specific sectors.

5.9       Te kawe i te haepapa para - Taking responsibility for our waste.  Proposals for a new waste strategy and issues and options for new waste legislation. (Waste Minimisation Act Review, New Zealand Waste Strategy Review and Litter Act Review).

5.10    Reserve Management Planning – Council continues to progress a number of Reserve management planning processes. The main ones being Frimley, Esk, and the review of the Havelock natural reserves (Tainui, Tauroa, and Tanner) plans.

 

 

 

6.0    Recommendations – Ngā Tūtohunga

A.    That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled Report on Activity from the Eco District Subcommittee  dated 2 November 2021.

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 

 


 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

Te Hui o Te Kaunihera ā-Rohe o Heretaunga

Hastings District Council: Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting

Te Rārangi Take
Report to Strategy and Policy Committee

Nā:

From:

John O'Shaughnessy, Group Manager: Planning & Regulatory Services

Rowan Wallis, Environmental Policy Manager

Te Take:

Subject:

Report on Activity from the District Planning and Bylaws Subcommittee

        

 

 

1.0    Executive Summary

1.1       The Chair of the District Plan and Bylaws Subcommittee, Councillor Kevin Watkins will give the Strategy and Policy Committee an update on the Subcommittee’s work programme.

2.0    Background

2.1       The District Planning and Bylaws Subcommittee is responsible for environmental policy associated with the Resource Management Act 1991. This includes the need for the review of the District Plan and making sure that it is kept up to date and is consistent with and reflects National Policy Statements and National Environmental Standards.    

2.2       The other main role of the District Planning and Bylaws Subcommittee is the setting and review of Bylaws under the Local Government Act 2002 and various other Acts:

·    to protect the public from nuisance

·    protecting, promoting, and maintaining public health and safety

·    minimising the potential for offensive behaviour in public places

 

3.0    Work Programme Update

3.1       The Council has endorsed and set the priority for the work timetable for the Environmental Policy team and this is outlined below:

 

Priority

Status

Progress Indicator

Next Steps

Ensuring ePlan is up to date

Ongoing

The Council has received its Certificate from Ministry for the Environment to confirm that we are meeting the requirements for an electronic district plan set down in the National Planning Standards.

Draft new section completed as a template.

The new format of the district plan is being worked on to meet the requirements of the National Planning Standards by 2024.

Irongate /York Structure Plan/ Plan Change

  Ongoing

Draft Master Plan from Isthmus received. Assessment reports (eg Stormwater modelling, geotech etc being undertaken) 

Master Plan to be signed off by HTST Board.   

 

Plan Change to implement changes required to protect  matters of cultural importance on Te Mata Rongokako

Ongoing

Further landscape assessment being undertaken to ascertain whether prohibition line should come down to Waimarama Road  

Workshop with Landscape architects to be held with Heretaunga Takoto Noa Committee and District Planning & Bylaws Subcommittee prior to bringing it back to their respective meetings in Nov 2021.

Residential Intensification Design Guideline 

Completed

Released to community Feb 2021 and now being monitored

Reporting back to Council in Feb 2022 on effectiveness of the Guideline and recommendations.

Investigation into Inclusionary Zoning for Housing

Ongoing

Considered by District Planning & Bylaws Subcommittee August 2021.

That inclusionary zoning be further investigated for incorporation into the Hastings Housing Strategy and District Plan once a Hastings Housing Trust or similar entity has been established.

Marae Plan Change followed by a Mapping of the Marae

Ongoing

Plan Change 3 Publicly notified under First Schedule to the Resource Management Act. Hearing of submissions completed 21 June 2021.

Appeal period open.

Landscape section / Wāhi Taonga review to include a reviewed nomination process.

Yet to commence

Commencing on settlement of Maungaharuru Tangitū Trust Appeal – estimated to be an 18-month -2 year project.

MTT Appeal decision received. Discussion paper to be brought to the Heretaunga Takoto Noa Standing Committee and District Plan and By Laws Sub-committee for guidance on beginning the project. 

State of the Environment Report

Ongoing

Considered by District Planning and Bylaws Subcommittee August 2021.

To be finalised and brought back to Council for adoption.

Implement National Planning Standards – we have until 2024 to implement.

Ongoing

Currently establishing the new format for the district plan. A model section has been drafted and this is being discussed with the Ministry for the Environment.

To District Planning and Bylaws Subcommittee for sign off of format following endorsement from Ministry for the Environment.

Plan Change to tidy up matters in the District Plan

Ongoing

Currently being prepared.

Plan Change to District Planning & Bylaws Subcommittee.

Plan Change to amend the Light Industrial Zone provisions

Yet to commence

 

 

Forestry Slash (the hazard effects on waterways created by forestry pruning and thinnings) if required as a result of joint monitoring approach with HB Regional Council

Yet to commence

Action required will result from the monitoring undertaken by the forestry officer.

 

The environmental policy team also worked with Dr James Graham on organising the Hui ā- Iwi held on 15th October 2021 to seek partnership with mana whenua on the Spatial Plan. 

The completion of the Pou project at Te Ara Kahikatea was successfully delivered culminating in the official opening on Friday 8th October 2021. 

 

 

4.0    Recommendations – Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Strategy and Policy Committee receive the report titled Report on Activity from the District Planning and Bylaws Subcommittee dated 2 November 2021.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 

           


 

HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL

 

Strategy and Policy Committee MEETING

 

Tuesday, 2 November 2021

 

 

 

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:

 

19        COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020

 

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

 

 

 

 

19         COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020

Section 7 (2) (h)

The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

To protect the disclosure of commercially sensitive information of other entities from the public.

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.

 



[1] This is different to the bottom lines which are not required to include backlog, but inlcude the required 20% competitveness margin. This is because a large part of the backlog response is expected to  come from social housing providers some of which will be outside of the commercially feasible capacity the NPSUD is aimed at. The figure used in paragraph 4.14  includes the backlog (for the resons outlined in parapraph 4.9),  but does not have the 20% competitivenss margin added, as it is not part of the predicted actual growth.

[2] The numbers in this table are rounded. For the purpose of calculating the housing bottom lines in table 7, unrounded numbers have been used. Table 6.1and 6.2 of the M.E. report contains the unrounded numbers used to calculate the housing bottom lines.

[3] This information is based on CoreLogic data. This data appears to be lower than the rating information. The CoreLogic data is used to compare the trends against NZ-wide patterns. The commercially feasible analysis is not based on the CoreLogic data and instead the rating information and sales information is used. 

[4] By aggregating the results, some finer nuances are masked and some categories are combined. 

[5] The total housing estate is used because the is churn in the market – some households buy ‘new’ dwellings and when they move, those dwellings open up for other households to occupy.  This filtering process continues across new and existing dwellings.