Te Rārangi Take Meeting Agenda
KOMITI HERE KAUPAPA POLICY COMMITTEE
Rātū 28 Hōngongoi 2015 Tuesday 28 July 2015
hei te 4.30pm Te Kopa Nui o te Kaunihera-ā-rohe at 4.30pm Council Chamber
Tiamana: (Chairperson): Cr Gordon Brown (Chairperson) Mema: (Members): Cr Grant Coward (Deputy) Cr Keith Allum Cr Murray Chong Cr Heather Dodunski Cr Richard Handley Cr Colin Johnston Cr Craig McFarlane Cr Howie Tamati Cr Roy Weaver Mayor Andrew Judd
POLICY COMMITTEE TUESDAY 28 JULY 2015
POLICY COMMITTEE
Objectives To develop strategies, policies and plans for the council to promote the district’s community outcomes and priorities and to consider matters not the function of another committee.
Addressing the committee Members of the public have an opportunity to address the committee during the public forum section or as a deputation.
A public forum section of up to 30 minutes precedes all committee meetings. Each speaker during the public forum section of a meeting may speak for up to 10 minutes. In the case of a group a maximum of 20 minutes will be allowed.
A request to make a deputation should be made to the secretariat within two working days before the meeting. The chairperson will decide whether your deputation is accepted. The chairperson may approve a shorter notice period. No more than four members of a deputation may address a meeting. A limit of 10 minutes is placed on a speaker making a presentation. In the case of a group a maximum of 20 minutes will be allowed.
Purpose of Local Government The reports contained in this agenda address the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to decision making. Unless otherwise stated, the recommended option outlined in each report meets the purpose of local government and:
• Will help meet the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses;
• Would not alter significantly the intended level of service provision for any significant activity undertaken by or on behalf of the Council, or transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset to or from the Council.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 POLICY COMMITTEE TUESDAY 28 JULY 2015
APOLOGIES None advised.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Elected members to indicate any conflicts of interest.
PUBLIC FORUM None advised.
DEPUTATIONS None advised.
COMMITTEE MINUTES RECOMMENDATION That the minutes of the Policy Committee (16 June 2015), and the proceedings of the said meeting, as previously circulated, be taken as read and confirmed as a true and correct record.
A ITEMS FOR DECISION BY COMMITTEE
A1 SOLID WASTE BYLAW AMENDMENTS The matter for consideration by the Council is the approval for consultation of proposed amendments to the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste and a proposed reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags.
A2 AMENDMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS POLICY The matter for consideration by the Council is the approval for consultation of proposed amendments to the Development and Financial Contributions Policy to include finance costs in development contribution and financial contribution charges. The opportunity is also taken to clarify the distribution of benefits for district wide community facilities within a development.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 POLICY COMMITTEE TUESDAY 28 JULY 2015
A3 UPDATE ON BUILDING (EARTHQUAKE-PRONE BUILDINGS) AMENDMENT BILL This report provides information on the interim report of the Local Government and Environment Committee on the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill.
A4 CHARTER FOR 5TH/7TH RNZIR BATTALION The matter for consideration by the Council is an update of the Charter for the 5th/7th RNZIR Battalion (previously the 5th Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki Battalion Group).
B ITEMS FOR RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
B1 ADOPTION OF 2016 MEETING SCHEDULE The matter for consideration by the Council is the adoption of ordinary meetings for Council, standing committees and community boards in 2016.
B2 COUNCIL APPOINTEE TO HERITAGE TARANAKI The purpose of this report is to appoint a council representative to Heritage Taranaki.
B3 REPRESENTATION REVIEW The matter for consideration by the Council is formulating a proposal on the representation arrangements for the 2016 and 2019 local body triennial elections.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 1 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A1
SOLID WASTE BYLAW AMENDMENTS PREPARED BY: Kimberley Hope (Manager Compliance), Richard Mowforth (Senior Policy Advisor) TEAM: Water and Wastes APPROVED BY: Mark Hall (Manager Water and Wastes) WARD/COMMUNITY: District Wide DATE: 25 June 2015 FILE REFERENCE: DM 6555230
MATTER The matter for consideration by the Council is the approval for consultation of proposed amendments to the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste and a proposed reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags.
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION That having considered all matters raised in the report the Council approve for consultation the proposed amendments to the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste and the proposed reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags.
COMMUNITY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS The Kaitake, Clifton and Waitara Community Boards endorsed the officer’s recommendation.
The Inglewood Community Board recommended the following amendment to be added: “…maximum weight of refuse bags be changed to 12kg.”
COMPLIANCE Significance This matter is of some importance. This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter:
1. Approve for consultation the proposed amendments to the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste and the proposed reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags. Options 2. Make changes to the proposed amendments to the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste and the proposed reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags and approve for consultation.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 2 ITEM A1 ITEM FOR DECISION
COMPLIANCE The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter are the Affected persons residents of New Plymouth District who receive a kerbside refuse collection service.
Recommendation This report recommends option one for addressing the matter. Long-Term Plan / Annual Plan No. Implications The recommended option will be inconsistent with Council Policy P10-12 Refuse Collection Levels of Service. This policy will require review following the outcome of the consultation on the proposed Significant amended bylaw. Policy and Plan Inconsistencies The recommended option will ensure consistency of the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste with the Long-Term Plan 2015-2025 and the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report recommends that the Council approves for consultation amendments to the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste (the bylaw) and a reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags. The amendments to the bylaw are to ensure alignment of the bylaw with a Council resolution that approved the new kerbside collection methodology. The proposed reduction in maximum weight of refuse bags is for health and safety reasons. The proposed consultation on these matters will be carried out in accordance with section 82 of the LGA 2002 and will be reported back to the Council at a later date.
BACKGROUND The bylaw outlines requirements to ensure that refuse collection and disposal does not have significant environmental or health impacts, by regulating recycling, ownership of the waste stream, refuse storage, waste management and waste collection.
A comprehensive review of Part 9 of the bylaw was undertaken in 2013 and an amended bylaw was adopted which provided allowance for any future changes to the kerbside collection methodology (via Appendix 1 of the bylaw). The proposed amendments that were consulted on included a reduction in the maximum refuse bag weight from 20kg to 15kg, for health and safety reasons. The bylaw was adopted with a maximum refuse bag weight of 20kg.
As part of consultation on the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (2011) and the Long Term Plan 2012-22, the Council undertook consultation on solid waste matters including the method of collection for kerbside rubbish, recycling and organic waste. Following this consultation, a public tender for the provision of regional solid waste services
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 3 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A1 was undertaken in late 2013 which included options for the kerbside collection methodology. On 18 March 2014 the Council approved a new kerbside collection methodology consisting of:
• General waste – weekly collection with 52 bags provided to serviced households. • Mixed recycling – fortnightly collection of mixed recyclables in a 240L mobile bin. • Glass recycling – fortnightly collection of glass recyclables in a 60L crate. The contract to provide this service was awarded to EnviroWaste Services Limited and signed on 18 December 2014. The new kerbside collection service will be implemented on 1 October 2015.
As the regulatory mechanism for managing solid waste, the bylaw is required to be amended to align with the Council approved new kerbside collection methodology. The proposed amended bylaw is included in Appendix 1 of this report; the amendments are identified as strikethrough text for text to be deleted and underlined text for proposed new text.
Amendments to the bylaw The proposed changes are separated into three categories:
1. Proposed amendments to the actual bylaw. These are changes within the body of the bylaw and require consultation that meets the requirements of s82 LGA 2002.
2. Amendment of refuse collection rules to reduce the bag weight from 20kg to 10 kg. This proposed change is additional to the Council resolution that approved the new kerbside collection methodology and as such requires consultation that meets the requirements of s82 LGA 2002. The rules are listed in Appendix 1 of the bylaw.
3. Amendment of refuse collection rules to align with the Council resolution that approved the new kerbside collection methodology. These changes do not require consultation and are for information purposes only.
Assessment of the proposed amendments to the bylaw against the consultation requirements for bylaws under section 156 LGA 2002 - it is considered that the most appropriate means of consultation on the proposed amendments is to consult in a manner that gives effect to the requirements of s82 LGA 2002 (principles of consultation). The reasons for this are that the proposed bylaw amendments are aligning the bylaw with an earlier Council resolution that approved a new kerbside collection methodology. Extensive consultation on these matters was previously carried out and the Council obtained the views of interested and affected parties on the proposed new kerbside collection methodology. The only proposed amendment in addition to aligning the bylaw and resolution is the proposed reduction in bag weight. This amendment is not considered to be significant as the health and safety considerations of the reduced bag weight outweigh any significant change to the existing level of service.
The proposed changes are discussed below. A copy of the bylaw with the proposed amendments is included in Appendix 1.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 4 ITEM A1 ITEM FOR DECISION
1. Proposed changes to the bylaw The new collection methodology requires the following changes to the bylaw.
1.1 Clause 4.2 Proprietary Bins Clause 4.2 currently allows for a dwelling to lease a bin from the Council contractor’s commercial collection and in such cases, restricts the occupant from putting out a rubbish bag as well as the leased bin. The new collection contract allows the Council’s contractor to only pick up approved refuse containers as part of the Council service. No commercial collection will be undertaken at the same time by Council’s collection contractor. There will continue to be other contractors providing private collection services independent of the Council’s service and they may undertake these on the same day as the Council’s collection.
If a household pays a targeted refuse rate, they will be provided with 52 approved refuse containers (bags) regardless of whether or not they lease a proprietary bin. The proposed changes allow the householder to use these approved refuse containers in addition to the leased bin.
1.2 Clause 4.6 Refusal to collect Clause 4.6 (d) currently allows the contractor to refuse to collect kerbside refuse if the container is not an approved container or proprietary bin. In accordance with the change proposed in clause 4.2 relating to proprietary bins, it is proposed that the proprietary bin reference is removed from clause 4.6 (d) as the Council’s collection contractor will not be collecting proprietary bins in conjunction with the Council collection service.
1.3 Clause 11.1 Transition Provision The proposed amendment to Clause 11.1 is a correction of a minor typo.
2. Reducing the maximum weight for refuse bags Appendix 1 of the bylaw lists the refuse collection rules created under clause 4.1 of the bylaw. Rule 1.1 of Appendix 1 currently defines the maximum weight of an approved refuse container as 20kg. It is proposed that the location of this rule be changed from its current position in the appendix and inserted in Rule 3 (as rule 3.4) so the weights of all containers can be defined under one clause.
Under new rule 3.4 it is proposed that the maximum weight of an approved refuse container be reduced from 20kg (as currently outlined in Rule 1.1) to 10kg. Health and safety considerations are the principal reason for this proposed reduction in maximum bag weight.
A reduction in the bag weight from 20kg to 15kg was proposed in the previous review of the bylaw (2013). Since this time, legislative requirements have become more stringent and new health and safety legislation is expected to come out later this year which will increase accountability for Contract Principals (the Council). In addition, as part of the roll out of the new refuse collection contract, any health and safety requirements have been reviewed to ensure appropriate controls are put in place to prevent injuries.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 5 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A1
There are a number of risk factors associated with collecting refuse in bags; a principal risk is the high level of manual handling involved in the collection. Significant risk factors in how a worker handles the bag are the weight of the bag and the way the bag is lifted and carried.
An assessment of the manual handling risk has been undertaken by the collection contractor using the Risk Assessment tool from WorkSafe’s Code of Practice for Manual Handling1. The assessment concluded that: • A 10kg maximum bag weight may result in injuries for less resilient people – workplace redesign is recommended for these people. • A 15kg maximum bag weight may result in injuries for trained and fit people – workplace redesign is recommended to control the contributory factors identified (load, environment, people, task and management) i.e. it is recommended that controls are put in place to reduce the factors that contribute to injuries. • A maximum bag weight of 20kg has the potential to significantly increase the risk of injury and puts it into the category where it may cause serious harm.
The contractor is able to put in place a number of controls to reduce the risk of injury from this work. However the weight and type of bags are determined and enforced by the Council. The Contractor has indicated that a maximum bag weight of 10kg will address their health and safety requirements. It is recommended that an appropriate maximum bag weight should be set to ensure that the Council has taken all practicable steps to address the risks of injury under the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992. Based on the risk assessment, a reduction in the maximum bag weight to 10kg is considered an appropriate control to minimise the risk of injury.
Research on the number of incidents for different collection methods highlights that bagged collections sustain a higher number of injuries compared to automated bin collections2. The research showed that strain/sprain injuries are the highest form of injury for bag collections (47% of injuries from bagged collections).
The failure to manage significant hazards (those that can cause serious harm) can increase the liability of both the Council as the Principal, and the Contractor. If a serious injury were to occur, the maximum fine following conviction is $250,000, although in cases where the person’s action or failure to act occurs, and they know it is likely to cause serious harm; the maximum fine is $500,000 and/or a maximum term of imprisonment of two years.
1 The Code of Practice for Manual Handling outlines a detailed methodology to determine the risk of injury from manual handling. It does not define a maximum weight but provides a ranking system depending on the type of manual handling. This has been developed by Work Safe New Zealand, New Zealand’s workplace health and safety regulator. 2 WasteMinz 2012: An assessment of the health and safety costs and benefits of manual vs automated waste collections. WasteMinz Position Report. 29 March 2012
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 6 ITEM A1 ITEM FOR DECISION
A survey undertaken in 2012 indicated that the average bag weight in New Plymouth District kerbside collections is 6.67kg with a range from 1.06kg to 18.14 kg3. Of all the bags weighed in this survey: • 71% percent were less than 8kg. • 84% were less than 10kg. • 5% exceeded 12kg. Based on this data, the proposed reduction in the maximum weight of a refuse bag to 10kg may impact on the solid waste disposal preferences of 16% of households. If a 15kg maximum weight were implemented, 5% of households may be affected. However, with the introduction of improved recycling and an increase in the diversion of waste into recycling, it is expected that the actual impact on households would be less than these statistics suggest. Other territorial authorities with bag rubbish collection have defined the following maximum bag weights. It is noted that six out of the 26 territorial authorities listed below have a maximum bag weight above 15kg. Eight territorial authorities have maximum weights under 15kg. The variation between councils is most likely due to changes being implemented as bylaws come up for review and during the renewal of collection contracts. South Taranaki and Stratford district councils are not included in the list as both provide bins for waste collection rather than bags.
Territorial authority Maximum bag weight (kg) Ashburton District Council 15 Auckland Council 10 Buller District Council 20 Central Hawkes Bay District Council 10 Dunedin City Council 15 Gisborne District Council 20 Grey District Council 15 Hamilton City Council 20 Hastings District Council 10 Hurunui District Council 15 Hutt City Council 15 Manawatu District Council 10 Marlborough District Council 15 Matamata-Piako District Council 20 Napier City Council 10 Palmerston North City Council 10 Porirua City Council 15 Selwyn District Council 12 South Waikato District Council 20 Tararua District Council 15 Tauranga City Council 15 Waikato District Council 20
3 WasteNot Consulting 2012: Survey of solid waste in New Plymouth District. Prepared for New Plymouth District Council, April 2012
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 7 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A1
Territorial authority Maximum bag weight (kg) Waimakariri District Council 15 Waimate District Council 12 Waitomo District Council 15 Wellington City Council 15
Based on the risk assessment, good practice guidelines and in order to fulfil the Council’s health and safety obligations, it is recommended that the maximum bag weight be reduced from 20kg to 10kg. Remaining with the status quo of a maximum bag weight of 20kg is not considered to be a practicable option as this is not considered good practice and is not acceptable from a health and safety perspective due to the potential for serious harm injuries.
If the recommendation to reduce the maximum bag weight to 10kg is not adopted, the Council still has an obligation to control the hazard. Other options for controlling the hazard could include: 1. Having two people on each collection truck. This would reduce the number of bag lifting repetitions, and length of time manual handling would be required. However this would also significantly increase the risk of injury relating to moving vehicles i.e. having a driver and runner on a truck increases the likelihood of the truck moving while the runner is still completing the bag collection. Having only one runner/driver on a collection truck has been introduced specifically to address the significant risk of serious harm or fatality that two people on a collection truck pose. This option is not considered best practice. This option would also increase the cost of the refuse collection service due to the additional staff resource required. 2. Provide bins for waste and utilise automated lifting machinery. This would significantly reduce the risk relating to manual handling. This option has been considered during the tender process and based on the cost of bins this option was considered to be too expensive (i.e. an estimated additional $50 per household per year) and therefore was considered not to be a feasible option. The contract has now been committed to and any change to the selected collection receptacles would also incur additional costs at this stage in the implementation.
Alignment of refuse collection rules with a Council resolution. The remaining changes to Appendix 1 of the bylaw (excluding the change to the refuse bag weight as detailed above) are made under clause 4.1 of the bylaw which enables the Council to make and amend refuse collection rules by resolution. These changes are to reflect the Council resolution of 18 March 2014 which approved the new collection methodology which will be implemented from 1 October 2015. The changes are shown for information purposes only and do not form part of the consultation on amendments to the bylaw and the proposed reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 8 ITEM A1 ITEM FOR DECISION
Key changes include:
1. The type and provision of approved refuse and recycling containers. 2. What can be put into approved containers. 3. The maximum weight of recycling containers. 4. Use of refuse containers in non-serviced areas. 5. Replacement of excess refuse stickers with approved refuse containers purchased from the Council or approved retail outlets. 6. Separation of glass from other recyclables (as opposed to paper and cardboard). Proposed consultation To be consistent with the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, the proposed consultation on this matter will be carried out in accordance with section 82 of the LGA and will include the following: • Preparation of information to meet the requirements of section 82A of the LGA. • Make the information available to the public. • Allow written submissions for a period of up to four weeks. • Consideration of all submissions prior to making decisions.
It is considered that this report and the attached bylaw with the proposed amendments meet the information requirements of s82A and will be made available to the public.
SIGNIFICANCE In accordance with the Council's Significance Policy, this matter has been assessed as of some importance because the proposed changes to the bylaw are to align the bylaw with a previous Council resolution on a new kerbside collection methodology. Consultation has already been undertaken to obtain the views of interested and affected parties regarding the new kerbside collection methodology. The proposed reduction in maximum weight of refuse bags will affect peoples’ existing use of refuse disposal but the health and safety considerations justifying the reduction in refuse bag weights are deemed to override any significant change in level of service.
OPTIONS
Option 1 Approve for consultation the proposed amendments to the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste and the proposed reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags.
This option would ensure alignment of the bylaw with an existing Council resolution on the new kerbside collection methodology and will ensure consistency with the LTP 2015-2025.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 9 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A1
The changes are also consistent with what is written in the Regional Solid Waste Services contract which is a legally binding document. If these changes are not adopted, the bylaw will be inconsistent with the contract. This puts the Council at risk of challenge by the other parties to this agreement.
This option would ensure that the Council is consulting on a maximum weight for refuse bags that is consistent with health and safety legislation.
Option 2 Make changes to the proposed amendments to the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste and the proposed reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags and approve for consultation.
Any changes proposed under this option may require further analysis prior to releasing the bylaw for consultation.
The community will have the opportunity to provide their views and preferences on the matters discussed in this report during the consultation process outlined in this report.
Recommended Option This report recommends Option 1 approve for consultation the proposed amendments to the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 Part 9 Solid Waste and the proposed reduction in the maximum weight of refuse bags, for addressing the matter.
APPENDICES Appendix 1 Proposed New Plymouth District Council Bylaw Part 9 Solid Waste.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 10 ITEM A1 ITEM FOR DECISION
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015
9 Part
New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008
(as amended and re-adopted, July 2013)
Solid Waste
The purpose of this part of the bylaw is to ensure that refuse collection and disposal does not have significant environmental or health impacts, by regulating recycling, ownership of the waste stream, refuse storage, waste management and waste collection.
1. Authority
1.1 This part is made under:
a) Sections 145 and 146 of the Local Government Act 2002; and
b) Section 56 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008; and
c) Section 64 of the Health Act 1956; and
d) Section 12 of the Litter Act 1979.
2. Purpose
2.1 The purpose of this part is to contribute to the:
a) Promotion of effective and efficient waste management and minimisation in the New Plymouth District;
b) Implementation of the Council’s Waste Management and Minimisation Plan;
c) Purpose of the Act;
d) Regulation of refuse collection and disposal, including recycling, ownership of the waste stream, refuse storage and waste management. It also outlines the responsibilities of customers who use the Council’s solid waste services and provides for licensing of waste collection contractors;
e) Protection of the health and safety of waste collectors, waste operators and the public; and
f) Management of litter and nuisance in public places.
3. Interpretation
3.1 This part shall be in addition to the provisions of Part 1 Introductory and if this part is inconsistent with Part 1 Introductory then the provisions of this part shall prevail.
3.2 In this part unless the context otherwise requires: Definitions
Act means the Waste Minimisation Act 2008.
Approved container means any container approved by the Council for the collection, transportation or disposal for a category of waste and collected by or on behalf of the Council.
Authorised hours of operation in regard to any transfer station or landfill means the hours during which the waste facility shall be open to receive waste from commercial operators or the public or such other hours as shall be publicly notified by the Council from time to time.
Designated rubbish collection point means a site along a refuse collection route for residents to deposit approved containers and recyclable refuse for collection.
SOLID WASTE 1
Cleanfill material means any inert material that does not undergo any physical, chemical, or biological transformation that will cause adverse environmental effects or health effects once it is disposed of to ground.
Commercial premises means premises which are occupied substantially for retail; office or other commercial purposes and includes halls, schools and public buildings.
Commercial refuse means refuse from commercial premises and includes floor sweepings, waste paper; flattened cartons tied in bundles and refuse of a type similar to household refuse but does not include trade refuse.
Dispose means in relation to waste to:
a) Cast, place, throw, drop; and
b) Cause or permit waste or other material or thing to be cast, placed, thrown or dropped.
Diverted material has the same meaning as that term in part 1 section 5 of the Act.
Excess refuse sticker means an official refuse sticker available for purchase from the Council’s service centres or authorised retail outlets. Each sticker pays for the collection and disposal of one approved refuse container. These will be replaced by excess refuse containers on 1 October 2015
Green waste/compostable refuse means lawn clippings, weeds, plants, other soft vegetable matter or other organic waste, which by nature or condition and being free of any contaminants will degenerate into compost. This does not include cooked food, timber, ponga trees, agapanthus, flax, bamboo, ginger plant, gorse cuttings, cabbage tree, norfolk pine, tree stumps or branches greater than 100mm in diameter.
Household refuse means waste from household premises arising or resulting from domestic housekeeping operations but does not include, green waste, commercial waste, prohibited waste, hazardous waste, trade waste or liquid waste or construction, demolition or renovation wastes.
Landfill contractor means any person or company, whether or not employed by the Council, engaged in the operation, control or management of a landfill.
Landfill means land set aside by the Council upon which the deposit and disposal of solid wastes to ground can lawfully occur.
Liquid waste means any waste with a solid content of less than 20 per cent per volume and waste which liberates free liquids when transported.
Litter shall have that meaning as described under the Litter Act 1979.
Multi-unit property means a multiple tenancy property comprising of three or more separately occupied residential or business units, of more than three stories whether in the same building or in separate buildings, and held either in common
2 New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008
ownership or in separate ownership.
Prohibited waste means waste containing any:
a) Material capable of causing injury to any person or animal unless the material is sufficiently contained to prevent injury.
b) Material capable of causing damage to the approved container or likely to shatter in the course of collection material unless the material is sufficiently contained to prevent damage to the approved container or to prevent injury.
c) Material that may endanger any person, animal or vehicle which may come in to contact with it prior to, during or following collection, transportation or disposal.
d) Liquid or any viscous fluid.
e) Radioactive wastes, but excluding domestic smoke detectors.
f) Used oil and lead-acid batteries.
g) Hazardous waste.
h) Medical waste.
i) Material prohibited by the Council.
Proprietary bin means a commercially provided mobile refuse bin, drum, bag, or similar container under contract to a licensed waste operator, and which is emptied on a regular basis.
Recyclable refuse means any waste that is potentially recyclable such, aluminium cans, steel cans, plastic products, glass, paper, cardboard and other such items as may be publicly notified by the Council as recyclable refuse from time to time. It does not include diverted material, as rags and textiles but it includes any component or element of diverted material, if the component or element is disposed of or discarded
Refuse or "waste" means any solid material or thing that is discarded or selected for disposal. It does not include diverted material but it includes any component or element of diverted material, if the component or element is disposed of or discarded.
Refuse collection contractor means any person or company contracted by the Council for the purpose of the collection of refuse.
Refuse disposal site means any landfill or closed landfill operated by or for the Council for the disposal or temporary storage of refuse or any specified refuse. It includes those transfer stations owned by and operated for the Council at Okato, Inglewood, Waitara and Tongaporutu utilised for the temporary storage of refuse.
Rejected refuse sticker means an official sticker to explain why the refuse collection contractor has elected not to remove or empty any approved container placed out for refuse collection.
SOLID WASTE 3
Resident means any person who resides in the district; or any person who operates a business from premises within the district; or any person temporarily visiting the district for the purpose other than that of depositing of refuse for disposal at any landfill or transfer station within the district.
Residual waste or solid waste:
a) Means anything disposed of or discarded; and
b) Includes a type of waste that is defined by its composition or source (for example, organic waste, electronic waste, or construction and demolition waste); and
c) To avoid doubt, includes any component or element of diverted material, if the component or element is disposed of or discarded.
Resource recovery facility means any facility that receives, collects, sorts, stores or processes waste to ensure waste minimisation and may include a commercial composting operation, a recovery operation, a materials recovery facility, a transfer station and a recycling depot. It excludes any facility that receives, collects, sorts, stores or processes diverted material unless a significant component or element of the diverted material is disposed of or discarded.
TCLP test means a ‘Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure’ test that estimates the potential for both organic and inorganic constituents to leach from a non-liquid waste. The test results indicate the environmental acceptability of disposing the non- liquid to landfill.
Trade refuse means scrap, waste material, any sewerage or liquid, or rubbish resulting from the conduct of any factory, manufacture, process, trade, market or other industrial operation or undertaking.
Transfer station means any land or other place owned by or vested in the Council or under its control and set aside by the Council for the receiving, containment or transfer of refuse.
Transfer station contractor means any person or company contracted to the Council to operate, control or manage or assist in the control or management of a transfer station.
Waste collector means any person who collects or transports waste and includes commercial and non-commercial collectors and transporters of waste.
Waste disposal facility has the same meaning as that term part 1 in Section 7 of the Act.
Waste operator (or operator) means a person who owns or manages a landfill site, cleanfill site, managed fill site, monofill site or a resource recovery facility.
4 New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008
4. Household waste and recyclables collection
4.1 The Council may from time to time by resolution, make and Refuse collection amend rules governing the collection of refuse and/or recyclable rules refuse by or for the Council, including (without limitation):
a) The weights, numbers, types and contents of approved containers for disposal of refuse and recyclable refuse.
b) The placing of approved containers for such collection in rural areas.
c) Recycling, including procedures for disposal of newspapers and flattened cardboard.
d) The separation of recyclable refuse and residual waste.
e) The days and hours that an operated transfer station will be available for solid waste disposal and management.
Such rules shall be enforceable under this part.
4.2 Except as is provided in clause 4.4, instead of an approved Provision rubbish container every any occupier of a dwelling or any portion of refuse bags or thereof separately occupied may lease a proprietary bin for the pProprietary depositing of household domestic refuse. bagsbin
A leased proprietary bin does not negate the property owner from paying the targeted refuse rate on the property rate account. When a property paying a targeted refuse rate leases a proprietary bin from the refuse collection contractor a separate approved container cannot be placed out for collection in conjunction with the proprietary bin.
4.3 Every resident participating in the Council’s kerbside recycling Recycling service shall also provide approved containers for the collection containers of specified recyclable refuse.
4.4 Every owner of a multi-unit property may, instead of providing Multi-unit individual approved containers for each apartment or unit, properties provide, maintain and keep clean proprietary bins for depositing household refuse and have arrangements for the regular emptying of the refuse subject to the satisfaction of the Council.
4.5 Where the Council makes provision for a refuse collection service, Responsibilities users of that service must: of the occupier of residential a) Place approved refuse containers out after 5pm the night premises before the collection day, or by 7am on the day of the collection. (Neither the Council nor any refuse collection contractor or agent employed by the Council will accept responsibility for the non-collection of waste if it is not put out for collection by 7am on the day appointed for collection in the area concerned, or in the case of special circumstances, the time specified on the notification).
b) Place all residual waste into an approved container.
c) Attach an excess refuse sticker to all excess waste.
d) Ensure that all refuse is in an approved container or proprietary bin.
SOLID WASTE 5
e) Ensure that the contents of any approved container do not soak or escape so as to be injurious or dangerous to health, cause an offensive smell or be a source of litter.
f) Protect contents of the approved container from the rain, dispersal by wind or ingress of flies and vermin.
No person shall put their approved container outside another person’s property without the prior approval of an authorised officer.
4.6 No person shall deposit refuse in a manner where: Refusal to collect
a) The container is damaged or otherwise likely to cause injury to the collector; or
b) In the opinion of the Council or refuse collection contractor, the refuse is in an unsanitary or in an offensive condition; or
c) The refuse includes refuse prohibited under this bylaw; or
d) The container is not an approved container or proprietary bin; or
e) The container is in a condition that allows spillage of refuse; or
f) The container or the refuse does not comply with the rules under this part in terms of type, volume, weight, numbers, placement or any other detail; or
g) The number of approved containers placed out for collection is greater than the refuse units rated on the household rate account unless the additional container has an excess refuse sticker attached; or
h) Any other reason which the refuse collection contractor deems would cause a health and safety concern to the refuse collection operation.
4.7 Where any of the conditions in clause 4.6 occur the refuse collection contractor shall not be obligated to collect the refuse.
4.8 When the refuse collection contractor does not remove any Labelling of container of refuse or recyclables because of non-compliance uncollected with this bylaw they are required to place a “Rejected Refuse refuse Sticker” on the container to inform the occupier why the refuse has been rejected.
4.9 The occupier is responsible for any refuse not collected because of Removal of non-compliance with this bylaw. Any refuse or recyclables shall uncollected be removed back to the occupier’s premises by noon on the day refuse following collection day and alternative arrangements for disposal shall be made by the occupier as soon as practicable.
4.10 Unless by written approval of an authorised officer no trade refuse Collection of or commercial refuse will be removed or disposed of as part of commercial the household refuse collection service unless such refuse is refuse contained in approved container and each container has an excess/commercial refuse sticker attached.
6 New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008
4.11 No person, other than the occupier of the property from which the Ownership of waste has come, shall on any public place interfere with or the waste remove any waste which is awaiting collection. stream
4.12 No person shall bury any household refuse in such a manner as to Alternative cause a nuisance. disposal of household refuse 4.13 No refuse shall be transported by vehicle through, over or upon Refuse to be any road or public place unless such refuse is sufficiently and covered during adequately covered to prevent the refuse from falling or transportation otherwise escaping on to any road or other public place.
5. Trade refuse
5.1 Every owner or occupier of any premises shall ensure that in the Accumulation opinion of an authorised officer no undue accumulation of trade and storage of refuse or salvaged material is permitted or suffered to remain or trade waste be in, on, or about such premises or any portion thereof.
5.2 Any perishable or putrid trade refuse shall be removed by the Removal of occupier or owner of a premise on a daily basis, at the cost of the perishable and owner or occupier, except where stored in an approved manner putrid waste that does not cause a nuisance of any kind.
5.3 The Council will not remove refuse from any non-residential Collection of premises except under clause 4.10 of this part. trade refuse
Note: for rules on the disposal of Trade Waste (liquid waste) refer to Part 11 Trade Waste Bylaw 2008.
6. Refuse disposal facilities
6.1 All persons entering any refuse disposal site, transfer station or Responsibilities landfill shall observe and comply with all erected signs, or any of users instructions given by an authorised officer with regard to operational and safety matters relating to the site or the deposition of refuse or recyclable refuse therein.
6.2 No person shall at any refuse disposal site or landfill site: Disposal of refuse a) Enter other than for the purposes of depositing refuse and/or recyclables and only during such hours as the site is open, except with the prior approval of an authorised officer.
b) Dispose any special waste without the written consent of an authorised officer and in accordance with whatever conditions may be imposed in relation to the nature of the disposal required, or any charges that may be imposed.
c) Tip, throw, or deposit any refuse in any manner at any place on any refuse disposal site which is not intended for that purpose.
6.3 An authorised officer may refuse to accept, at any refuse disposal Refusal site any refuse for which fees or charges have not been paid or of waste which, in his or her opinion:
SOLID WASTE 7
a) May cause undue hazard to the health and safety of the public or to any operator of the site, or b) May damage the environment; or
c) Cannot be adequately treated or handled by the normal methods used on that site.
6.4 No person shall remove any deposited refuse, article or materials Scavenging from any refuse disposal site without the consent of an authorised officer, provided that this shall not apply to any person authorised by the Council to remove articles or materials for recycling or reuse.
6.5 All refuse, garden waste, recyclable refuse, unwanted articles or Ownership of other things deposited and left at any refuse disposal site shall waste be deemed to be the property of the Council which may dispose of such materials by recycling or in such other manner as it sees fit. The person so depositing and leaving such refuse shall be deemed to have abandoned all claims to ownership thereof but shall not be relieved of any liability for damage flowing in any way from such action nor from the penalties provided for offences against this part.
6.6 No person shall take any animal on to any refuse disposal site or Animals allow any stock to wander or graze thereon without the prior consent of an authorised officer.
Note: For further rules on animals in public places see Part 5 Public Places New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008.
6.7 An authorised officer may require any person to leave any refuse Unlawful entry disposal site, with or without any refuse brought by that person on or for disposal, who is on the site contravening the provisions of this interference part. with operations
7. Council transfer stations
7.1 All persons using the facilities of a transfer station shall ensure Responsibilities that: of users
a) All refuse is separated into compostable refuse, recyclable refuse and residual waste categories.
b) All refuse is off-loaded at the place and in the manner directed by the site operator.
c) All reasonable steps are taken to assist in the minimisation of waste.
d) All reasonable steps are taken to protect and promote the health and safety of all of those persons on site including site staff.
e) No prohibited waste is off-loaded.
7.2 No person shall deposit any special or hazardous waste in any Hazardous place except at the hazardous waste facility at New Plymouth waste transfer station at Colson Road, and persons using the hazardous place facility must before using the facility:
8 New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008
a) Complete all health and safety documentation.
b) Pay any applicable fee for the disposal of commercial quantities of hazardous waste.
7.3 No person shall: Recyclable waste a) Deposit any general refuse in any place, facility or container designated for the deposition of recyclables.
b) Disregard any reasonable instruction of an authorised officer to separate recyclables from general refuse and to deposit them as directed.
c) Wrongly or unlawfully dispose of non-recyclable refuse or hazardous waste through the recycling system.
7.4 Any person disposing green waste must ensure that: Greenwaste
a) It is free of contaminants; and
b) It is sorted into firewood, shredable material and fine material.
8. Council landfills
8.1 The minimum opening hours for Council landfills shall be approved Landfill by resolution and publicly notified. opening hours
The following types of general refuse will be accepted at the Acceptable Colson Road landfill: wastes
a) Municipal or household refuse collected for disposal.
b) End of life tyres - quartered or de-walled.
c) Non-hazardous commercial and industrial refuse acceptable for co-disposal with municipal or household refuse.
d) Clean fill if authorised as acceptable material by an authorised officer.
8.2 No person shall deposit any special waste, except at the Special wastes hazardous waste facility, and unless it is:
a) Asbestos (acceptable only if provided in accordance with the Asbestos Regulations 1998); or
b) Confidential documents; or
c) Small quantities of solids and liquid waste suitable for co- disposal with municipal refuse; or
d) Hydrocarbon contaminated material; or
e) Non hazardous liquid waste and waste from commercial grease interceptors which cannot be disposed of at the Carrousel Waste Water Treatment Plant; or
f) Non-hazardous commercial and industrial refuse; or
SOLID WASTE 9
g) Screenings from approved waste water treatment plants; or
h) Small quantities of waste products containing potentially hazardous materials that are not likely to have adverse effects when contained within the residential refuse collection; or
i) Landfill leachate; or
j) Other such waste which when tested by a TCLP test shows that the leachate concentrations will not affect the landfill’s trade waste consent conditions.
8.3 No person shall access the landfill to dispose of special wastes unless all relevant documentation has been completed and cited by the landfill operator.
8.4 Prohibited waste shall not be accepted at any landfill. Prohibited wastes
9. Licensing of Commercial Waste Collectors and Waste Disposal Operators
9.1 No person shall, unless licensed by Council to do so, engage in General the collection, transportation or disposal of: requirement for license a) Waste (excluding hazardous waste) in excess of 10 tonnes per annum;
b) Any hazardous waste, or
c) Diverted materials in excess of 10 tonnes per annum.
9.2 a) Applications for licences must be made in the Council's Application for prescribed form, describe the activities in respect of licence which the licence is sought and be accompanied by payment of the application and processing fees and such further supporting information as the Council may require to enable processing of the application.
b) The holder of an existing licence may apply to the Council for a renewal of that licence.
c) Licences may be granted or refused at the discretion of the Council, upon such terms and conditions as the Council thinks fit.
d) A licence is personal to the holder and is not transferable.
9.3 When considering an application for a licence and the conditions to Consideration be imposed under it, the Council may take into account matters of application relating to the suitability of the applicant to hold a licence for licence including but not limited to the following:
a) The extent to which the licensed activities will promote public health and safety and achievement of the Council’s waste management and minimisation plan and waste reduction initiatives.
10 New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008
b) The applicant’s experience, reputation and track record in the waste industry, including any known past operational issues which may affect, or may in the future affect, the applicant’s performance.
c) The type of waste to be collected or transported.
d) The manner of treatment (if any) and disposal of the waste type, and the identity of the disposal facility, resource recovery facility, landfill site, managed fill site, mono fill site or cleanfill site at which it is proposed that treatment or disposal will occur.
e) The terms and conditions under which such disposal of waste is permitted and the existence of or need for any statutory approvals, authorisations or consents required to be held or complied with in respect of such disposal.
f) The frequency and location of the waste collection, transportation or disposal services.
g) The specifications of the vehicles, equipment and approved containers to be used for the collection, transportation or disposal of waste.
9.4 The Council may impose such terms and conditions on any licence Conditions of as it determines, which may include without limitation: licences
a) Term – a licence may be granted for a term of up to five years, but will be reviewed annually to ensure
compliance.
b) Licence fee – the licensee must pay an annual licence fee in an amount determined by the Council from time to time and publicly notified.
c) Bond – the Council may from time to time and on a case by case basis require a licence holder to post a bank guaranteed bond.
d) Compliance with standards – the licence holder must
comply with the Council’s standards and policies for waste collection, transportation or disposal services including, in respect of collection services:
- The collection of any litter within five metres of an approved container awaiting collection and any
litter spillage from the licence holder’s vehicle during the collection, transportation or disposal process;
- Provision of waste collection services within reasonable times specified by Council.
e) Provision of information – the licence holder must provide waste data to the Council during the term of the licence in the form and at the times determined by the Council from time to time including the following data:
- Waste log books for each vehicle operated in accordance with the licence recording the quantity, composition and destination of each waste type and the point in time when such data was recorded during the waste collection,
SOLID WASTE 11 transportation or disposal process. - Weighbridge receipts.
- Gate records of waste tonnage.
9.5 The Council will take all reasonable measures to keep commercially sensitive information confidential including by the aggregation of such information for recording purposes.
10. Licensing of resource recovery facilities and fill sites
10.1 Any operator who operates a disposal facility, resource recovery facility, landfill site, clean fill site, managed fill site or mono-fill site must obtain a licence to do so from the Council.
10.2 Clause 10.1 does not apply to land used for the disposal of clean fill material where such disposal:
a) Is of clean fill material sourced directly from that land; or
b) Consists solely of:
i) Hardfill that is natural or uncontaminated or cover material, or both; or
ii) Not more than 30 cubic metres, or such greater amount as the Council may approve, of other hardfill material specified pursuant to clause 20, measured over any continuous 12 month period.
10.3 The Council may grant a licence in the case of a:
a) Municipal Solid Waste Industrial Waste Landfill
b) Clean fill site.
c) Controlled / Managed Fill site.
d) Construction and Demolition Industrial Waste Landfill.
10.4 The determination and issuing of the licences shall be in accordance with clause 9.2 to 9.5.
10.5 The holder of a licence under this clause must comply with the conditions of the licence.
11. Transitional Provision
11.1 Any person who collects, transports or disposes of waste must obtain a licence to do so from the Council within two years orof clauses 9 and 10 come into force.
12. Offences
12.1 Any person commits a breach of this Bylaw who fails to comply with the requirements of this Bylaw and the decisions made under this Bylaw.
12 New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008
12.2 Every licensee breaches this Bylaw who fails to act in full compliance with the terms and conditions of its licence, this Bylaw and the decisions made under this Bylaw.
13. Notifications, Actions and Penalties
13.1 Any person who does not comply with this Bylaw or a decision made under it may (without limitation) be subject to the following action being taken against them:
a) Non-compliant notification including a time period to rectify the issue. If compliance is not reached within the specified time period of the notification, then Council may rectify or organise for the issue to be rectified, and recover all costs from that person in doing so.
b) Enforcement for a breach of this Bylaw, as provided for in the Local Government Act 2002 or the Waste Minimisation Act 2008.
c) Enforcement of any offence that may have been committed under the Litter Act 1979 as a result of the non-compliance.
d) An enforcement order or abatement notice under the Resource Management Act 1991.
e) Where a licensee fails to comply with any of the terms of conditions of the licence or acts in a manner which, in the opinion of Council, renders the licensee unfit to hold such licence then the Council may revoke the licence in accordance with the process for revocation of licenses as stipulated in the Introductory Part.
f) Any other steps that may be taken by the Council at law.
SOLID WASTE 13 APPENDIX 1
This appendix is for information purposes only. It does not form part of the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008.
In accordance with clause 4.1 of Part 9 of the New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008, the Council resolves the following rules in relation to solid waste collection and disposal.
1. Approved Refuse Container
1.1 The approved refuse containers shall consist of a red pre-printed New Plymouth District Council bag standard rubbish bag or a plastic or twin wall paper bag with a total volume not exceeding 20kg or 60 litres.
1.2 The Council will provide each domestic premise rated for the refuse collection service with 52 approved refuse containers per year.
2. Approved Recycling Containers
2.1 The approved recycling containers shall consist of • a 240 L mobile recycling bin for mixed recyclables and • a 60 L crate for glass bottles and jars.The approved recycling container should consist of a supermarket sized plastic bag.
2.12.2 The Council will provide each domestic premise rated for the refuse collection service with a set of approved recycling containers.
3. Weights, types and contents of containers which will be collected
3.1 The following items can be placed in the 240L approved recycling container:
a) Paper
b) Cardboard
c) Aluminium and tin cans
d) Plastics numbered 1 to 7 (excluding plastic bags and expanded polystyrene).
3.2 The following items can be placed in the 60L approved recycling container:
a) Unbroken glass bottles and jars (all colours)
3.13.3 No person shall deposit or cause or allow any of the following materials to be deposited in any approved refuse bagcontainer placed for collection:
a) Any hazardous, prohibited or special waste co-mingled with domestic waste; or
b) Explosives, hot ashes, highly inflammable material or infectious material; or
c) Liquids, acids, printer’s ink, paint, or any other viscous fluid; or
d) Any ashes, broken bottles, glass, glass articles, broken crockery, china or other such sharp articles or materials unless such sharp articles or materials are wrapped so as to prevent injury to persons engaged in collection or disposal work; or
14 New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008
e) Any matter, thing or refuse of any kind whatsoever, other than household refuse unless specifically allowed by a specific policy; or
f) Any trade refuse except as allowed in clause 4.9 of by the bylaw; or
g) Any pesticides, herbicides, fungicides or other toxic compounds; or
h) Any effluent from chemical toilets or waste removed from any part of a drainage or sewerage system; or
i) Any sharps such as medical needles, skin piercing devices; or other similar sharp objects. Broken glass from domestic household waste may be accepted as long as it securely wrapped in newspaper as to prevent piercing of the refuse bag.
j) Such other types of prohibited waste as may be publicly notified by the Council from time to timeAny other prohibited wastes.
3.4 Approved refuse containers shall not exceed 10kg in weight.
3.5 Approved mixed recycling containers shall not exceed 70kg in weight.
3.23.6 Approved glass recycling containers shall not exceed 12kg in weightAny approved refuse bags in excess of the numbers over and above the approved number of bags for the property must have clearly visible official excess refuse stickers.
SOLID WASTE 15 4. Placing of containers for collection in unserviced areas
4.1 Residents who live in unserviced rural areas and along routes which Council refuse collection vehicles travel on may use the service with prior approval by Council, by placing each approved rubbish refuse containerbag adjacent to the roadway in an obvious location or in designated specific collection points. Each bag must have an excess/commercial refuse sticker attached. 4.14.2 The Council or its contractor shall be under no obligation to collect approved containers which do not meet the requirements of the Bylaw and these rules and in such cases the depositor of the container shall be liable for such disposal.
5. Excess Refuse and Recycling Stickers
4.15.1 Excess refuse residual waste may be placed at the kerbside in approved pre- purchased approved refuse containers purchased from Council service centres or approved retailersstickers may be used to ensure excess refuse is collected by the Council.
4.2 Excess refuse stickers may be used onin approved containers may be used on refuse collection routes and at designated collection points as approved by the Council; provided that in all cases the containers and wastes contained are compliant with the Council’s existing level of service.
5.2 The provisions of the Bylaw and these rules relating to the collection of approved containers apply to the collection of approved excess refuse containers.
4.35.3 The Council or its contractor shall be under no obligation to collect approved excess refuse containers with or without excess refuse stickers which do not meet the requirements of the Bylaw and these rulesthis policy, and in such cases the depositor of the bag container shall be liable for such disposal.
5.4 Excess refuse stickers must be used for all excess refuse until 30 September 2015. From 1 October 2015 excess refuse must be placed in approved refuse containers and stickers cannot be used. Unused stickers can be exchanged for approved refuse containers until 31 March 2016from the previous financial year will continue to be accepted on approved containers for up to 6 months after expiry .
4.45.5 Additional recycling containers can be used if these are approved containers, purchased from Council service centres.
6. Recycling
6.1 A kerbside recycling service shall be provided to all designated collection areas in New Plymouth District.
6.2 Recycling facilities shall be provided at all New Plymouth District Council landfills and transfer stations, with restricted processing at Tongaporutu and shall include meeting the additional costs of glass recycling.
6.3 Recycling services by community organisations and the private sector are encouraged.
6.4 No bottle banks at locations other than at landfills and transfer stations shall be provided but the public are encouraged to make use of the kerbside recycling service and other recycling centres for the disposal of glass bottles and jars.
16 New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008
6.5 Any person depositing newspapers and flattened cardboard for recycling must ensure that they are placed wrapped and tied securely in briefcase size bundles or in an approved container.
7. Waste Separation
7.1 Newspapers and flattened cardboardGlass must be separated from other recyclables.
7.2 Any person disposing of solid wasterefuse for household collection must separate recyclable refuse and residual wastefrom other refuse.
7.3 No person shall place or leave any non-recyclable materials in any recycling container or at any recycling station.
SOLID WASTE 17 5.8. Days and hours during which a council-owned and operated transfer station will be available for solid waste disposal and management
8.1 The minimum opening hours for Council-owned and operated transfer stations are:
a) Tongaporutu three hours per week.
b) Waitara 16 hours per week.
c) Okato nine hours per week.
d) Inglewood 10 hours per week.
8.2 Nothing in Appendix 1, clause 8.1 above shall refer to New Year’s Day, the day after New Year’s Day, Waitangi Day, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, Easter Monday, Anzac Day, Queens Birthday, Labour Day, Christmas Day and Boxing Day when the transfer stations will be closed.
18 New Plymouth District Council Bylaw 2008 1 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
AMENDMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS POLICY PREPARED BY: Richard Mowforth (Senior Policy Adviser), Graeme Trevathan (Manager Business Advice) TEAM: Corporate Strategy and Policy, Financial Services APPROVED BY: Mitchell Dyer (Acting Manager Corporate Strategy and Policy), Phil Armstrong (Manager Financial Services) WARD/COMMUNITY: District wide DATE: 14 July 2015 FILE REFERENCE: ECM6573978
MATTER The matter for consideration by the Council is the approval for consultation of proposed amendments to the Development and Financial Contributions Policy to include finance costs in development contribution and financial contribution charges. The opportunity is also taken to clarify the distribution of benefits for district wide community facilities within a development.
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION That having considered all matters raised in the report the Council approve for consultation the proposed amendments to the Development and Financial Contributions Policy to include finance costs in development contribution and financial contribution charges and to clarify the distribution of benefits for district wide community facilities within a development.
COMPLIANCE Significance This matter is significant. This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter:
1. Approve for consultation the proposed amendments to the Options Development and Financial Contributions Policy.
2. Do not approve for consultation the proposed amendments to the Development and Financial Contributions Policy.
The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter are any Affected persons persons who may be required to pay a development contribution. Recommendation This report recommends option one for addressing the matter. Long-Term Plan / Yes. Including finance costs in development and financial Annual Plan contributions would increase the revenue from these funding sources Implications predicted in the LTP.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 2 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
COMPLIANCE Significant Yes. This report proposes changes to the Council’s current Policy and Plan Development and Financial Contributions Policy. Inconsistencies
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The matter for consideration by the Council is the approval for consultation of proposed amendments to the Development and Financial Contributions Policy to include finance costs in development contribution and financial contribution charges. The opportunity is also taken to clarify the distribution of benefits for district wide community facilities within a development.
During May 2015 legal advice was sought on the ability to include finance costs in development contribution and financial contribution charges as part of the current 2015-2025 LTP. The advice indicated that it was too late for the charges to be included in the LTP and recommended that the Council could only amend the policy via public consultation on the proposal in a manner that gives effect to the requirements of section 82 LGA 2002.
Including finance costs in development contribution and financial contribution charges aligns with the provisions of the LGA 2002. This will increase contributions from approximately $700,000 to $1.5m per annum and will reduce the financial impact on other funding sources of recovering these costs.
The following report discusses the proposed amendments to the policy. A copy of the policy including the proposed amendments is included in Appendix 1. The proposed changes are highlighted in the policy as underlined and strikethrough italics text.
BACKGROUND In March 2015 Council officers attended a workshop on RMA best practice. Discussion in this workshop inferred the ability to include interest costs with respect to developer agreements and financial contributions. Subsequent consideration of interest costs regarding developer agreements and financial contributions with respect to Area Q were carried out post March 2015. During May 2015 a legal opinion was sought on the ability to include finance costs in the Council’s Development and Financial Contributions Policy. The legal advice received confirmed that finance costs could be included in development contributions and financial contributions. However, the legal advice also indicated that it was too late to be included in the current 2015-2025 LTP. The advice recommended that the Council could only amend the policy via public consultation on the proposal in a manner that gives effect to the requirements of section 82 LGA 2002.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 3 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
Inclusion of finance costs The inclusion of finance costs ensures alignment of the policy with the LGA 2002 regarding the term ‘total cost of capital expenditure’. The inclusion of finance costs associated with loan funding for capital expenditure on a project was confirmed through legal advice.
The inclusion of finance costs is also supported by submissions received on the policy during the Long-Term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP), with one submission requesting that infrastructure required by urban growth should be funded as much as possible by development contributions. Officers carried out further analysis of the policy with consideration of the submission and concluded that the inclusion of finance costs was an appropriate option to address this matter.
The policy has been amended in several locations to include finance costs into the development and financial contribution charges framework.
The inclusion of finance costs also ensures alignment of the policy with the overall framework of the Revenue and Financing Policy including the principle of exacerbator pays ‘if a person (or persons) creates a problem which generates cost for the Council and the community, then that person should bear some or all of that cost’.
The following amendments are proposed to incorporate finance costs in the policy:
• Introduction Amended to ensure consistent terminology and to provide information on what is included in finance costs.
• Statement 38 Amended to insert a statement enabling finance costs to be recovered through contributions.
• Table 1 Amended to include a column on estimated finance costs. The development contribution charge per household unit equivalent for each relevant project has also been amended as a consequence of including finance costs.
• Statement 42 Updated to explain the amendment to Table 1 to include finance costs. The inclusion of NZTA subsidies into table 1 is also now covered in this statement.
• Statement 46 Amended to align with the legislative terminology of the LGA 2002 relating to the total cost of capital expenditure which is generally considered to include finance costs.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 4 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
• Statement 52 Amended to provide details of the significant assumption for finance costs when calculating development contributions. The assumption links the finance costs used in the policy to the Council’s forecast interest cost of borrowing in the LTP on a 30 year table loan basis. This assumption ensures consistency between the policy and the LTP in this regard.
• Statement 57 Amended to represent how finance costs are included in the development contribution calculation process.
• Statement 75 Amended to represent the inclusion of finance costs in the method of calculation of contributions.
• Statement 79 A consequential amendment to update the development contribution charge for parks as a result of the inclusion of finance costs.
Distribution of benefits for district wide community facilities within a development A new policy statement (new statement 13 with following statement numbers adjusted accordingly) is proposed to be included in the ‘distribution of benefits’ section of the policy. This statement clarifies the distribution of benefits for those community facilities within a development that have wider benefits than just for the specific development within which it is located. The statement recognises that it is reasonable and fair to recover capital expenditure from all developments that benefit from those community facilities within specific development that have wider benefits. An example would be the extension of the coastal walkway through a specific development.
Engagement Section 102(4)(b) LGA 2002 enables the Council to amend the policy at any time after consulting on the proposed amendments in a manner that gives effect to the requirements of s82 (principles of consultation) LGA 2002.
This report recommends that the proposed policy amendments are approved for public consultation. It is considered that this report and the appendix meet the information requirements of s82A LGA 2002. It is proposed to undertake four weeks of public consultation to obtain the views of persons who may be affected or interested in the matter. This approach is consistent with the Council’s approach to consultation in accordance with s82 LGA 2002 as specified in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
Any feedback received during the consultation process will be analysed and reported back to the 3 November Council meeting with recommendations on the proposed policy amendments.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 5 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
SIGNIFICANCE In accordance with the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter has been assessed as significant because of the proposed change in Council policy to recover finance costs through development contributions and the proposed change to the development contribution charge compared to the current charge consulted on and approved as part of the LTP. The financial benefits for other funding from including finance costs in development contribution charges has been assessed as of some importance as while not material on an annual basis, it is still of benefit to the Council.
OPTIONS
Option 1 Approve for consultation the proposed amendments to the Development and Financial Contributions Policy.
Option 2 Do not approve for consultation the proposed amendments to the Development and Financial Contributions Policy.
Financial implications The inclusion of estimated finance costs in development contribution charges increases the development contribution charges consulted on and approved as part of the LTP from $1,391.83 to $3,062.83 excluding GST.
The Council borrows money to spread the cost of capital expenditure projects over the period of benefit of the project. This approach ensures intergenerational equity is achieved for funding projects with long periods of benefit. There would be benefits for other funding sources (including rates) over the loan repayment period if the finance costs of approximately $800,000 per annum on growth related capital expenditure were included in development contribution charges.
Promotion or achievement of community outcomes Development contributions are a mechanism for funding growth in the district. Funding growth will be an important component for the implementation of the ‘Growth’ key direction of the New Plymouth District Blueprint.
Statutory responsibilities Section 102 LGA 2002 requires the Council to adopt a policy on development contributions or financial contributions.
There is no statutory requirement to include finance costs in development contribution charges but the terminology of the LGA 2002 implies their inclusion.
Consistency with policy and plans Including the estimated finance costs of growth related capital expenditure in development contribution charges ensures that the policy is consistent with the overall framework of the Council’s Revenue and Financing Policy as previously described in this report.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 6 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
Participation by Maori There are deemed to be no specific implications for Maori regarding the matters covered in this report.
Community views and preferences This report recommends approving the proposed policy amendments for public consultation.
Consultation on the policy was recently undertaken as part of the LTP consultation process through the LTP Consultation Document and the Supporting Information. Two submissions were received as a result of this consultation. The recommended option aligns with one of the LTP submissions received on the policy which submitted that infrastructure required by urban growth should be funded as much as possible by development contributions. Including finance costs in development contribution charges would help achieve the intent of this submission.
Recommended Option This report recommends option one for addressing the matter.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 7 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
APPENDIX 1
New Plymouth District Council
Development and Financial Contributions Policy
Purpose This policy explains how New Plymouth District Council will use development contributions to recover from those persons undertaking development a fair, equitable, and proportionate portion of the total cost of capital expenditure necessary to service growth in the district.
Legislative requirements Section 102 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA 2002) requires the Council to adopt a policy on development contributions or financial contributions. This policy covers development contributions and summarises the provisions that relate to financial contributions as required by section 106 (2) (f) LGA 2002.
Introduction Current projections for New Plymouth District indicate a population growth of 19 per cent over the next 30 years. The new development associated with a growing community increases demands on community facilities which include network infrastructure, community infrastructure and reserves. This demand can apply whether growth takes the form of greenfields development, renewal development (which changes the types of land use), or infill development (which can increase the intensity and scale of development).
The challenge for the Council is how to expand its network of community facilities to cater for increased demand resulting from growth. There is usually a significant cost associated with expanding these networks both in terms of new capital expenditure including finance costs (interest costs on borrowing) and consequential operating expenditure, including financing costs and funding for renewals. Funding this expansion solely through rates is considered inequitable as existing ratepayers are not the primary cause or primary beneficiaries of these works. It is considered fairer for the costs of increased demand from growth resulting from development to be allocated proportionately between those who create the need for the work as well as those who will benefit from the work. The use of development contributions are considered a suitable funding mechanism to ensure that developers pay a fair share of the costs of increased demand from growth resulting from development.
Summary of Financial Contributions Policy The Council’s Financial Contributions Policy is a component of the New Plymouth District Plan. Under the LGA 2002, this policy is required to summarise the financial contribution provisions in the District Plan.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 8 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
The Financial Contributions Policy was formulated pursuant to the Resource Management Act 1991 and is focussed on avoiding, remedying and mitigating the adverse environmental effects resulting from particular developments. The circumstances under which financial contributions may be required are: • For the impacts on network infrastructure resulting from subdivision and/or development and/or other land use. • Requirements for areas of new open space in growth areas resulting from subdivision and/or development and/or other land use (pending, subject to plan change PLC14/00042).
Under the Financial Contributions Policy, developers are required to meet the full cost of on- site infrastructure demands of their developments e.g. water pipes required to connect to the water network. They will also be required to meet a fair and reasonable cost of the off-site infrastructure works required.
The Financial Contributions Policy has a provision to require financial contributions for community facilities (as defined in the District Plan). This provision is not currently applied and will be reviewed as part of the District Plan review to commence in 2015.
Development Contributions Policy Statements
Policy to seek development contributions 1. The Council’s policy is to seek funding for community facilities using development contributions. This policy sets out the matters required to be covered by the LGA 2002 as a result of the Council’s decision to collect development contributions.
When development contributions will be required 2. Development contributions may be required in relation to developments if the effects (including cumulative effects) of the development is to require new or additional assets or assets of increased capacity and, as a consequence the Council incurs capital expenditure to provide those assets.
3. Development contributions can also be required for capital expenditure already incurred by the Council in anticipation of development.
Use of development contributions 4. Development contributions must be used: • For or towards the purpose of the activity or the group of activities for which the contributions were required; and • For the benefit of the district or the part of the district that is identified in the policy in which the development contributions were required.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 9 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
Development agreements 5. The Council may seek to initiate direct negotiations with a developer to enter into a development agreement which would be a voluntary contractual agreement for the provision, supply or exchange of infrastructure, land, or money to provide community facilities.
6. Any development agreement between the Council and a developer must be consistent with the provisions and requirements for development agreements under sections 207A-F LGA 2002.
7. If there is any conflict between the content of a development agreement and the application of this policy in relation to that agreement, the content of the development agreement prevails.
Restrictions on requiring development contributions 8. Development contributions cannot be required for the provision of any reserve if the development is non-residential in nature, or for the non-residential component of a development that is a mixture of residential and non-residential. In this context, reserve does not include land for road or stormwater management purposes.
Types of community facilities that may be funded by development contributions 9. The Council may charge development contributions to fund: • Network infrastructure - including roads and other transport, water, wastewater and stormwater collection and management (including flood protection and control). • Community infrastructure - including community centres or halls (including the land on which they will be situated), play equipment located on a neighbourhood reserve and public toilets. • Reserves - including acquisition and development of land.
Financial management consideration of identified activities (application of s101 (3) LGA 2002) 10. This section of the policy explains, in terms of the matters required to be considered under section 101(3) of the LGA 2002, why the Council has determined to use development contributions to meet the expected capital expenditure for community facilities resulting from growth.
Community outcomes 11. The growth-related capital expenditure of activities to be funded by development contributions or financial contributions, contributes both directly and indirectly to the following community outcomes as set out in the Council’s Long-Term Plan 2015- 2025:
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 10 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
Our Economy: A strong and resilient economy • An economy built on sustainable management of economic resources. • An economy that encourages and builds on innovation and creativity. • An economy supported by a diverse range of industries.
Our Environment: A clean, green, liveable environment • An environment supported by the sustainable management and protection of natural resources. • An environment where future challenges are recognised and planned for. • An environment that is liveable for our community.
Our Community: An inclusive and connected community • A community that fosters pride and a collective sense of identity. • A community that enjoys the great Taranaki lifestyle. • A community that is strong, resilient and values diversity.
Distribution of benefits Community facilities within a development or immediately off-site of a development 12. The need for new community facilities (including roads, water supply, wastewater, stormwater and flood protection, parks, and community infrastructure) within a development or the demand for improvements to existing community facilities immediately off-site of a development is primarily generated by those groups or individuals that have created the demand. The most reasonable and fair means to recover this type of capital expenditure is directly from those groups or individuals.
13. Where a community facility within a development has a wider benefit than just to the development, the most reasonable and fair means to recover this type of capital expenditure is from those groups or individuals who receive the benefit, including the entire district.
Roads 14. The roading network is available to the whole community as it enables people, goods and services to be moved throughout the district, therefore the provision of a roading network benefits the entire community.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 11 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
15. Where new or additional capacity or improvements are required to the roading network that have been generated from growth driven demand, the most efficient and fair means to recover the costs of providing this infrastructure is to require development contributions on all developments in the district. Improvements to the roading network benefit the whole district and the cost allocation to development contributions is proportionate between the current demand in the district and the future demand from growth.
Water supply 16. Benefits of the water supply network are predominantly identifiable for individuals and properties that are connected or are able to connect to the network and not the whole community. This is because there are no obvious significant direct or indirect benefits of the supply network to those who are not able to connect to it.
17. Where new or additional capacity or improvements to the water supply network are generated from growth driven demand, the most efficient and fair way to recover these costs is to require development contributions on all developments in the district. In such cases, the cost allocation to development contributions is proportionate between the cost to provide for growth and the cost to provide any additional benefit to existing recipients of the service. Such benefits can include improved resilience of the network.
Wastewater treatment 18. Benefits of the wastewater network are identifiable to individuals and properties that are connected to the network and not the whole community. This is because there are no obvious significant direct or indirect benefits of the network to those who are not connected to it.
19. While the whole community may benefit from the absence of wastewater pollution, this is seen as the prevention of a negative effect, rather than the activity causing positive benefits.
20. Where new or additional capacity or improvements to the wastewater network are required that have been generated from growth driven demand, the most efficient and fair means to levy these costs is to require development contributions on all developments in the district. In such cases, the cost allocation to development contributions will be split proportionately between all developments and not the current demand on the network as current connections will not receive any additional benefit from growth related works.
21. Stormwater drainage and flood protection and control works 22. Stormwater drainage and flood protection and control works (stormwater and flood protection) tend to primarily benefit those people and properties within hydrological catchment areas. Most catchments, however, contain infrastructure and other services that are used more widely across the community. The topography of North Taranaki
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 12 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
means that the majority of the district’s people and properties reside within a catchment.
23. Benefits accrue through the protection of property and improvements to that protection. Properties with a large proportion of their area covered in impervious materials (e.g. buildings and concrete) cause more stormwater run-off than those where the ground is uncovered or covered in natural foliage. For this reason an assessment is made on the area covered by impervious materials for the purposes of calculating development contributions.
24. Where a development is adding to the burden of existing or future stormwater and flood protection infrastructure, these costs are recovered via development contributions.
25. Where new or additional capacity or improvements to stormwater and flood protection are required that has been generated from growth driven demand, the most efficient and fair means to levy these costs is to require development contributions on all developments in the district. In such cases, the cost allocation to development contributions will be split proportionately between all developments and not the current demand on the network as current connections will not receive any additional benefit from growth related works.
Parks 26. The Council’s parks portfolio is distributed across the whole district and includes open space, natural reserves, botanical gardens, accessways, walkways and sports parks. The direct beneficiaries of this diverse portfolio are difficult to identify because access to most parks is not limited or monitored. As a result, the provision of parks is considered to benefit the entire community. There are also indirect beneficiaries, for example, the benefit to people living near parks is usually reflected in their property values.
27. Where a development is adding to the burden of existing or future parks capacity, these costs are recovered via development contributions.
28. Where new or additional capacity or improvements to parks are required that have been generated from growth driven demand, the most efficient and fair means to levy these costs is to require development contributions on all developments in the district. In such cases, the cost allocation to development contributions is proportionate between the current demand in the district and the future demand from growth as improvements to parks benefit the whole district.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 13 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
Community infrastructure 29. Community infrastructure, namely local community centres or halls, play equipment for a neighbourhood reserve and public toilets are provided to benefit those communities which they are intended to service as well as the whole community as the ability to use these facilities is not restricted to any individuals or groups.
30. Where a development is adding to the burden of existing or future community infrastructure capacity, these costs are recovered via development contributions.
31. Where new or additional capacity or improvements to community infrastructure are required that have been generated from growth driven demand, the most efficient and fair means to levy these costs is to require development contributions on all developments in the district. In such cases, the cost allocation to development contributions is proportionate between the current demand in the local community or in the district and the future demand from growth.
Period of benefits 32. Development contributions should be determined in a manner that is generally consistent with the capacity life of the assets for which they are intended to be used and in a way that achieves proportionate recovery of costs from development contributions.
33. Growth related capital expenditure can have benefits that extend beyond the ten-year period of the Long-Term Plan. Where possible, the period of time over which the capacity of an asset provides a benefit has been determined and development contribution charges have been spread proportionately over that time.
34. The growth allocation of each asset of capital expenditure undergoes an assessment to determine the period of time over which the capacity of an asset provides a benefit for growth.
35. Where the period of benefit is uncertain, a ten-year period of benefit has been used to align with the ten-year period of the Long-Term Plan. A maximum period of benefit of 30 years has been used to ensure intergenerational equity is achieved.
Need to undertake activity 36. Development related growth pressures are a key driver of capital works funded by development contributions and financial contributions. Requiring the growth community to contribute to the funding of such capital works ensures that those individuals and groups who have created the need for the works pay a proportionate amount.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 14 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
Distinct funding from other activities 37. Using development and financial contributions to fund the cost of providing additional community facilities improves equity and also provides greater transparency and accountability. It leads the Council to allocate costs of capital works between various project drivers and to recover those costs accordingly. The benefits of this approach are deemed to exceed the costs of assessing and determining development and financial contributions.
Cost allocation methodology 38. Cost allocations used to establish development contributions should be determined according to, and be proportional to, the persons who will benefit from the assets to be provided (including the community as a whole) as well as those who create the need for those assets.
39. Development contributions can only be levied and applied to fund the total cost of capital expenditure which includes finance costs (interest costs on borrowing) of new or additional assets or assets of increased capacity to service growth. Operations and maintenance costs (opex) have been separated out before other cost drivers have been considered.
To ensure those persons undertaking development pay a fair, equitable and proportionate portion of the total cost of capital expenditure necessary to service growth, finance costs including interest on loans taken by the Council to provide community facilities will be recovered through contributions. The finance costs will be included in the total cost of capital expenditure for each project and included in the contribution charge.
40. Each item of capital expenditure undergoes a cost driver analysis to define the benefit and share of the cost attributed to both the current recipients and the anticipated growth. The analysis considers one or more of the following cost drivers: • Renewal • Level of service • Growth
The growth costs provide for new or additional assets or assets of increased capacity to meet the demand on community facilities resulting from growth.
41. Where it is difficult to identify the costs of providing a project for growth compared to current beneficiaries and where the benefits of the project are considered to be equal to all, then the cost allocation is proportionately split between current beneficiaries and anticipated growth that will use the asset.
42. The growth allocation of each asset of capital expenditure then undergoes an assessment to determine the period of benefit over which the asset will provide for growth.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 15 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
Table 1: Growth related capital expenditure and revenue Activity and project no. Estimated NZTA subsidies Estimated finance Total cost of capital Development Financial Contributions Other funding* Estimated HUE Estimated Development capital costs costs expenditure less NZTA contributions demand using annualised HUE contribution subsidies each asset type demand charge per HUE (excluding GST) [A] [B] [C] [A] + [B] + [C] Proportion $ Proportion $ Roads 100% R2 Road surface improvements 4,640,000 (2,320,000) 2,784,200 5,104,200 14% (714,600) 0% 0 (4,389,600) 710 100.65 R5 Road network land purchase and widening 1,500,000 (750,000) 900,100 1,650,100 14% (231,000) 0% 0 (1,419,100) 710 32.54
R6 Road network land purchase and widening - 480,000 (240,000) 288,000 528,000 0% 0 65% (343,200) (184,800) 710 0.00 Bell Block Total Roads 6,620,000 (3,310,000) 3,972,300 7,282,300 (945,600) (343,200) (5,993,500) 710 133.19 Water Supply 90% W1 Henwood Road additional reservoir 1,800,000 2,160,100 3,960,100 85% (3,366,100) 0% 0 (594,000) 639 175.59 W2 New connection between Western Feeder 2,000,000 2,400,100 4,400,100 20% (880,000) 0% 0 (3,520,100) 639 45.91 and Mangorei reservoirs W4 New reservoir Mountain Road 1,960,000 2,352,100 4,312,100 50% (2,156,100) 0% 0 (2,156,000) 639 112.47 W5 New pipe to Henwood Road and Mountain 9,900,000 11,880,700 21,780,700 85% (18,513,600) 0% 0 (3,267,100) 639 965.76 Road reservoirs W6 New trunk main - Lepperton to Faull Road 7,250,000 8,700,500 15,950,500 85% (13,557,900) 0% 0 (2,392,600) 639 707.25 W7(part) Water Treatment Plant upgrades 550,000 660,000 1,210,000 85% (1,028,500) 0% 0 (181,500) 639 53.65 W8 Extend water to Barrett Road 100,000 120,000 220,000 25% (55,000) 0% 0 (165,000) 639 2.87 Total Water 23,560,000 0 28,273,500 51,833,500 (39,557,200) 0 (12,276,300) 639 2,063.50 Wastewater 80% WW1 New Plymouth Wastewater Treatment 9,450,000 11,340,600 20,790,600 34% (7,068,800) 0% 0 (13,721,800) 568 497.80 Plant (NPWWTP) upgrade WW2 NPWWTP thermal drier upgrade and 7,000,000 8,400,500 15,400,500 30% (4,620,200) 0% 0 (10,780,300) 568 271.14 renewal WW3 NPWWTP bioreactor aeration system 230,000 276,000 506,000 43% (217,600) 0% 0 (288,400) 568 15.32 upgrade WW5 Bell Block growth area watewater 1,967,000 2,360,500 4,327,500 0% 0 67% (2,899,400) (1,428,100) 568 0.00 services projects WW6 Dillion Drive sewer upgrade 200,000 240,000 440,000 19% (83,600) 0% 0 (356,400) 568 14.72 Total Wastewater 18,847,000 0 22,617,600 41,464,600 (11,990,200) (2,899,400) (26,575,000) 568 798.98 Stormwater Drainage and Flood Protection and 80% Control Works No projects planned requiring development/financial contributions Total Stormwater Drainage and Flood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Protection and Control Works Parks 100% of P1 New parks for our growing areas in Bell 1,901,000 2,281,300 4,182,300 0% 0 100% (4,182,300) 0 residential, 0% 350 0.00 Block of non- P2 New parks for our growing areas in Bell 86,000 103,200 189,200 0% 0 100% (189,200) 0 residential 350 0.00 Block P3 New parks for our growing areas in Oakura 744,000 892,900 1,636,900 0% 0 100% (1,636,900) 0 350 0.00
P4 Reserves along waterways Inglewood 96,000 115,200 211,200 14% (29,600) 0% 0 (181,600) 350 8.46 P5 Reserves along waterways district wide 659,200 791,100 1,450,300 14% (203,000) 0% 0 (1,247,300) 350 58.00 Total Parks 3,486,200 0 4,183,700 7,669,900 (232,600) (6,008,400) (1,428,900) 350 66.46 Community Infrastructure 100% of No projects planned requiring residential, 0% development/financial contributions of non- Total Community Infrastructure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total 52,513,200 (3,310,000) 59,047,100 108,250,300 (52,725,600) (9,251,000) (46,273,700) 3,062.13 *Includes subsidies (excluding NZTA), reserves, loans and rates funding.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 16 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
43. Table 1 shows the total cost of capital expenditure capex (in 2015/16 dollars) expected to be incurred to meet the increased demand for community facilities resulting from growth over the life of the Long-Term Plan 2015-2025. The table also shows the NZTA subsidies and estimated finance costs applied to the financing of the projects. The table also includes shows the amount of the total cost of capital expenditure that will be funded from development contributions, financial contributions and other funding (including subsidies, reserves, loans and rates funding). The development contributions charges specified in Table 1 take effect from 1 December 2015.
Geographic areas for contributions 44. The geographic area for development contributions is the entire district with the requirement for contributions based on the availability of community facility networks in that area. Where a service is not available, the development contribution will not be required.
45. In order to forecast the demand for each service, it has been estimated that roading will be provided to 100% of new developments. Water will be provided to 90 per cent of new developments, while wastewater, stormwater and flood protection will be provided to 80 per cent of new developments. Parks and community infrastructure are estimated to be provided to 100 per cent of residential developments and zero per cent of non-residential developments, as non-residential developments do not create significant demand for these types of facilities. This has been converted to HUE demand in table 1.
46. This approach to the geographic areas for contributions is considered to balance practical and administrative efficiencies with considerations of fairness and equity as contributions are only charged on the community facilities that are available to a development.
47. The Council utilises the resource consent process under the Resource Management Act 1991 to require provision of community facilities within a development and immediately off-site of a development. This includes developer led infrastructure and/or the requirement for financial contributions to cover Council provided community facilities. This replaces the need for a focussed catchment approach to the use of development contributions for the same growth related total cost of capital capex expenditure within developments and immediately off-site of developments.
48. The Council is currently developing a spatial Blueprint for the district which will guide growth and development in the district over the next 30 years. The Blueprint will inform the review of the New Plymouth District Plan to commence in 2015. During this review the Council will be reviewing and testing potential future growth areas in the district and reviewing the financial contribution provisions of the District Plan. The outcomes of this review may lead to a more detailed catchment based approach to requiring development contributions.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 17 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
Units of demand 49. The household unit equivalent (HUE) has been established as the basic unit of demand, and is the equivalent of one average residential dwelling. Development contributions have been calculated according to the number of HUEs in a development. One new residential dwelling, subdivision or building consent is generally considered as one HUE, while non-residential developments are proportions or multiples of that. The following values represent typical levels of demand for a dwelling in the district.
Activity Units Demand per HUE Comments Roads Vehicle trips per 10 day Water supply Litres per household 806 310 litres per person per day per day at 2.6 people per household
Wastewater Litres per household 650 250 litres per person per day per day at 2.6 people per household
Stormwater Impervious area 400 Sample average per 2 drainage and flood (m ) dwelling protection and control works
50. For non-residential developments, development contributions for water supply, wastewater, stormwater drainage, flood protection and control works, and roads can be converted to HUEs based on a combination of accepted industry standards and assessment of information provided by the developer on the demand they expect to generate.
51. For planning purposes, one non-residential building is generally considered as nine HUE and is based on the previous five year average HUE per non-residential development.
52. Developments that do not generate any demand for infrastructure will not be charged a development contribution. Developments that only place low demand on infrastructure capacity will typically be assessed in percentages of HUEs, rather than whole HUEs.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 18 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
Significant assumptions for calculation of development contributions 53. The capital expenditure identified in the Long-Term Plan 2015-2025 is the amount required to meet the demand generated from growth over the 10 year period of the plan. This expenditure is based on the Council’s asset management, activity management, and financial plans, as well as incorporating community priorities and outcomes.
The finance cost attributed to the net capital expenditure (after subsidies) identified as growth is calculated by applying the Council’s forecast interest cost of borrowing rate in the Long- Term Plan 2015-2025 on a 30 year table loan basis.
54. Population of New Plymouth District is predicted to grow from 75,100 in 2015 to approximately 83,400 in 2025 and to over 88,000 by 2045.
55. The rate of new residential dwellings and subdivided lots is predicted to be approximately 350 per year over the next 10 years to meet demand from population growth. This is supported by historical data showing an annual average of 308 new dwellings per year over the last five years and 328 over a 10-year period. Accepting that the economic climate may fluctuate but will over the long-term (2015-2025) remain balanced it is forecast that the rate of new dwellings will settle at around 350 per year to meet demand from population growth. To be consistent with the Council’s Infrastructure Strategy, for longer-term planning purposes this rate is assumed to remain constant for the next 30 years out to 2045.
56. The rate of new non-residential development is predicted to be approximately 40 per year over the next 10 years. This is supported by a historical five year average of 39.4 new developments per year. The demand per year for this new non-residential development is predicted to be 360 HUE based on an historical average HUE per development.
57. The total demand per year from new residential and non-residential development is predicted to be 710 HUE. This is made up of 350 HUE for residential and 360 for non-residential.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 19 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
Calculation of development contributions 58. The development contributions charge per unit of demand for each activity area is calculated using the following process:
Total cost amount of capital expenditure (including finance cost) to be collected in development contributions for each growth related project ÷ Period of benefit of the project = Total amount to be collected annually in development contributions for each growth related project ÷ The forecast average annual growth in demand (HUEs) = Contribution per HUE
59. The total development contribution for each new residential section or dwelling is then calculated by adding together the individual contributions for each service or activity for which a development contribution is required. For urban developments this would normally include water supply, wastewater, stormwater drainage, flood protection and control works, roads, community infrastructure and parks. For rural developments, where certain services may not be available only contributions for services that are available may be collected.
60. The total development contribution for non-residential developments will be analysed on a case by case basis by assessing demand for infrastructure and converting it to HUEs and the development contributions individually calculated. The Council requires the developer to provide information on the demand that will be generated by their development. The Council assesses the information provided and determines the number of units of demand of the proposed development.
Inflation 61. Development contribution charges will be increased annually under the provisions of section 106 (2C) ensuring that the increase does not exceed the result of multiplying together: (i) the rate of increase (if any), in the Producers Price Index Outputs for Construction provided by Statistics New Zealand since the development contribution was last set or increased; and (ii) the proportion of the total costs of capital expenditure to which the development contribution will be applied that does not relate to interest and other financing costs.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 20 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
Development contributions reconsideration process 62. Section 202A of the LGA 2002 requires the Council to include a reconsideration process in its development contributions policy. The reconsideration process sets out how a request for reconsideration of a development contribution requirement can be lodged with the Council and the steps in the process the Council will apply when reconsidering the requirement to make a development contribution.
Right to reconsideration of requirement for development contributions 63. Any person required by the Council to make a development contribution may request the Council to reconsider the requirement if the person has grounds to believe that: • The development contribution has been incorrectly calculated or assessed under the Council's Development Contributions Policy, or; • The Council has incorrectly applied its Development Contributions Policy, or; • The information used to assess the person's development against the Development Contributions Policy, or the way the Council has recorded or used it when requiring a development contribution, is incomplete or contains errors.
Lodging a request for reconsideration 64. Any request for reconsideration must be lodged by completing the Council's 'Request for Reconsideration of Development Contributions' application form.
65. A request for reconsideration must be made within 10 working days after the date on which the person lodging the request receives notice from the Council of the level of development contribution required.
Reconsideration process 66. The Council will undertake the following process to reconsider a requirement to make a development contribution:
Step 1 Receiving the request for reconsideration • Council officers will assess the request to ensure that it made on one or more of the statutory grounds for reconsideration and that the application form has been completed in full. • Requests that are not made on one or more of the statutory grounds for reconsideration will be rejected. • Incomplete application forms may be rejected. • Council officers will contact the applicant to confirm receipt and acceptance or rejection of the request.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 21 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
Step 2 Assessing the request for reconsideration • Council officers will assess the request for reconsideration against the relevant provisions in the Council's Development Contributions Policy. • Council officers may require further information from the applicant to fully assess the request for reconsideration. In such cases, the Council will contact the applicant and provide details of the further information required.
Step 3 Outcome of assessment of request for reconsideration • The outcome of the assessment of a request for reconsideration will be one of the following: - Grant the request in full. - Grant the request in part. - Decline the request. • The applicant will be informed in writing of the outcome and the reasons for the outcome within 15 working days after the date on which the Council receives all required information to assess the request for reconsideration. • Council officers will liaise with the applicant to determine the arrangements of any repayments required to be paid to the applicant as a result of the reconsideration.
Policy review 67. The Development Contributions Policy and schedules are to be reviewed at least once every three years to meet the requirements of s106(6) LGA 2002.
68. Future policy reviews may be prompted by, and will consider various factors including the following: • Changes to the significant assumptions underlying this policy. • Changes to the capital expenditure allocated to growth. • Changes to the financial contribution provisions in the New Plymouth District Plan. • Changes to the numbers, types and locations of new subdivision, land use, and building consents. • Any change to legislation, or its interpretation, due to legislative amendments, repeals or new case law. • Whether any unforeseen impacts on the rate of growth or its location have arisen as a result of the implementation of the Development Contributions Policy.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 22 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
Schedule 1 Schedule in accordance with s202 LGA 2002
Events that will give rise to the requirement for a development contribution and method of payment 69. When deciding whether a development contribution will be required the Council will first assess whether the proposed development is a subdivision or other development as defined in section 197 of the LGA 2002 which generates a demand for reserves, network infrastructure, or community infrastructure and secondly, whether the proposed development is one that, on its own or cumulatively with other developments, will require the Council to incur capital expenditure on new assets or assets of increased capacity (as required by section 197, 198 and 199 of the LGA 2002) and thirdly, whether a contribution is required under this policy.
70. If following the above assessment it is decided that a contribution is required, the development will be assessed according to the demand generated for each type of service, as measured in whole, or percentages of, HUE. The assessment will be undertaken using the methodology mentioned previously in this policy.
71. Contributions will be assessed under this policy when granting: • A resource consent under the Resource Management Act 1991 for a development or subdivision within New Plymouth District. • A building consent under the Building Act 2004 for building work situated in New Plymouth District.
72. In respect of subdivision consents, payment is to be made prior to granting of a certificate under section 224(c) of the RMA 1991. In respect of land use consent, payment is to be made prior to commencement of consent, or within 180 days of consent being granted, whichever occurs first. In respect of building consents payment is to be made within 180 days of granting consent, or prior to the code of compliance certificate being issued under section 43 of the Building Act, whichever occurs first.
73. As the sequence of development is not always consistent, development contributions will be required to be paid at the first available opportunity. At each and every subsequent opportunity the development will also be reviewed and additional contributions required if the units of demand assessed for the development exceed those previously paid. This would occur, for example, if the number of dwellings or HUEs had increased during the life of the proposal.
74. Homeowners carrying out renovations or extensions to their dwellings will not be subject to development contributions, unless the matters in statement 68 of this policy are triggered.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 23 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
75. This Development Contributions Policy does not apply where a resource or building consent is required for a development which is the development of community facilities. This decision is made on the basis that applying the Development Contributions Policy to such developments would merely result in an internal transfer of budget from one account to another and would not generate any additional funding.
Method of calculation of contributions 76. Only the total cost of capital expenditure including finance costs is considered in this methodology. All operational expenditure is excluded. Capital expenditure has been identified from asset management, activity management, and financial plans and approved via the Long-Term Plan process together with a share of the finance costs.
77. The methodology for determining the development contribution for each individual development proposal has been outlined in the Development Contributions Policy and calculated in accordance with Schedule 13 of the LGA 2002. Some additional notes and worked examples are provided below.
Parks 78. Development contributions for parks will be used for development of existing and acquisition of new parkland and open space and for the capital development cost of new parks where these are not funded by financial contributions.
79. Section 203 of the LGA 2002 establishes a maximum contribution for reserves as follows:
“Development contributions for reserves must not exceed the greater of: a) 7.5 per cent of the value of the additional allotments created by a subdivision; and b) The value equivalent of 20 square metres of land for each additional household unit created by the development”.
80. The development contribution for parks of $66.46 $53.43 is less than one per cent of the average land value of an urban housing lot as determined by government valuation. This will be checked for each proposed development to ensure it does not exceed the statutory maximum. It is noted that the development contribution will be in addition to any financial contribution towards Parks under the Financial Contributions Policy.
Community infrastructure 81. A community infrastructure contribution is required based on future projected demand for facilities such as a community centre or hall, play equipment located on a neighbourhood reserve, or public toilets.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 24 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
Network infrastructure 82. Under the existing Financial Contributions Policy, the provisions for water supply, wastewater collection and treatment, stormwater disposal (including flood protection and control) and roading all require the applicant to meet the full cost of all land and works necessary to provide any subdivision or development with these services. This is achieved by requiring the applicant to meet all on-site costs associated with these services and to meet the fair and reasonable costs off-site necessary to service the development proposal in question where they have not been accounted for by development contributions.
Land or money 83. Under this Development Contributions Policy the contribution shall in every case be money, unless at the sole discretion of the Council, a piece of land offered by a developer would adequately suit the purposes for which the contribution is sought.
84. A developer agreement can override the above requirement for the type of contribution.
Enforcement 85. As a means of ensuring development contributions are made, the Council may withhold Resource Management Act 1991 section 224(c) subdivision certificates, Building Act section 43 compliance certificates or land use consents. Finally, the Council may register an unpaid development contribution under the Statutory Land Charges Registration Act 1928 as a charge on the title of the land, as provided for by section 208(d) of the LGA 2002.
Remissions, reductions and refunds 86. The Council may decide to allow remissions for particular community infrastructure works, such as that undertaken by schools, charitable organisations or trusts. Each application for a remission will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
87. Council’s policy is not to consider any requests to postpone a requirement to pay a development contribution(s).
88. A refund of development contributions paid or a return of land set aside for a development contribution (except a development contribution required for a specified reserve purpose) will be made in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 upon written request from the consent holder where: • The resource consent lapses or is surrendered. • The building consent lapses. • The development or building for which the consent was granted does not proceed.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 25 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A2
• The Council does not provide the reserve, network infrastructure or community infrastructure for which the contribution was required.
89. A refund of development contributions paid or a return of land set aside for a specified reserve purpose will be made in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 where: • The money is not applied to that purpose within 10 years after the Council receives the money; and • The Council does not use the land for that purpose within 10 years after the Council acquires the land (or other period agreed by the Council and the person who paid the development contribution).
90. The Council will also take into consideration that while a current property owner might not wish to connect to Council infrastructure, prudence may require that the Council take the development into consideration when determining infrastructure capacity because some future property owner might wish to connect. This may mean that a development contribution is payable, even though the current owner does not want to connect to Council infrastructure.
Significant financial and administrative assumptions 91. This Development Contributions Policy is based on the following administrative and financial assumptions.
• Contributions for growth in water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, and flood protection and control systems are only collected in those areas or catchments where that service is provided. • The current level (quality) of service has been applied to new developments as the basis for calculating development contributions for this policy. • Development contributions will be used towards the capital expenditure for increasing the capacity of network or community infrastructure or parks for which the contribution has been sought. • Income generated from rates and other operating revenue will be sufficient to meet the increase in operating costs generated by the increasing level of capital expenditure into the future. • For roading projects meeting New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) criteria, NZTA subsidies will fund increased capacity alongside development contributions.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 26 ITEM A2 ITEM FOR DECISION
Schedule 2 Schedule of assets for which development contributions are required 92. Section 201A of the LGA 2002 requires the Council to include in its Development Contributions Policy, a schedule of assets for which development contributions will be used.
93. This schedule lists the assets and programmes of work for which the development contributions requirements set out in this policy are intended to be used or have already been used. For each asset or programme of works the proportion of the capital cost proposed to be recovered through development contributions is provided as well as through other funding sources.
Name of project Proportion of capital Proportion of capital cost to cost to be recovered be recovered through other through development funding contributions Roads R2 Road surface improvements 14% 86% R5 Road network land purchase and widening 14% 86% Water W1 Henwood Road additional reservoir 85% 15% W2 New connection between Western Feeder and 20% 80% Mangorei reservoirs W4 New reservoir Mountain Road 50% 50% W5 New pipe to Henwood Road and Mountain 85% 15% Road reservoirs W6 New trunk main Lepperton to Faull Road 85% 15% W7 (part) Water treatment Plant upgrades 85% 15% W8 Extend water to Barrett Rd 25% 75% Wastewater WW1 New Plymouth Wastewater Treatment Plant 34% 66% (NPWWTP) upgrade WW2 NPWWTP thermal drier upgrade and 30% 70% renewal WW3 NPWWTP bioreactor aeration system 43% 57% upgrade WW6 Dillon Drive sewer upgrade 19% 81% Parks P4 Reserves along waterways Inglewood 14% 86% P5 Reserves along waterways district wide 14% 86%
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 1 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A3
UPDATE ON BUILDING (EARTHQUAKE-PRONE BUILDINGS) AMENDMENT BILL PREPARED BY: Richard Mowforth (Senior Policy Adviser) TEAM: Corporate Strategy and Policy APPROVED BY: Mitchell Dyer (Acting Manager Corporate Strategy and Policy), Peter Scantlebury (Manager Building) WARD/COMMUNITY: District wide DATE: 9 July 2015 FILE REFERENCE: ECM6578712
PURPOSE This report provides information on the interim report of the Local Government and Environment Committee on the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill.
RECOMMENDATION That, having considered all matters raised in the report, the report be noted.
SIGNIFICANCE This report is provided for information purposes only, and has been assessed as having some importance.
DISCUSSION On 23 June 2015 the Local Government and Environment Committee released an interim report on the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill (the Bill).
The Bill seeks to amend the Building Act 2004 to enforce national timeframes and procedures for addressing earthquake-prone buildings. The intent of the Bill is to balance the protection of citizens with the cost of strengthening, upgrading, or demolishing buildings, and the protection of heritage buildings.
The Bill was introduced in 2013 and was referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee (the Committee) in 2014. A Council submission on the Bill was approved at the 8 April 2014 Policy Committee meeting.
In the course of the Committee’s examination they considered public submissions and received advice from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), the Parliamentary Counsel Office, and the Regulations Review Committee. As a result of this process, and in response to the issues raised by submitters, the Committee are considering a range of potential changes to the original Bill.
The purpose of the interim report was to invite feedback from previous submitters on the specific changes proposed by MBIE. The Committee consider this course of action
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 2 ITEM A3 ITEM FOR DECISION
appropriate as the proposed changes would significantly alter the version of the Bill initially released.
The deadline of 16 July 2015 for submissions on the interim report provided insufficient time to prepare and report a submission to Policy Committee and Council for approval.
The following information summarises the main content and changes to the Bill proposed by the interim report.
Scope of buildings covered by the provisions and definition of earthquake-prone buildings • Amends the definition of earthquake-prone buildings to improve clarity by: o Defining ‘ultimate capacity’ in the regulations. o Removing ‘moderate earthquake’ reference from the meaning of earthquake- prone building. • Amends the definition of earthquake-prone buildings to include injury or death to persons around the building to ensure that it covers people on the same property as the building in the way that it covers people on other property. • Amends the Bill to ensure parts of buildings are adequately and clearly covered. • Maintain the existing scope of buildings. • New exclusions for the following: farm buildings, retaining walls, fences, monuments that cannot be entered (e.g. statues), wharves, bridges, tunnels, storage tanks (e.g. water reservoirs). • New inclusion for hostels, boarding houses, and other specialised accommodation.
Comments The proposed changes are considered to be reasonable and do not pose any significant implications for the Council.
Defining areas based on seismic risk • Amends the Bill to define areas of high, medium and low seismic risk in connection with the Building Code with reference to the seismic hazard factor. • Defined areas of seismic risk have timeframes for identification, assessment and remediation of earthquake-prone buildings that are aligned to the risk level of that area. These are further described in the following sections. • New Plymouth District (NPD) is defined as a medium seismic risk area.
Comments The proposed change is considered appropriate and aligns with the Council’s (and LGNZ’s) previous submission on the Bill which called for a risk based approach to managing the risk posed by earthquake-prone buildings.
Identification of building performance • Amends the timeframes for identification of potentially earthquake-prone buildings. Because NPD is a medium seismic risk area, the Council has 10 years to assess buildings to determine if they are potentially earthquake-prone. The Bill originally gave all territorial authorities five years to complete the assessments.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 3 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A3
• High seismic risk areas have five years and low risk areas have 15 years to complete the assessments. • New timeframe for priority buildings of half of the seismic risk area timeframe. The Council has five years to assess priority buildings. • Defining priority buildings for areas of high and medium seismic risk as the following: Hospital buildings, school buildings, emergency service facilities (fire stations, police station etc), corridor buildings (those buildings that if they were to collapse would impede transport routes of strategic importance in an emergency). • New optional ability for territorial authorities (TAs) to identify priority corridor buildings. The Council would have to use the special consultative procedure to identify priority corridor buildings. • New timeframe of 12 months for buildings owners to provide an engineering assessment to confirm the performance of their building. The Bill no did previously specify a timeframe. • New limited discretionary powers for TAs to extend the 12 month assessment period (for up to a further 12 months) • New designation of ‘potentially earthquake-prone (not assessed)’ to cover situations were owners do not wish to undertake or fail to provide an engineering assessment. • MBIE to set and publish risk based methodology for TAs’ to undertake assessments of building performance, engineering assessments, and clarification of EQPB status and rating of building performance. • New discretionary powers for TAs to carry out engineering assessments and recover costs if owners do not wish to undertake an assessment or fail to provide an assessment.
Comments The proposed changes are considered to be reasonable and do not pose any significant implications for the Council. The Council has completed the majority of the initial assessments to identify potentially earthquake-prone buildings, including priority buildings.
To date the Council has assessed 437 buildings, of those 165 are likely to be earthquake- prone (subject to engineering assessment), 221 are unlikely to be earthquake-prone (no engineering assessment required), 24 are confirmed to be earthquake-prone, and 27 are confirmed not earthquake-prone.
Notification and disclosure requirements • New requirement for TAs to report their progress on identification of potentially earthquake-prone buildings to MBIE. The Council are required to report back every two years (medium seismic risk areas). Annual reporting is required for high seismic risk areas and every three years for low seismic risk areas. • Amending national register provisions so that the register only includes details of buildings that are determined as earthquake-prone or potentially earthquake-prone (not assessed), rather than including details of all buildings. • Amending earthquake-prone building notice requirements to include the building’s NBS percentage or range. The form of the notice will be set in regulations using a grading scheme to help differentiate earthquake-prone buildings and incentivise action.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 4 ITEM A3 ITEM FOR DECISION
Comments The reporting requirements are not considered to be onerous as the Council will already be collecting this information as a reference database.
The amendment to the national register to only include buildings that are earthquake-prone or potentially earthquake-prone (not assessed) are considered to limit the public’s knowledge of the earthquake-prone status of any particular building especially those buildings that have been assessed as not earthquake-prone. As a result the Council may decide to retain its own earthquake-prone buildings register that lists all assessed buildings including those that have been assessed and have been deemed not earthquake-prone.
The amendment to use a grading system for notices is supported to ensure they are easily understandable.
Timeframes for remediation • Removal of the provisions in the Bill setting the timeframe for the remediation of most buildings at 15 years. • Setting new timeframes for remediation as follows: o 15 years for areas of high seismic risk. o 25 years for areas of medium seismic risk (including NPD). o 35 years for areas of low seismic risk. • New timeframe for priority building at half of the above timeframes. • Amends the Bill to enable owners of heritage buildings on the National Historic Landmarks List to apply for an extension of up to 10 years to complete seismic work. The Bill will also retain this ability for Category 1 (NZHPT) buildings. • Amending the Bill regarding exemptions from remediation requirements which will now be highlighted in a purpose statement and the criteria for granting an exemption will be set in regulations.
Comments The 25 year timeframe for remediation is considered suitable and is more aligned with the Councils current timeframes of between 15 to 30 years based on the importance level of the building.
The priority buildings identified in the Bill are considered to be appropriate are also generally consistent with the Council’s current policy approach on the importance level of a building.
The Council’s previous submission suggested that the eligibility for the 10 year extension for remediation works should be amended to provide for heritage buildings that are recognised as important on a district level as well as those on a national level. This could include extensions for heritage buildings with the highest level of classification in the relevant District Plan. The interim report did not endorse these suggestions.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 5 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A3
Upgrade requirements • New provisions to require earthquake-prone remediation work where substantial alterations are to be carried out on a building so that the building is no longer earthquake-prone. Regulations will be set to specify the criteria that TAs must apply when considering whether an alteration is a substantial alteration. • Clarification that the ability to not require earthquake-prone remediation work can apply to upgrades for means of escape from fire, upgrades to access and facilities for persons with disabilities, or both.
Comments The proposed changes are considered to be reasonable.
Transitional provisions • All notices issued under s124 Building Act 2004 to be reissued. • Remediation timeframes remaining on s124 notices that are less than the relevant timeframe of the defined seismic area (or for priority buildings) then the original timeframe applies. • Remediation timeframes remaining on s124 notices that are longer than the relevant timeframe of the defined seismic area (or for priority buildings) then the new timeframes apply. • New ability for building owners to apply to TAs to have the new timeframes based on seismic risk areas in the Bill apply from the date of issue of the original s124 notice.
Comments The proposed changes are considered to be reasonable and do not pose any significant implications for the Council. The Council has not issued any s124 notices for seismic upgrades to date as building owners have been proactive in their seismic strengthening works.
New steps in Bill process The Select Committee will consider the submissions received on the interim report and will issue a final report back to Parliament. The final report is due to be reported back to Parliament on 3 September 2015. The Bill then continues through the standard parliamentary process.
FINANCIAL AND RESOURCING IMPLICATIONS The proposed changes to the Bill are considered to not pose any significant financial and resourcing implications for the Council. As part of normal business, systems and processes will be applied to properly administer and implement any changes that might come into effect.
Building owners of earthquake-prone buildings in New Plymouth District will have a longer timeframe to complete remediation of their buildings than the Bill originally required.
In general it is difficult to understand the financial and resourcing implications on things that are still to be set in regulations as the detail of such matters is unknown.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 6 ITEM A3 ITEM FOR DECISION
IMPLICATIONS ASSESSMENT This report confirms that the matter concerned has no particular implications and has been dealt with in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002. Specifically: • Council staff have delegated authority for any decisions made; • Council staff have identified and assessed all reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter and considered the views and preferences of any interested or affected persons (including Māori), in proportion to the significance of the matter; • Any decisions made will help meet the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses; • Unless stated above, any decisions made can be addressed through current funding under the Long-Term Plan and Annual Plan; • Any decisions made are consistent with the Council's plans and policies; and • No decisions have been made that would alter significantly the intended level of service provision for any significant activity undertaken by or on behalf of the Council, or would transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset to or from the Council.
Further information The following websites provide further information on the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill and the interim report.
Information on the Bill http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/legislation/bills/00DBHOH_BILL12960_1/building- earthquake-prone-buildings-amendment-bill
Interim report http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/sc/documents/reports/51DBSCH_SCR63267_1/interim- report-on-the-building-earthquake-prone-buildings
Interim report full text http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en- nz/51DBSCH_SCR63267_1/b48e2b01669564a6e9c9e6a7f02bbb55ae768006
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 1 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A4
CHARTER FOR 5TH/7TH RNZIR BATTALION PREPARED BY: Julie Straka (Manager Democratic Services) TEAM: Democratic Services APPROVED BY: Liam Hodgetts (Group Manager Strategy) WARD/COMMUNITY: District Wide DATE: 15 July 2015 FILE REFERENCE: ECM 6570285
MATTER The matter for consideration by the Council is an update of the Charter for the 5th/7th RNZIR Battalion (previously the 5th Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki Battalion Group).
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION That having considered all matters raised in the report
a) The amended Charter for the 5th/7th RNZIR Battalion be approved.
b) This issue be dealt with as a matter of urgency as the 5th/7th RNZIR Battalion will be holding a charter parade in New Plymouth on Saturday 8th August 2015.
COMPLIANCE Significance This matter is of some importance. This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter:
Options 1. Update the Charter
2. Don’t update the Charter
The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter are the Affected persons New Zealand Army and the general community. This report recommends option 1 (updating the Charter) for Recommendation addressing the matter. Long-Term Plan / Annual Plan No Implications Significant Policy and Plan No Inconsistencies
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 2 ITEM A4 ITEM FOR DECISION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report recommends updating the Charter for the 5th/7th RNZIR Battalion. The updates relate to amalgamation of the 5th Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki Battalion Group. The New Zealand Army have advised they will be holding a Charter Parade in New Plymouth and Stratford on Saturday 8 August 2015. The parade will commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Battle for Chunuk Bair.
BACKGROUND On 1 November 1978, the New Plymouth City Council granted a Charter to the 5th Battalion Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment (Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki). New Plymouth District Council reconfirmed the Charter following local government amalgamation in 1989.
In 2011, the Charter was updated following a request by the 5th Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki Battalion Group to reconfirm its right to the Freedom of the District of Taranaki by conducting a Charter Parade. The amendments at that time reflected that the organisation was now the New Plymouth District Council and updated the wording.
In 2012, the Army’s six Territorial Force battalions amalgamated to form three battalions. The 5th/7th Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment was established by amalgamating the 5th Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki Battalion Group and the 7th Wellington (City of Wellington’s Own) and Hawke’s Bay Battalion Group.
The Battalion have requested that the Charter be updated to reflect the 2012 changes. A charter parade is scheduled to be held in New Plymouth on 8th August 2015.
History The Charter grants the Battalion the Charter to the Freedom of the District and gives them the right and privilege of marching with drums beating, band playing, bayonets fixed, colours flying and swords drawn throughout the district.
The 5th/7th Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment is a unit of the Army Reserve which contains part-time soldiers and officers from the lower half of the North Island with its Headquarters in Trentham. The Battalion was formed in 2012 when the previous six Territorial Force battalions were amalgamated to form three Army Reserve Force Battalions in a New Zealand Army reorganisation.
The Battalion is over 150 years old, and has the historic distinction of being the only unit of the New Zealand Army with 'New Zealand' as a Battle Honour, reflecting its role in the New Zealand Wars of the 1860s. This distinction is also unique within the British Commonwealth, as no other Commonwealth unit has ever been given the name of a country as a battle honour.
The role of the unit is to provide trained volunteers for overseas operations as required, as well as a trained pool of personnel to be able to respond to civil emergency tasks within New Zealand.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 3 ITEM FOR DECISION ITEM A4
The 5th/7th Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment and the District of New Plymouth have an affiliation through our predecessors which dates back to the formation of the Taranaki Volunteer Rifle Company in November 1858.
SIGNIFICANCE In accordance with the Council's Significance Policy, this matter has been assessed as of some importance because amending the Charter will not impact on the ability of the Council to meet its statutory purpose or levels of service.
OPTIONS Implications for Maori The Battalion Group is descended from the Taranaki Volunteer Rifle Corps. The Corps were active during the New Zealand Land Wars.
The parade was discussed at the Kaumatua Kaunihera o Ngā Whare Taonga meeting held at Puke Ariki on 8th June. Members of Ngāti Te Whiti hapū, as mana whenua of the area, proposed a number of ideas for their inclusion in the event. Their proposed inclusion has been agreed to by the regiment and includes karanga, karakia and inspection of the troops.
Kaumatua had commented previously that while the regiment had been involved in the land wars against hapū/iwi, in more recent times mana whenua members have also been members of the regiment and therefore their connection to this group was not only historical but also contemporary.
Statutory Responsibilities There are no statutory responsibilities relating to updating the Charter.
Community Views and Preferences Community views and preferences are unknown. However, give the administrative nature of the proposed changes, there are unlikely to be concerns in the community.
Option 1 Update the Charter Financial and Resourcing Implications There will be a small cost for the preparation (calligraphy) of the amended Charter. This cost will be met within existing budgets.
Option 2 Not update the Charter
Recommended Option This report recommends option 1 – Update the Charter for addressing the matter.
APPENDICES Charter showing proposed amendments
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 4 ITEM A4 ITEM FOR DECISION
Proposed Charter
Charter
5th Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki Battalion Group 5th/7th Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment
Whereas the Mayor, Councillors and Citizens of the District of New Plymouth – fully realising and appreciating the honourable record and traditions of the 5th Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki Battalion Group 5th/7th Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment and being desirous of recognising, cementing and fostering the intimate association which existed and had for some time been enjoyed between the City District of New Plymouth and the regiment in which so many of its sons had been proud to serve.
Now therefore the Council hereby grants unto the said 5th Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki Battalion Group 5th/7th Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment the Charter of the Freedom of the District of New Plymouth giving the said 5th/7th Battalion the right and privilege without any further permission being obtained of marching with drums beating and band playing, bayonets fixed, colours flying and swords drawn through the District of New Plymouth.
And the Council also accepts the honour of viewing the 5th Wellington, West Coast and Taranaki Battalion Group 5th/7th Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment once in each year for an inspection by His or Her Worship the Mayor together with the further honour of having two officers one officer of the said 5th/7th Battalion in uniform in attendance upon His or Her Worship the Mayor on important official occasions.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 1 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION ITEM B1
ADOPTION OF 2016 MEETING SCHEDULE PREPARED BY: Jan Holdt (Democracy Adviser) TEAM: Democratic Services APPROVED BY: Julie Straka (Manager Democratic Services) WARD/COMMUNITY: District Wide DATE: 27 May 2015 FILE REFERENCE: DM 6415063
MATTER The matter for consideration by the Council is the adoption of ordinary meetings for Council, standing committees and community boards in 2016.
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION That having considered all matters raised in the report the following meeting schedule be adopted:
Comm Bds Monitoring Policy Regulatory Council Jan 25-29 Feb 9 16 18 Mar 7-11 22 29 31 1 April 18-22 12 May 30-31 3 10 12 24 June 2-3 14 21 23 July 11-15 26 5 Aug 22-26 2 4 16 Sep 6 13 15 27
COMMUNITY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS The Kaitake, Inglewood, Clifton and Waitara Community Boards endorsed the officer’s recommendation.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 2 ITEM B1 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION
COMPLIANCE Significance This matter is of some importance. This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter: Options 1. Adopt the recommended meeting schedule.
2. Adopt alternative dates. The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter are the Affected persons elected members. Recommendation This report recommends option 1 for addressing the matter. Long-Term Plan / Annual Plan No Implications Significant Policy and Plan No Inconsistencies
BACKGROUND The Council has resolved to retain the current six weekly meeting cycle for the remainder of the triennium. This report proposes meeting dates for 2016 based on that cycle. The period covers ends in September 2016 due to the triennial election being held on Saturday 8 October 2016.
SIGNIFICANCE In accordance with the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter has been assessed as having some importance because it is an administrative matter and there are no financial or levels of service implications.
OPTIONS
Option 1 Adopt the recommended meeting schedule This option is based on the Council’s adopted six-weekly meeting cycle. There is no adjustment to avoid standing committee and Council meetings in school holidays.
Option 2 Adopt alternative dates The Council could choose to adopt alternative dates.
Recommended Option This report recommends option 1 – adopting the recommended meeting schedule for addressing the matter.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 1 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION ITEM B2
COUNCIL APPOINTEE TO HERITAGE TARANAKI PREPARED BY: Julie Straka (Manager Democratic Services) TEAM: Democracy Services APPROVED BY: Liam Hodgetts (General Manager Strategy) WARD/COMMUNITY: District wide DATE: 15 July 2015 FILE REFERENCE: ECM 6583247
PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to appoint a Council representative to Heritage Taranaki.
RECOMMENDATION That, having considered all matters raised in the report, Cr Colin Johnston be appointed as the Council’s representative on Heritage Taranaki.
SIGNIFICANCE This report is provided for information purposes only, and has been assessed as having some importance.
DISCUSSION A request has been made by Heritage Taranaki for the Council to appoint a representative to their organisation.
The purposes of Heritage Taranaki are to: • Promote and encourage the conservation, preservation, identification and documentation of historic places in the Taranaki area and New Zealand generally for the benefit of future and present communities. • Promote and support the education of the public in its understanding and appreciation of heritage places and values. • Work in conjunction with other groups and organisations with similar purposes and interests to advance the attainment of any of the foregoing purposes.
The Council have previously appointed a representative to the Taranaki Branch Committee of the NZ Historic Places Trust. The branch committees were disestablished in 2012 following a review of the New Zealand Historic Places Act. Heritage Taranaki now undertakes many of the activities previously undertaken by the branch committee.
FINANCIAL AND RESOURCING IMPLICATIONS There are no financial or resourcing implications.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 2 ITEM B2 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION
IMPLICATIONS ASSESSMENT This report confirms that the matter concerned has no particular implications and has been dealt with in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002. Specifically: • Council staff have identified and assessed all reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter and considered the views and preferences of any interested or affected persons (including Māori), in proportion to the significance of the matter; • Any decisions made will help meet the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses; • Unless stated above, any decisions made can be addressed through current funding under the Long-Term Plan and Annual Plan; • Any decisions made are consistent with the Council's plans and policies; and • No decisions have been made that would alter significantly the intended level of service provision for any significant activity undertaken by or on behalf of the Council, or would transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset to or from the Council.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 1 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION ITEM B3
REPRESENTATION REVIEW 2015 PREPARED BY: Julie Straka (Manager Democratic Services) TEAM: Democratic Services APPROVED BY: Liam Hodgetts (Group Manager Strategy) WARD/COMMUNITY: District Wide DATE: 15 July 2015 FILE REFERENCE: ECM 6551559
MATTER The matter for consideration by the Council is formulating a proposal on the representation arrangements for the 2016 and 2019 local authority triennial elections.
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION That having considered all matters raised in the report the Council determine an initial proposal for consultation on the representation arrangements for New Plymouth District Council including:
• Number of members • Ward structure / at large and • Community Boards and structure.
COMPLIANCE Significance This matter is significant. This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter:
1. Status Quo
2. Election at Large Options (Council) 3. Eight Ward Structure
4. Five Ward Structure
5. Four Ward Structure
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 2 ITEM B3 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION
COMPLIANCE This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter:
A. Status Quo
Options B. Adjusted Boundaries and establishing a Bell Block (Community Community Board Boards) C. Adjusted Boundaries (to include Princess Street in the Waitara Community) and establishing a Bell Block Community Board
D. Community Board membership
The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter are the Affected persons residents and ratepayers of New Plymouth District.
Recommendation This report makes no recommendation for addressing the matter. Long-Term Plan / Some structures may have Long-Term Plan / Annual Plan Annual Plan implications. Implications Significant Policy and Plan No Inconsistencies
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents Representation Review options for consideration by the Council following pre-consultation feedback. The Council needs to determine an initial proposal to be released for public consultation. In addition to feedback through the NRB survey, a number of detailed comments were received through community conversations and an online consultation process.
BACKGROUND The Local Electoral Act (LEA) requires the Council to review representation arrangements at least once every six years. The last review was carried out in 2009, taking effect for the 2010 triennial election.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 3 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION ITEM B3
Representation Review Process There are three key factors in determining representation arrangements under the Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA), communities of interest, effective representation and fair representation.
1. Communities of Interest Communities of interest are not defined by statute however the Local Government Commission Guidelines for representation reviews identifies three dimensions for recognising communities of interest:
• Perceptual: a sense of belonging to an area or locality • Functional: the ability to meet the community’s requirements for services • Political: the ability to represent the interests and reconcile conflicts of the community.
Feedback received Feedback received through pre-consultation indicates that communities of interest exist within New Plymouth District. Reasons given for this viewpoint included rural/urban/coastal splits, services, shared family histories, location of schools, geographical split by the mountain and demographics.
2. Effective Representation In determining the representation arrangements the Council must ensure that:
• The election of members of the Council (whether in wards, at large or a combination of both) will provide effective representation of communities of interest within the district. • Ward boundaries coincide with the boundaries of the current statistical meshblock areas determined by Statistics New Zealand and used for parliamentary electoral purposes. • So far is practicable, ward boundaries coincide with community boundaries (ie community boards).
Feedback received There was strong support for retaining the current number of councillors (14), although there was some support for reducing the size of the Council. On the strength of feedback received, no options on an alternate size of Council have been considered.
There was a clear preference for retaining a ward structure. Strong feedback was received in relation to representation of the communities in the western area of the district (Okato and surroundings). Feedback providers did not feel that the current structure provided effective representation. This is a result of the South-West Ward being geographically split by Mount Taranaki and the Kaitake and Pouakai ranges with the majority of the elector base being situated in and near Inglewood township. Similar feedback was received from those living outside of the Oakura urban boundary who considered themselves part of Oakura rather than as part of the South- West Ward. Similar feedback has been provided in previous representation reviews.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 4 ITEM B3 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION
There was some suggestion of increasing the size of the community boards by one or two members. The reason was to strengthen their effectiveness.
3. Fair Representation Section 19V of the LEA requires that the electors of each ward receive fair representation having regard to the population of the district and of that ward. More specifically, section 19V(2) requires that the population of each ward, divided by the number of members to be elected by that ward, procures a figure no more than 10% greater or smaller than the population of the district divided by the total number of elected members (the’+/- 10% fair representation rule’).
Many of the identified communities of interest do not meet the population size requirements to enable direct representation. A previous Local Government Commission determination noted that:
“The Commission does not consider that section 19T envisages that individual communities of interest need separate representation. Its sole requirement in this regard is that the representation of communities of interest must be effective”
All options presented in this report comply with the Fair Representation requirements in section 19V of the LEA.
The LEA provides four grounds for not complying with the fair representation requirements. These grounds are:
• To provide for effective representation of communities of interest within: − Island communities − Isolated communities
• Where compliance would limit effective representation of communities of interest by: − Dividing a community of interest − Grouping together communities of interest with few commonalities of interest
The Local Government Commission has an expectation that the Council’s proposal will meet the fair representation requirements of the LEA. While there are limited grounds for non-compliance, it is the Commission’s expectation that these are not the default or starting point when determining a proposal. Any decision which does not comply must be backed up with supporting arguments and relate to one of the grounds listed above.
If the Council’s decision is non-complying, it is automatically referred to the Commission. The Commission will treat that referral as if there had been an appeal (i.e. the same statutory requirements apply to the Commissions decision-making).
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 5 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION ITEM B3
Feedback received There was general acceptance that the predominant population base in the current City Ward made it difficult for there to be additional representation in the geographically larger rural area and smaller settlements.
Number of Councillors The Council may decide on any number of elected members to be represented on the Council within a legal range of five and 29 members (excluding the Mayor). Pre-consultation feedback was strongly in support of retaining the status quo of 14 councillors. On the strength of the feedback received, the status quo is the only option that has been considered in relation to the number of councillors.
Community Boards When carrying out a representation review, the Council must resolve:
• Whether there needs to be communities and community boards within the territorial authority’s district.
• If the territorial authority decides that one or more communities needs to be established (or retained): − The nature of the community and − The structure of the board.
Delegations to community boards are a matter for consideration by the incoming Council following the 2016 triennial election. They are outside the scope of the Representation Review process.
Feedback received: A significant level of support for community boards has been received. There were a number of suggestions for new community boards, particularly throughout the current City Ward, including the Bell Block area.
There was some support for amending the boundaries of the current community boards. The Princess Street area falls within the Waitara and Clifton community board areas. There was some suggestion of ensuring that all of the Princess Street area be located in the Waitara Community Board area.
If the Council decide to adopt a structure with amended ward boundaries, the community board boundaries should be adjusted. This reflects the Local Government Commission advice that where practicable electoral boundaries coincide as this:
• Supports communities of interest and local electors’ identification with their area.
• May encourage participation, such as voting or standing as a candidate.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 6 ITEM B3 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION
Community Feedback Pre-consultation feedback has been received through the NRB Survey, an online feedback process, eight Community Conversations and attendance at the Seaside Market. While there was a limited attendance at the community conversations, the comments at those meetings were captured, along with subsequent written feedback.
A total of 401 responses were received from the NRB survey.
The data received has been circulated to councillors.
The Process The Council must identify an initial representation proposal which is then publicly notified. Any person interested in the proposal is entitled to make a written submission. Submitters must be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard by the Council. Subsequent to the hearing, the Council must consider all submissions (written and verbal) and determine the final representation arrangements. The final representation arrangements are then notified and the community has the opportunity to appeal or object to the arrangements. If appeals or objections are received, these are forwarded to the Local Government Commission for final determination.
The timeline for the 2015 review is:
Tuesday 28 July Policy Committee recommends Initial Proposal to the Council Tuesday 11 August Council determines Initial Proposal Saturday 22 August Public notice given of “initial” proposal inviting submissions Friday 2 October Submissions close Wednesday 4 November Hearing of submissions (if required) and determination of final proposal Wednesday 11 November Public notice of “final” proposal Friday 11 December Appeals and objections close
Local Government Commission The determination of appeals and objections to the Council’s representation proposal, and determination of any proposal that doesn’t comply with the 10% rule is within the jurisdiction of the Local Government Commission.
Once a proposal has been referred to the Commission, their determination may deal with issues which are additional to those raised in appeals. The Council’s proposal is only one of the matters the Commission will consider. The weighting accorded to the Council’s proposal is at the sole discretion of the commission. Legislative compliance, robustness of consultation and robustness of decision-making (especially acceptance or rejection of submissions) will all be taken into account if the Commission decides to accord weight to the Council’s proposal.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 7 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION ITEM B3
SIGNIFICANCE In accordance with the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter has been assessed as being significant because it will affect all of the community and could have a substantial effect on it. The decision is also potentially controversial. Full public consultation is required under the Local Electoral Act 2001 and will be undertaken before a final proposal is presented to a future Council meeting.
OPTIONS An assessment of each option is attached as a separate document.
Financial and Resourcing Implications Financial and resourcing implications relate to elected member salaries and staff resourcing of elected members.
Remuneration of elected members is set independently by the Remuneration Authority against a national criteria. The criteria relates to population size, council expenditure, job size of position, proportion of full-time work applicable to the Council.
The options presented do not include a change in the number of councillors. It is not envisaged that there are any financial implications related to Options 1 – 4.
Option B and C consider establishing a new Community Board (Bell Block) and an increase in elected members on each community board. Based on the approved community board remuneration levels for 2015/16 the annual financial implications would be:
Community Board Options A & C Options B & C 4 members per board 5 members per board. 1 Cr appointee (no cost) No councillor appointee (Status Quo) Clifton 29,000 34,800 Waitara 34,500 41,400 Inglewood 34,500 41,400 Kaitake 31,000 37,200 Bell Block * 0 37,200 TOTAL 129,000 192,000
* Based on Kaitake Community Board population
The options presented do not envisage changes in the level of resourcing required to support the elected members or the community boards.
Implications for Maori Attendees at the Community Conversation for tangata whenua were largely focussed on direct Māori representation. Representation at that level is outside the scope of the Representation Review process. As a result of the poll on whether to establish a Māori Ward, direct Māori Representation cannot be reconsidered for the 2016 or 2019 elections.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 8 ITEM B3 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION
The suggestion of establishing wards based on iwi boundaries was investigated. This option is not possible as the population numbers are not compliant with the fair representation requirements of the LEA (the 10% rule).
The LEA does not permit the election of Māori community boards (ie a community board elected by those on the Māori electoral roll) or direct representation on community boards.
The Council has undertaken to present its initial proposal at a hui during the submission process.
Community Views and Preferences The table below indicates the pre-consultation that has been undertaken. The full list of comments received is appended to this report.
Consultation Date NRB Survey February 2015 401 responses Online consultation 26 responses Community Conversation – Waitara 18 May 2015 6 attendees Community Conversation – Urenui 20 May 2015 12 attendees Community Conversation – Okato 21 May 2015 9 attendees Community Conversation – Oakura 26 May 2015 16 attendees Community Conversation – Inglewood 27 May 2015 7 attendees Post Clifton Community Board – Tongaporutu 28 May 2015 20 attendees Seaside Market 7 June 2015 Unrecorded Community Conversation – tangata whenua 15 June 2015 30 attendees Community Conversation – NP Central 17 June 3 attendees
Risk Analysis It is anticipated that the Council’s initial proposal will generate interest within the community. Most Representation Reviews generate submissions and it is not uncommon for the final determination to be made by the Local Government Commission.
Community Outcomes Through the community outcomes, the Council has identified the theme of Our Community. The Council’s decision on the representation review should reflect that community outcome particularly in the sub-themes: • A community that fosters pride and a collective sense of identity. • A community that is strong, resilient and values diversity.
Statutory Responsibilities Representation Reviews are undertaken through the process set out in the Local Electoral Act 2001.
All population figures are from the 2013 ordinarily resident Census data.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 9 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION ITEM B3
During pre-consultation, several suggestions have been made which are not legally possible: For example a ward system based on age demographics (as opposed to geographic wards), and community boards representing social as well as physical communities (eg youth, disability).
Any delegation of powers to community boards would need to be considered by the incoming Council.
The Council must also take account of the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 particularly in relation to:
• Ensuring that it is aware of, and has regard to, the views of all of its communities; and • Takes account of diversity of the community, and the community’s interests and • The interests of future as well as current communities; and • Provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making processes
Consistency with Policies and Plans The options presented in this report are consistent with Council policies and plans.
Blueprint key directions The Blueprint key directions are the focus for the Council’s future planning and should be taken into account during the Representation Review.
Blueprint direction Factors for consideration Environment Rural vs urban approaches to enhancing biodiversity. Communities Planned approaches to strengthening and connecting local communities and neighbourhood centres. Supporting diversity (neighbourhoods and suburban centres) Helping communities achieve their goals. This direction is best reflected in Option 3. Citizens Citizens who perceive they are well represented have a higher level of engagement. Growth Representation of probable growth areas (particularly in Bell Block and Smart Road areas and to a lesser degree the Oakura area) are best reflected in Options 3 and 4. Depending on the rate of actual growth, ward boundaries may need adjustment at the next representation review to reflect population change. Economy Recognition of the District’s strong agricultural base (including poultry sector) and the nationally significant oil and gas sector. Talent Reinforcing a sense of place and diversity (at a local level) and maintaining the Taranaki lifestyle. Central City Current population of the central city is relatively low and insufficient to allow direct representation through the representation review. Destination Our natural assets may invoke a sense of place on which a community of interest is based. Similarly, such features may provide natural barriers segregating parts of the district.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 10 ITEM B3 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION
Community Boards Disestablishment of community boards has not been assessed. This is due to the level of support for community boards in the feedback received.
Recommended Option This report does not recommend a preferred option.
APPENDICES 1. Historical Representation Arrangements 2. Pre-consultation feedback (Previously circulated to councillors) (ECM6585029) 3. Representation Review Options (Attached as a separate document) (ECM 6585870) 4. Statistical analysis of potential ward structures (ECM6584572)
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 11 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION ITEM B3
HISTORICAL ARRANGEMENTS
APPENDIX 1
HISTORY OF NEW PLYMOUTH DISTRICT COUNCIL REPRESENTATION REVIEWS
History of New Plymouth District Council Reviews 1989 On establishment (following local government amalgamation) New Plymouth District had eight wards with 16 councillors. Wards existed for Clifton, Waitara, Bell Block, NP East, NP Central, NP West, Inglewood and Okato. The Clifton and Okato wards elected one member each, NP Central and NP West elected three members, while all other wards elected two members.
Inglewood, Clifton and Waitara Community Boards and Oakura Community Committee/Board.
1994 The three New Plymouth wards and the Bell Block ward were merged into one. The City ward boundaries were adjusted and the Okato Ward was renamed the Kaitake Ward.
1997 Boundaries of the New Plymouth, Inglewood and Kaitake Wards were amended. The boundaries of the Clifton and Waitara Wards remained unchanged. The Council comprised 16 councillors and the Mayor (Clifton Ward (one member), Waitara Ward (two members), Inglewood Ward (two members), Kaitake Ward (1 member) and New Plymouth Ward (10 members).
There were four community boards (Clifton, Waitara, Inglewood and Kaitake).
2004 Following a review of membership and basis of election, the Council initially resolved:
Mayor and 14 councillors elected at large. Retention of the four existing community boards (Clifton, Waitara, Inglewood and Kaitake)
Having considered the 416 submissions on the proposal, the Council’s final resolution:
• Mayor plus 14 Councillors elected from three wards: New Plymouth City Ward (10 members), South-West Ward (two members) and North Ward (two members).
- New Plymouth City Ward to include Omata and Oakura. - South West Ward to include Inglewood and Okato areas - North Ward to include Clifton and Waitara areas.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015 12 ITEM B3 ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION
• Retain Waitara and Clifton Community Boards • Abolish the Inglewood and Kaitake Community Boards • Establish an Inglewood-Okato Community.
Following a hearing of appeals and objections, the Local Government Commission determined:
Mayor and 14 Councillors: North Ward (two members), New Plymouth City Ward (10 members) and South-West Ward (two members).
Four community boards – Clifton, Waitara, Inglewood and Kaitake Community.
2007 Council initial proposal was 14 councillors and the Mayor – elected at large. Plus four Community Boards (Waitara, Clifton, Inglewood and Kaitake). The Council confirmed this decision following submissions.
Following the receipt of five appeals (focussed solely on the decision for an at-large system), the Local Government Commission held a hearing.
The Local Government Commission determination established the current structure of North Ward (two members), City Ward (10 members) and South- West Ward (two members). The determination also confirmed the Clifton, Waitara, Inglewood and Kaitake Community Boards.
2009 Council resolved to undertake a representation review. As a result of consultation, the Council resolved to make no change to the representation structure (Council and community boards).
2011 Council resolved not to undertake a representation review.
Policy Committee Tuesday 28 July 2015