Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Will Be Held in Mauao Rooms, Bay of Plenty Regional Council Building, 87 First Avenue, Tauranga On

Regional Direction and Delivery

Committee

NOTICE IS GIVEN that the next meeting of the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee will be held in Mauao Rooms, Bay of Plenty Regional Council Building, 87 First Avenue, Tauranga on:

Thursday, 18 May 2017 commencing at 9.30 am.

Mary-Anne Macleod Chief Executive 11 May 2017

Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Terms of Reference

The Regional Direction and Delivery Committee has a core function of policy formulation and implementation and monitoring of Regional Council strategy and policy. Delegated Function To set the strategic direction for the Region by formulating policy that clearly identifies Council’s role and direction on issues. This will be achieved through the development and approval of Council strategy and policy.

To set the operational direction for approved Regional Council policy and strategy and monitor how it is implemented. This will be achieved through the development of specific operational decisions which translate policy and strategy into action. Membership Chairman and all councillors. Quorum In accordance with Council standing order 10.2, the quorum at a meeting of the committee is not fewer than seven members of the committee. Term of the Committee For the period of the 2016-2019 Triennium unless discharged earlier by the Regional Council. Meeting frequency Six-weekly. Specific Responsibilities and Delegated Authority The Regional Direction and Delivery Committee is delegated the power of authority to:

• Approve and review statutory and non-statutory policy, plans and strategies for: . the management of resources in the region; . identifying and promoting community aspirations; . defining and delivering on Council’s roles;

• Approve and review operational policy and plans; • Develop and review bylaws; • Receive reporting on consenting, compliance and enforcement; • Receive reporting from state of the environment monitoring;

BOPRC ID: A2460611 Page 3 of 274 • Receive any annual reporting of organisational programmes; • Enter into contracts on matters within its Terms of Reference to a maximum value of $700,000 (excluding GST) for any one contract, subject to and within the allocation of funds set aside for that purpose in the Long Term Plan or Annual Plan or as otherwise specifically approved by Council; • Approve submissions on matters relating to the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee’s areas of responsibility that are not delegated to staff; • Establish subcommittees and hearing committees and delegate to them any authorities that have been delegated by Council to the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee, including those under section 34 of the Resource Management Act 1991, and to appoint members (not limited to members of the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee); • Delegate to hearings commissioners under section 34A of the Resource Management Act 1991 to exercise the powers, functions duties in relation to any authorities that have been delegated by Council to the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee; • Establish working groups to provide advice to the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee on its areas of responsibility.

Note:

• The Regional Direction and Delivery Committee reports directly to the Regional Council. • The Regional Direction and Delivery Committee is not delegated the power of authority to: . Approve the Regional Policy Statement and bylaws; . Review and adopt the Long Term Plan and Annual Plan; . Develop and review funding, financial, audit and risk policy and frameworks; . Approve Council submissions on Maori related matters except where submissions may have a wide impact on Council’s activities; . Develop, approve or review non statutory policy for the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes.

BOPRC ID: A2460611 Page 4 of 274 Public Forum

1. A period of up to 15 minutes may be set aside near the beginning of the meeting to enable members of the public to make statements about any matter on the agenda of that meeting which is open to the public, but excluding any matter on which comment could prejudice any specified statutory process the council is required to follow. 2. The time allowed for each speaker will normally be up to 5 minutes but will be up to the discretion of the chair. A maximum of 3 public participants will be allowed per meeting. 3. No statements by public participants to the Council shall be allowed unless a written, electronic or oral application has been received by the Chief Executive (Governance Team) by 12.00 noon of the working day prior to the meeting and the Chair’s approval has subsequently been obtained. The application shall include the following: name of participant;

organisation represented (if any);

meeting at which they wish to participate; and matter on the agenda to be addressed.

4. Members of the meeting may put questions to any public participants, relevant to the matter being raised through the chair. Any questions must be asked and answered within the time period given to a public participant. The chair shall determine the number of questions.

Page 5 of 274

Page 6 of 274 Membership

Chairperson: P Thompson

Deputy Chairperson: A von Dadelszen

Councillors: N Bruning, W Clark, J Cronin, S Crosby, Chairman D Leeder, D Love, T Marr, M McDonald, J Nees, A Tahana, L Thurston, K Winters

Committee Advisor: N Moore

Recommendations in reports are not to be construed as Council policy until adopted by Council. Agenda

1 Apologies 2 General Business and Tabled Items

Items not on the agenda for the meeting require a resolution under section 46A of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 stating the reasons why the item was not on the agenda and why it cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting. 3 Public Forum 4 Declarations of Conflicts of Interests 5 Previous Minutes

5.1 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Minutes - 29 March 2017 13 6 Subcommittee meeting minutes

6.1 Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee minutes - 27 February 2017 25

6.2 Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee minutes - 9 December 2016 27 7 Presentations

7.1 2016-2017 Ballance Farm Environment Award programme annual report 33

7.2 Presentation - Operating Environment

Page 7 of 274 8 Reports

8.1 Towards Objectives for the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/Maketū, Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas 39

APPENDIX 1 - Approved Objective Setting Process 43

APPENDIX 2 - Region Wide Values 47

APPENDIX 3 - Draft Attributes and Bands for Rivers 51

8.2 Region - wide Water Quantity Proposed Plan Change 9 Progress Update 55

8.3 Freshwater Futures Update 59

8.4 Special Management Areas for addressing localised water quality issues 71

APPENDIX 1 - Map of the Kaiate Stream watershed 77

APPENDIX 2 - Map of Ngongotaha stream sub-catchment 81

APPENDIX 3 - Special Management Areas Statutory Assessment 85

8.5 Air discharges in the Mount industrial area: Dust, Methyl Bromide, Hydrogen Sulphide and Sulphur Dioxide

This report will be circulated under separate cover.

8.6 Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 89

APPENDIX 1 - Cooney Lees Morgan overview of Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 97

8.7 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements 105

APPENDIX 1 - Attachment Te Mana Whakahono 113

APPENDIX 2 - Iwi and Hapu in the region May 2017 121

8.8 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act applications in the Bay of Plenty region 141

APPENDIX 1 - Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act Applications in the Bay of Plenty region - 8 May 2017 149

APPENDIX 2 - Map of Marine and Coastal Area Act (Takutai Moana) Applications 159

APPENDIX 3 - Process for Crown engagement under the Marine and Coastal Area Act 163

8.9 Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document Submission 167

APPENDIX 1 - Draft BOPRC submission to Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document 2 May 2017 171

8.10 Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw 197

Page 8 of 274 APPENDIX 1 - Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw - Statement of Proposal 205

APPENDIX 2 - Draft Agreement - Enforcement and Administration of Air Quality Control Bylaw 227

8.11 Climate change information update 239

APPENDIX 1 - Climate change and land use dynamics in lowland CCII Kaituna case study 243

APPENDIX 2 - DRAFT Stocktake of Council activities related climate change 249

8.12 Environment Court Decision on Implementation of the Horizons One Plan 257

8.13 Maritime Update 261

APPENDIX 1 - Accela Smart Charts 265

APPENDIX 2 - Oil Spill Response Vessel 269

8.14 Regional Direction and Delivery Work Programme 2017 273

8.15 Operations and Monitoring News 9 Public Excluded Section 275

Resolution to exclude the public

THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

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

9.1 Public Excluded Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Minutes - 29 March 2017 277

Grounds

That the public conduct of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist.

Reason

Please refer to the relevant clause in the meeting minutes.

9.2 Public Excluded Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee minutes - 27 February 2017 279

Grounds

Reason

Please refer to the relevant clause in the meeting minutes.

Page 9 of 274 9.3 Public Excluded Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee minutes - 9 December 2016 283

Grounds

Reason

Please refer to the relevant clause in the meeting minutes. 10 Confidential business to be transferred into the open 11 Readmit the public 12 Consideration of General Business

Page 10 of 274

Previous Minutes

Page 11 of 274

Page 12 of 274 Minutes of the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Meeting held in Mauao Rooms, Bay of Plenty Regional Council Building, 87 First Avenue, Tauranga on Wednesday, 29 March 2017 commencing at 9.30 a.m.

Click h ere to enter text.

Present:

Chairman: P Thompson

Deputy Chairman: A von Dadelszen

Councillors: L Thurston, D Love, N Bruning, A Tahana, J Nees, Chairman D Leeder, W Clark, S Crosby, K Winters

In Attendance: M Macleod (Chief Executive), F McTavish (General Manager, Strategy & Science), C Ingle (General Manager, Integrated Catchments), E Grogan (General Manager, Regulatory Services), J Graham (General Manager, Corporate Solutions), I Morton (Strategy & Science Manager), N Poutasi (Water Policy Manager), S Lamb (Natural Resource Policy Manager), J Low (Senior Planner), J Noble (Senior Planner), K Parcell (Senior Policy Analyst), L Mason (Integrated Catchments Programme Manager), L Goldsmith (Rotorua Catchments Manager), N Green (Senior Planner), R Donald (Science Manager), R Cross (Team Leader Land Resources), S Craig (Communications Manager), R Garrett (Committee Advisor).

Apologies: J Cronin and T Marr; A Tahana and D Leeder for lateness

1 General Business

The following item was raised for consideration:

1. Storm damage in Paradise Valley Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1. Received and considers the General Business item.

Winters/Thompson CARRIED

2 Declaration of conflicts of interest

No conflicts of interest were declared.

Page 13 of 274 1 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Wednesday, 29 March 2017

3 Minutes

3.1 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee minutes - 23 February 2017

Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Notes that the minutes of the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee meeting on 23 February 2017 incorrectly record Councillor von Dadelszen as absent rather than as an apology;

2 Agrees that the minutes should be corrected to record Councillor von Dadelszen’s apology;

3 Confirms, with the above correction, the minutes of the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee meeting held 23 February 2017.

Bruning/Crosby CARRIED

4 Reports

4.1 Presentation – Operating Environment

General Manager, Strategy and Science Fiona McTavish introduced this presentation and outlined the four topics to be covered.

Plan Change 10 Update

Refer PowerPoint Presentation Objective ID A2579826

Natural Resources Policy Manager Stephen Lamb provided an overview and updated members on the progress of the Proposed Plan Change 10 hearing currently underway in Rotorua. Members asked that their appreciation for the professionalism of the staff involved, particularly Rebecca Burton, be recorded.

Ministry for the Environment (MFE) Clean Water Package

Refer PowerPoint Presentation Objective ID A2578841

Chief Executive Mary-Anne Macleod, Water Policy Manager Namouta Poutasi, Strategy and Science Manager Ian Morton and Science Manager Rob Donald spoke to this presentation.

Ms Poutasi outlined the main points of the amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM) and their implications for Council and noted that submission were due by 28 April.

Ms Macleod updated members on the government’s swimmability targets and noted that the overall target was that 90% of New Zealand’s waters be swimmable by 2040. Ms Macleod noted that a taskforce had been established between regional Chief

A2581515 Page 14 of 274 2 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Wednesday, 29 March 2017

Executives and the Ministry, to further develop swimmability targets, with each regional council identifying what rivers could be moved up target categories in each region. Staff clarified thebodies of water the targets would apply to, noting that Council could include more than the “fourth order rivers and lakes” prescribed by the Ministry and seek improvement across all levels, and that community expectations could vary between regions. Clarification was also provided that the 90% swimmability target was a national target, and could raise equity issues between regions.

Strategy & Science Manager Ian Morton noted that the package requirements relating to stock exclusion were in line with Council’s normal business although there may be funding decisions to consider. Mr Morton also updated members on the MFE Freshwater Fund, noting that it only applied to Ministry identified vulnerable catchments and that applications closed 13 April. Clarification was provided around the definition of “vulnerable”, which included social and economic vulnerability. Ms Macleod informed members that three potential applications were being considered.

OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: NZ 2017

Refer PowerPoint Presentation Objective ID A2578914

Chief Executive Mary-Anne Macleod and General Manager, Strategy & Science Fiona McTavish summarised the key messages from the OECD report and the findings relevant to the Regional Council. Points noted included the importance of considering the impacts of climate change in and on Council activity, the need for more national direction and integration between legislation and a lack of funding and tools at regional and territorial authority level. It was noted that the report findings were recommendations only with the government determining which ones it would progress, if any. .

Resource Legislation Amendment Bill

Refer PowerPoint Presentation Objective ID A2579796

General Manager, Strategy & Science Fiona McTavish updated members on the progress of this legislation, and noted that key changes revolved around collaborative planning and streamlined planning processes. Ms McTavish noted that a fuller analysis would be provided to the Committee when the Bill was enacted.

Attendance

D Leeder joined the meeting at 10.40 am.

Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 10.45 am and reconvened at 11.00 am.

4.2 Freshwater Futures: National Scene, Regional Approach and Next Steps

Refer PowerPoint Presentation Objective ID A2579837

Water Policy Manager Namouta Poutasi and Senior Planner (Water Policy) Nicola Green provided an update on Council’s role in water from a national and regional context, sought direction from the Committee on the current approach being taken and outlined next steps for implementation of the NPS-FM.

A2581515 Page 15 of 274 3 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Wednesday, 29 March 2017 Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Freshwater Futures: National Scene, Regional Approach and Next Steps.

2 Approves investigating and reporting back on options for working with Territorial Local Authorities at a governance level and linking this well with collaboration at an operational level.

3 Approves the proposed adaptive approach for Plan Change 12 project objective setting, engagement, and addressing issues, the updated timeline and process review points, in particular:

a) the approach to objective setting as outlined in Appendix 3.

b) the continuation of the ‘involve’ approach to engagement for Plan Change 12 and future Water Management Areas as outlined in Appendix 3 and 4.

c) there are issues in the Rangitaiki and Kaituna-Pongakawa-Waitahanui Water Management Areas that mean objectives and management will need to halt water quality decline and in some cases improve’ water quality as outlined in Appendix 3.

d) a 12 month extension for phase 3 of plan change 12 project is needed to address issues, apply lessons learnt, and to establish planning frameworks as outlined in Appendix 3.

4 Notes that approval will be sought on the order of the next WMAs at the RDD meeting in May 2017.

5 Notes that the implementation timeline will be reviewed in light of proposed NPS-FM changes, with a view to notifying an amended timeline in March 2018.

6 Confirms that the decision has a medium level of significance as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Council has identified and assessed different options and considered community views as part of making the decision, in proportion to the level of significance.

Thompson/Nees CARRIED

4.3 Update on Regional Plan Amalgamation

Refer PowerPoint Presentation Objective ID A2577513

Natural Resources Policy Manager Stephen Lamb and Senior Policy Analyst (Natural Resources Policy) Karen Parcell updated members on progress with the amalgamation of regional plans into the Regional Natural Resources Plan. Ms Parcell explained that the amalgamated Plan would include all regional specialist plans except for the Regional Coastal Environment Plan, which was nearly operative; noted that legal feedback received on the draft amalgamated plan was positive and reassured the

A2581515 Page 16 of 274 4 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Wednesday, 29 March 2017

Committee that the draft plan wasconsistent with the national template currently being developed.

Members emphasised the need for clear communication with the community around the changes being form rather than substance; queried whether links could be created with territorial authorities to make a “one-stop shop” for ratepayers and suggested that a Māori sub-name be added to the amalgamated plan . Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Update on Regional Plan Amalgamation.

2 Approves the title of the amalgamated plan as the “Regional Natural Resources Plan”.

3 Notes the current progress on the amendment to the Regional Water and Land Plan.

Thompson/Tahana CARRIED

4.4 Streamlining Regional Plans

Refer PowerPoint Presentation Objective ID A2577514

Refer Tabled Document 1: Chart, Summary of Regional Plan Contents

Natural Resources Policy Manager Stephen Lamb and Senior Policy Analyst (Natural Resources Policy) Karen Parcell presented this report which sought the Committee's endorsement of a streamlined approach to regional plans. Ms Parcell outlined the minimum requirements for plan content, being objectives, policies and rules; and noted that any other content could be valuable but was optional. Ms Parcell explained staff’s recommendation to remove “issues” as a separate category from plans and to only include methods where determined appropriate, based on meeting method selection criteria.

Members endorsed the streamlined approach but emphasised the importance of maintaining clarity, and noted staff comment that issues and methods could be included in other documents such as an implementation plan if required. Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Streamlining Regional Plans.

2 Endorses a streamlined approach to regional plans which focuses on having:

a. Objectives, policies and rules

A2581515 Page 17 of 274 5 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Wednesday, 29 March 2017

b. Limited introductory and explanatory text

c. Only those methods deemed to be necessary.

3 Agree that future plan changes will be developed using the streamlined approach.

4 Agree that existing material not consistent with the streamlined approach will be removed at an appropriate stage.

Thompson/von Dadelszen CARRIED

4.5 Proposed Change 4 to the Regional Policy Statement - Tauriko West Urban Limits

General Manager, Strategy & Science Fiona McTavish, supported by Senior Planner James Low, provided an overview of a possible change to the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement (RPS) required to deliver additional urban land in the Western Bay of Plenty "Western Corridor" at Tauriko West.

Ms McTavish explained that the recommended approach would be to provide a draft RPS change for consultation, consider feedback received and report back to Council for approval to progress into the formal RPS change process. Ms McTavish noted the need to progress the change quickly and emphasised that the proposed change would be technical in nature with a narrow scope.

Members noted the commitment already made to the process by Western Bay of Plenty District Council, Tauranga City Council and the New Zealand Transport Authority (NZTA); and that a key issue would be the ability of NZTA to deliver roading changes on time.

In response to a query staff clarified that environmental impacts of the change, including any impact on the Wairoa River, would be addressed through consultation and in the Structural Plan.

Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Proposed Change 4 to the Regional Policy Statement - Tauriko West Urban Limits; and

2 Approves the content, approach and timeline for commencing a change to the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement for Tauriko West, as set out in this report.

Crosby/Leeder CARRIED

A2581515 Page 18 of 274 6 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Wednesday, 29 March 2017

4.6 Resolution of Appeals on the Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan

Senior Planner Jo Noble updated the Committee on progress made toward resolving appeals on the Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan and sought approval for the rules in the Plan to take immediate legal effect. Ms Noble clarified that as the outstanding Motiti appeal was area-specific it should not hold up the rest of the Plan becoming operative.

Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Resolution of appeals on the Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan.

2 Rescinds the decision made by the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee on 15 May 2014 concerning the legal effect of rules in the Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan, and approves the release of a public notice to that effect under sections 86B and 86C of the Resource Management Act 1991.

3 Notes that all rules in the Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan will have legal effect the day after public notification occurs, and any of those rules beyond appeal will be treated as operative.

4 Notes the progress made in resolving the Environment Court appeals received on the Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan under the guidance of the Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee.

Leeder/Nees CARRIED

4.7 Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme 6 Month Report (2016- 2017)

Refer video presentation Objective ID A2606411

General Manager Integrated Catchments Chris Ingle, Rotorua Catchments Manager Linda Goldsmith and Team Leader - Land Resources Rosemary Cross spoke to this report. Ms Goldsmith noted that the report was a requirement of the Ministry for the Environment funding deed and did not require Committee approval. Ms Cross presented a video outlining the work undertaken by the Advice and Support team as part of the Rotorua Lakes programme.

Members sought and received clarification regarding achieving the gorse programme nitrogen reduction targets. The hard work of the Advice and Support team was also acknowledged by members.

A2581515 Page 19 of 274 7 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Wednesday, 29 March 2017 Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme 6 Month Report (2016-2017);

Winters/Thurston CARRIED

4.8 Further appointment to Hearing Committee for Proposed Change 3 (Rangitaiki River) to the Regional Policy Statement

General Manager, Strategy & Science Fiona McTavish spoke to this report which asked the Committee to appoint Councillor von Dadelszen as an additional member to the Hearing Committee for Proposed Change 3 (Rangitaiki River) to the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement. Ms McTavish clarified that if Hearing Committee member Antoine Coffin was successful in being elected to the vacant Mauao Māori constituency seat, he would still remain on the Hearing Committee to provide iwi representation. Members noted Councillor Cronin’s current leave of absence. Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Further appointment to Hearing Committee for Proposed Change 3 (Rangitaiki River) to the Regional Policy Statement; and

2 Appoints Councillor Andrew von Dadelszen as an additional member to the Hearing Committee for Proposed Change 3 (Rangitaiki River) to the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement.

Thurston/Nees CARRIED

4.9 Operations and Monitoring News

Refer video presentation Objective ID A2606513; Refer video presentation: https://vimeo.com/209050599 password “coastcare”

General Manager Integrated Catchment Chris Ingle provided apologies from Kaituna Catchments Manager Pim de Monchy and presented two videos on his behalf. The first video looked at recent work undertaken on the Maketū Spit as part of the Biodiversity Management Plan; the second “Our Sand Dunes 1 – Meet the Dunes” was a Coastcare outreach video narrated by two schoolchildren.

4.10 RD&D Work Programme 2017

General Manager, Strategy & Science Fiona McTavish provided the updated Committee workplan for members’ information.

A2581515 Page 20 of 274 8 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Wednesday, 29 March 2017 Resolved

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, RD&D Work Programme 2017

Thompson/Thurston CARRIED

5 General Business

5.1 Paradise Valley Update

General Manager Integrated Catchments Chris Ingle provided members with a verbal update on the damage caused by the recent storm event. Mr Ingle noted that the issues concerned driveway damage for two properties and run-off into the Ngongotahā Stream. Mr Ingle explained that Rotorua Lakes Council (RLC) was taking the lead in addressing the access issues and that remediation costs would rest with the private landowners; however Regional Council was providing technical and design assistance. Mr Ingle further noted that better management of storm events could help mitigate or resolve several wider catchment issues in the Ngongotahā area, and that Council was funding a facilitator for the existing Ngongotahā catchment group.

Members asked several questions of clarification around roles and responsibilities in relation to the flood damage. Communications staff agreed to work with RLC to clarify this issue for the public.

6 Public Excluded Section

Resolved

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

General Subject of Matter Reason for passing this Grounds under Section 48(1) to be Considered resolution in relation to LGOIMA 1987 for passing this matter this resolution 7.1 – Public Excluded Please refer to the That the public conduct of Regional Direction and relevant clause in the the whole or the relevant Delivery Committee meeting minutes. part of the proceedings of Minutes – 23 February 2017 the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist. 7.2 – Operations and That the public conduct That the public conduct of Monitoring News of the whole or the the whole or the relevant relevant part of the part of the proceedings of proceedings of the the meeting would be likely

A2581515 Page 21 of 274 9 Regional Direction and Delivery Committee Wednesday, 29 March 2017

meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of to result in the disclosure information for which good of information where the reason for withholding withholding of the would exist. information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information.

Thompson/Nees CARRIED

The meeting closed at 12.30 pm.

A2581515 Page 22 of 274 10

Subcommittee meeting minutes

Page 23 of 274

Page 24 of 274 Minutes of the Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee Meeting held in Mauao Rooms, Bay of Plenty Regional Council Building, 87 First Avenue, Tauranga on Monday, 27 February 2017 commencing at 12.30 pm.

Click h ere to enter text.

Present:

Chairperson: P Thompson

Deputy Chairperson: J Nees

Councillors: J Cronin

In Attendance: D Phizacklea (Regional Integrated Planning Manager), J Noble (Senior Planner), N Moore (Committee Advisor), D Llewell (Legal Specialist), R Boyte (Legal Counsel, Cooney Lees Morgan)

1 Tabled Item

The following item was tabled for consideration:

1 Matakana Island appeals topic Resolved

That the Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee under its delegated authority:

1 Under section 46A of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, receives and considers Tabled Document 1 in public excluded, as part of Agenda Item 7.2.

Thompson/Cronin CARRIED 2 Declaration of conflicts of interest

There were no conflicts of interest declared.

3 Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee minutes - 9 December 2016

Resolved

That the Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee under its delegated authority:

Page 25 of 274 1 Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee Monday, 27 February 2017

1 Confirms the minutes of the Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee meeting held on 9 December 2016 as a true and correct record.

Thompson/Nees CARRIED

4 Public Excluded Section

Resolution to exclude the public

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting:

4.1 Public Excluded Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee minutes – 9 December 2016

Grounds

Reason

That the public conduct of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information where the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege.

4.2 Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals, February 2017 Update

Grounds

Reason

Thompson/Nees CARRIED

The meeting closed at 1.55 pm.

A2566165 Page 26 of 274 2 Minutes of the Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee Meeting held in the Wairoa Meeting Room, Bay of Plenty Regional Council, First Avenue, Tauranga on Friday, 9 December 2016 commencing at 1.35 pm.

Click h ere to enter text.

Present:

Chairman: P Thompson

Deputy Chairman: J Nees

Councillors: J Cronin

In Attendance: Councillor T Marr, N Moore (Committee Advisor), J Noble (Senior Planner), D Phizacklea (Regional Integrated Planning Manager), D Llewell (Legal Specialist), F McTavish (Group Manager Strategy & Science), P Cooney, R Zame (Legal Counsel, Cooney Lees Morgan)

Apologies: Nil

1 General Business and Tabled Items

Resolved

That pursuant to section 46A of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 the following items be considered at this meeting.

Tabled document 1 Environment Public Excluded Report and Direction of Court Item 7.2 the Court – Decision No [2016] NZEnvC 239 – Mangrove Protection Society, Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society

Tabled document 2 Environment Public Excluded Declaration for Decision Court Item 7.2 Granted – Decision No [2016] NZEnvC 240 - Motiti Rohe Moana Trust

Tabled document 3 Environment Public Excluded Consent order – General Court Item 7.2 application of the planning maps ENV- 2015-AKL-000120 Paul Francis

Page 27 of 274 1 Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee Friday, 9 December 2016

Tabled document 4 Mangrove Public Excluded Mangrove Management Management Item 7.2 Provisions, Track Change Version

Resolved

That the Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives and considers the tabled items.

2 The grounds for accepting the tabled items are that they cannot be delayed until the next meeting of the Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee.

3 Under section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, considers tabled documents 1.0 in public excluded noting that:

4 Good reason for withholding exists under section 48(1)(a);

5 The grounds to exclude the public is to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the free and frank expression of opinions and to maintain legal professional privilege.

Thompson/Cronin CARRIED

2 Declaration of conflicts of interest

There were no conflicts of interest declared.

3 Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee minutes - 19 August 2016

Resolved

That the Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee under its delegated authority:

1 Confirms the minutes, Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee minutes - 19 August 2016 as a true and correct record.

Thompson/Cronin CARRIED

4 Public Excluded Section

Resolution to exclude the public

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

A2501157 Page 28 of 274 2 Regional Coastal Environment Plan Appeals Subcommittee Friday, 9 December 2016

Grounds

Reason

4.2 Update on appeals on the Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan – December 2016

Grounds

Reason

Thompson/Nees CARRIED

The meeting closed at 3.00 pm.

A2501157 Page 29 of 274 3

Page 30 of 274

Presentations

Page 31 of 274

Page 32 of 274

File Reference: File Reference Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Simon Stokes, Eastern Catchments Manager

2016-2017 Ballance Farm Environment Award programme annual report

Executive Summary

This report is a summary of the Ballance Farm Environment Award programme for 2016- 2017 run by the Farm Environment Award Trust (Bay of Plenty Region). Jim Hitchcock and John Mackintosh from the Ballance Farm Environment Awards Management Committee will present their annual report.

1 Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the presentation, 2016-2017 Ballance Farm Environment Award programme annual report.

2 Background

The Farm Environment Awards have existed nationally since 1993. In 2004, The New Zealand Farm Environment Award Trust was established. The Trust's core business is promoting sustainable environmental management of land. One of the ways it does this is to run the National Ballance Farm Environment Awards event. It also ensures that any other events or awards run under the New Zealand Farm Environment Award banner stay true to the original idea.

The Ballance Farm Environment awards in the Bay of Plenty are directed by the Farm Environment Award Trust (Bay of Plenty Region). The annual event is run by the Ballance Farm Environment Awards Management Committee. Jim Hitchcock and John Mackintosh from the Ballance Farm Environment Awards Management Committee will be presenting to you today.

3 About the awards

Page 33 of 274 2016-2017 Ballance Farm Environment Award programme annual report

The Ballance Farm Environment Awards aim to identify and reward farming operations that are achieving a high standard across three key factors essential to a successful farming operation:

 Sustainable Profitability  Environmental awareness  Social and community responsibility

While the Awards are about celebrating winning practices, they are first and foremost focused on learning and knowledge sharing. For those farmers who do not yet feel they are ready to enter, the Awards are an opportunity to benchmark themselves against their peers and receive confidential constructive feedback from a team of three independent assessors. Many people enter the Awards to share ideas and expertise with the wider farming community. A key characteristic of many entrants is a desire to seek innovative and sustainable ways to address limitations encountered in their farming businesses. Each year one farming operation is judged as the supreme winner for the region, and seven additional awards are made across a range of farm types and businesses.

3.1 How the awards benefit the future

The awards help many farming businesses to enhance their assets in a variety of ways. Many past participants have entered to learn new ways of doing things. Farmers have said that the benefits to be gained from entering include:

 Linking sustainable farming practices to long-term profitability

 The opportunity to discuss practical farm information and business with assessors from arrange of fields

 Gathering new ideas and different methods from other entrants

 Confirmation that current farm management practices are sustainable

4 Our Role

We have been working with and supporting the farm environment awards for a long time. In December 2008 the Council updated its relationship with the Farm Environment Award Trust and signed a contract agreement with them that changed the way we engage with the Ballance Farm Environment Award programme. Instead of the organisation of the Awards being undertaken by one of our communications advisers or directly paying some of the programme costs we now fund the Farm Environment Award Trust (Bay of Plenty Region) with a total annual grant of $30,000.

 This assists the Trust in achieving its principal objective which is;

“The advancement, education, assistance and promotion of sustainable environmental management of land and other natural resources on farms within the Bay of Plenty region”.

 The Trust is required as a condition of its contract, to report to the Council before the end of the financial year after its awards ceremony and supreme winners field day.

2 Page 34 of 274 2016-2017 Ballance Farm Environment Award programme annual report

 Council’s commitment, on top of its financial obligation is to cover the print cost of meetings and provide staff time: Simon Stokes (Eastern Catchment Manager) is a trustee on the Trust and Hamish Dean (Land Management Officer), is on the management committee. We also provide personnel support for the annual awards and field day and provide meeting rooms. We support the judging programme with one assessment judge.

Both parties have recently re-signed a new contract for the next two years based on the same level of commitment.

5 Financial Implications

Current Budget

Funding is provided for in the current Annual Plan.

Future Implications

Future commitments are provided for in the Long Term Plan budget.

Hamish Dean Land Management Officer for Eastern Catchments Manager

10 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

3 Page 35 of 274

Page 36 of 274

Reports

Page 37 of 274

Page 38 of 274

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Namouta Poutasi, Water Policy Manager

Towards Objectives for the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/Maketū, Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas

Executive Summary

This paper seeks in principle approval for pairings of freshwater values and attributes (also known as measures) to be used as a starting point for discussions with Community Groups in late May and early June. Pairing values and attributes together is the starting point for the development of objectives as required to implement the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management.

The detailed process to develop objectives in the Rangitaiki and Kaituna/Maketu, Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas (WMAs) was approved by the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee in March. It was noted that it is an iterative process and as such will take some time to be finalised. As ideas mature staff will bring them to Council for endorsement.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Towards Objectives for the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/Maketū, Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas;

2 Approves in principle the pairing of values and attributes detailed in Section 5 of this report as the basis for objective setting under the National Policy Statement Freshwater Management.

1 Purpose

Community workshop(s) for the Rangitāiki and Kaituna-Pongakawa-Waitahanui WMAs are scheduled for 26 May – 6 June. Staff are seeking in principle support for the pairings of values and attributes in Section 5 of this paper to be introduced to the Community Groups at these workshops. Pairings of values and attributes are the start of the objective setting process in implementing the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management. The process to develop objectives is iterative, as ideas mature staff will bring them to the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee (RDD) for endorsement. Final approval of objectives is planned later this year.

Page 39 of 274 Towards Objectives for the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/Maketū, Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas

2 Background

The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management requires regional councils to develop freshwater objectives at a specific scale in accordance with the National Objectives Framework (NOF) process. We are here

As outlined in the above diagram, values and attributes inform (help you choose) freshwater objectives. 3 Values

In June 2016, Regional Direction and Delivery (RDD) approved a draft region-wide set of values. Work to develop (mainly instream) values for the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/Maketū, Pongakawa/Waitahanui WMAs included: four workshops with each of three community groups, three Hui-a-iwi in the Rangitāiki WMA and two in the Kaituna- Pongakawa-Waitahanui WMA and a public drop-in event in each WMA. Work to date has resulted in values listed in Appendix B. “Use” values such as hydro-electric power generation, flood water conveyance and economic use (Step 3 in Appendix A) are important next step intended to come out of future workshops.

4 Attributes

In-river water quality and ecology attributes have been provisionally documented by staff. Draft attributes are attached as Appendix C. These include nine (mandatory) attributes and other important measures. These will be more fully reported to RDD in June 2017. Nine of the attributes are mandatory and many of the others are already part of our NERMN program so we are not seeking approval of these at this point in time.

Finalising objectives is some way off in the agreed process (i.e. Step 6 in Appendix A).

5 Preliminary Value and Attribute Pairings

Approval is sought for the following pairing of values and attributes (measures) to use as a starting point for the Rangitāiki, Kaituna and Pongakawa community group meetings later this month. These pairings are the first steps towards developing

2 Page 40 of 274 Towards Objectives for the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/Maketū, Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas

objectives for the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/Maketū, Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas.

1) [Specific Area] is typically swimmable between November to March. Key measure: E. coli, absence of oil, turbidity and odour.

The water supports healthy ecosystems and has at least a steady trend. Key measures: periphyton, nitrate (band B), ammonia (band A), dissolved oxygen, dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, algae, benthic cyanobacteria, macrophytes, invertebrates, phosphorous*. Note – this may require enhanced water quality.

2) The [specific areas] water continues to provide good habitat for eels and ducks, inanga, watercress, cockabullies, kokopu, suitable for kahawai, mullet and flounder. Siltation and sediment is managed and reduced to improve aquatic habitat and invertebrate conditions. Key measures: water flow, dissolved oxygen, temperature, invertebrates, suspended sediment*, deposited sediment, metals, pesticides.

3) The water [particularly in some locations] in rivers supports mahinga kai that is safe to eat all year round (eels, flounder, whitebait, ducks). Key measures: E. coli, benthic cyanobacteria, macrophyte, invertebrates, metals, pesticidess, faecal coliforms

4) Wai Tapu values of the water are maintained or enhanced (requires further confirmation). Possible measures: E. coli, suspended sediment*, water levels (i.e. for cave drawings).

5) The water remains suitable for navigation. Key measure: silt deposition (very location specific).

Community groups will use these pairings to help gauge how their values are met under different land management scenarios. Scenarios and the models that will be used to test these will be brought to Council for more detailed consideration prior to workshop 6. 6 Analysis

The values intended to be used to start the objective setting process come out of the region-wide value set Council has already approved. They are values the community has raised.

This paper seeks broad (in principle) approval on the pairing of values and attributes as a starting point. As these pairings are worked through further and reiterated then objectives can be confirmed. Further work includes scenario modelling, fuller iwi and hapu engagement, economic and social cost and benefit analysis. 7 Māori Implications

Māori engagement is an important project priority that has and will continue to assist the identification of tangata whenua values and interests. It is a crucial element of the objectives and limits setting process.

Māori engagement has included updates to co-governance bodies and hui-a-iwi (three in Rangitāiki WMA and two in Kaituna-Pongakawa-Waitahanui WMA). Staff have also reviewed Iwi and Hapu Management Plans and sought advice from Iwi as to how they

3 Page 41 of 274 Towards Objectives for the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/Maketū, Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas

would like to be engaged. These will inform recommendations staff bring back to Council for further Māori engagement.

8 Next Steps

Staff are seeking in principle support to take the values and attributes outlined above to the next set of community group workshops. This will allow staff to present tangible examples of where the community-based work is heading without unreasonably constraining community discussions. Staff will bring preliminary analysis and more refined objectives to Council for consideration work progresses.

9 Council’s Accountability Framework

9.1 Community Outcomes

This project/proposal directly contributes to the Water Quality and Quantity Community Outcome/s in the council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025 by progressing the development of Objectives for the Water Management Areas.

9.2 Long Term Plan Alignment

This work is planned under the Regional Planning and Engagement Group and the Land and Water Framework activities in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Current Budget Implications

This work is being undertaken within the current budget for the Regional Planning and Engagement and Land and Water Framework activities for Year 2 of the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Future Budget Implications

This work is provided for in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

James Low Acting Water Policy Team Leader for Water Policy Manager

10 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

4 Page 42 of 274

APPENDIX 1

Approved Objective Setting Process

Page 43 of 274

Page 44 of 274 Appendix A: Document Details

Page 45 of 274

Page 46 of 274

APPENDIX 2

Region Wide Values

Page 47 of 274

Page 48 of 274

Appendix B: Region-wide Values

Mauri The essential life force, energy or principle that tangata whenua believe exists in all things in the natural world.

Mana /Kaitiakitanga, means the exercise of guardianship by the tangata whenua.

**Ecosystem health – The freshwater management unit supports a healthy ecosystem

Indigenous species and habitat – The freshwater management unit includes habitat for rare, endangered or otherwise significant species

**Human health for recreation: As a minimum, the freshwater management unit will present no more than a moderate risk of infection to people when they are wading or boating. In areas where there is greater contact that standard is higher. Note: Swimming was most commonly discussed.

Natural form and character – Where people value particular natural qualities of the freshwater management unit.

Amenity values – In addition to natural character, water bodies in the freshwater management unit may contribute to people’s appreciation

Mahinga kai – Kai are safe to harvest and eat

Fishing - The freshwater management unit supports fisheries of species allowed to be caught and eaten

Water supply – The freshwater management unit can meet people’s potable water needs.

Transport and tauranga waka – The freshwater management unit is navigable for identified means of transport

Irrigation and food production – The freshwater management unit meets irrigation needs for any purpose.

Animal drinking water – The freshwater management unit meets the needs of stock.

Āu Putea / Economic or commercial development - The freshwater management unit provides economic opportunities for people, including Hydro-electric power generation - The freshwater management unit is suitable for hydro-electric power generation.

Flood water and urban stormwater conveyance: the freshwater management unit is a part of a flood protection and drainage scheme or provides this function.

Page 49 of 274 Wai tapu – Wai tapu represent the places where rituals and ceremonies are performed. Note: This value requires confirmation via more detailed Iwi/Hapu engagement.

Korero tuturu/ Sites/areas of cultural and historical significance: The freshwater management unit includes Korero Tuturu, taonga, heritage sites.

Kaitiakitanga / Historical relationships: Some water bodies provide iwi/hapū a strong sense of identity and connection with the land and water.

Rawa Tuturu / Customary resources: For this value, freshwater management unit includes (or used to include) important customary resources (other than food, commercial and industrial uses)

Role in Integrated Management: for example, the freshwater management unit plays a natural role in sustaining flow/water levels of another water body.

Moana / Influence on sensitive coastal waters and receiving environments: The freshwater management unit discharges to a coastal receiving environment that is sensitive to freshwater quantity and quality inputs. This includes estuaries and harbours.

Influences on/by geothermal heat: Freshwater bodies in the freshwater management unit interacts with a geothermal water body.

Note: ** means this is a mandatory value required by NPS FM

Blue shading means this value was strongly identified in the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/Maketū, Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas.

Page 50 of 274

APPENDIX 3

Draft Attributes and Bands for Rivers

Page 51 of 274

Page 52 of 274

Draft recommendations for attributes and bands for rivers. Under review.

Attribute Statistic Band Biophysical layer Value(s) Volcanic Volcanic Non- supported Steep Gentle volcanic E.coli* Annual median A ≤ 260/100mL Human B > 260 and ≤ 540/100mL Health for C > 540 and ≤ 1000/100mL Recreation D >1000/100mL 95th percentile A ≤ 260/100mL B > 260 and ≤ 540/100mL >MAS >540/100mL Nitrate-nitrogen Annual median A ≤1.0 mg/L Ecosystem B >1.0 and ≤ 2.4 mg/L Health C >2.4 and ≤ 6.9 mg/L (toxicity) D >6.9 mg/L Annual 95th A ≤ 1.5 mg/L percentile B >1.5 and ≤ 3.5 mg/L C >3.5 and ≤ 9.8 mg/L D > 9.8 mg/L Ammoniacal Annual A ≤0.03 mg/L Ecosystem nitrogen median* B >0.03 and ≤ 0.24 mg/L Health C >0.24 and ≤ 1.3 mg/L (toxicity) D >1.3mg/L Annual A ≤ 0.05 mg/L maximum* B >0.05 and ≤ 0.4 mg/L C >0.4 and ≤ 2.2 mg/L D > 2.2mg/L Dissolved oxygen 7-day summer A ≥ 8.0 mg/L Ecosystem mean B ≥ 7.0 and < 8.0 mg/L Health minimum# C ≥ 5.0 and < 7.0 mg/L D < 5.0 mg/L 1-day summer A ≥ 7.5 mg/L minimum# B ≥ 5.0 and < 7.5 mg/L C ≥ 4.0 and < 5.0mg/L D < 4.0 mg/L pH 95th summer A ≥ 6.5 and ≤ 8.0 Ecosystem percentile# B > 6.5 and < 8.5 Health C ≥ 6.0 and ≤ 9.0 D < 6.0 or >9.0 Temperature Summer Cox- A ≤ 18.0ºC Ecosystem Rutherford B ≤ 20.0ºC Health Index# for C ≤ 24.0ºC lowland areas D > 24.0 ºC Summer Cox- A ≤ 19.0ºC Rutherford B ≤ 21.0ºC Index# for C ≤ 25.0ºC upland areas D > 25.0 ºC * It is intended this attribute will reflect the operative National Policy Statement and any subsequent amendments.

Page 53 of 274

Attribute Statistic Band Biophysical layer Value(s) Volcanic Volcanic Non- supported Steep Gentle volcanic Periphyton Exceeded no A ≤ 50 mg chl-a/m2 Ecosystem more than 8% B > 50 and ≤ 120 mg chl-a/m2 Health of samples C > 120 and ≤ 200 mg chl-a/m2 (default class) D > 200 mg chl-a/m2 Exceeded no A ≤ 50 mg chl-a/m2 more than 17% B > 50 and ≤ 120 mg chl-a/m2 of samples C > 120 and ≤ 200 mg chl-a/m2 (productive D > 200 mg chl-a/m2 class) Benthic 80th percentile A Cover < 20%. Ecosystem cyanobacteria B N/A Health and C Cover 20 – 50% Human D Cover > 50%, OR max dislodging Health for and accumulating along river’s edge Recreation Macrophytes - Annual A <50% channel cross-sectional area Ecosystem rivers monitoring or volume OR channel water surface Health area - N/A - N/A D >50% channel cross-sectional area or volume OR channel water surface area Annual A >120 >124 >115 monitoring: B 110 - 120 106 - 124 100 - 115 MCI scores C 100 - 110 88 – 106 87 – 100 D <100 <88 <87 Annual A >12 EPT >11 EPT >9 EPT monitoring: taxa taxa taxa EPT richness B 9 - 12 EPT 7 – 11 6 – 9 EPT Invertebrate taxa EPT taxa taxa Ecosystem communities Health C 6 – 9 EPT 2 – 7 EPT 3 – 6 EPT taxa taxa taxa D <6 EPT < 2 EPT <3 EPT taxa taxa taxa Annual A >24 >47 >18 monitoring: B 16 - 24 36 - 47 7 - 18 BoP_IBI C 7 – 16 26 - 36 3 - 7 D <7 <26 <3

Page 54 of 274

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Namouta Poutasi, Water Policy Manager

Region - wide Water Quantity Proposed Plan Change 9 Progress Update

Executive Summary

This report updates Councillors on progress with the Region – wide Water Quantity - Proposed Plan Change 9, following notification and closing of submissions. Key themes from submissions are highlighted.

Further submissions are planned to be notified on 30 May 2017 with a 20 working day period. This is double the minimum timeframe provided by the Resource Management Act and is Council’s standard practice. Staff anticipate hearings to be held in October/November 2017.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Region - wide Water Quantity Proposed Plan Change 9 Progress Update;

1 Purpose of report

The purpose of this report is to update Councillors on the key topics in submissions to Proposed Plan Change 9 (PC9), and to advise of timeframes for further submissions. 2 Background

PC9 is the first step in a two stage approach to improving rules for water quality and quantity in the region. It contains rules and policies that are designed to strengthen water allocation limits and water management. The plan change was notified for public submissions on 18 October 2016. A total of 82 submissions were received and are now being summarised in preparation for the further submission process. 3 Submission themes

Page 55 of 274 Region - wide Water Quantity Proposed Plan Change 9 Progress Update

The following table briefly summarises dominating themes from submitters, but it should be noted that in most cases a wide range of positions were taken by submitters.

Topic Submissions Metering and  General support for efficiency policy (WQ P13) reporting  Opposition to more stringent metering via Policy WQ P24, including metering of permitted takes • Unreasonable & more stringent than water metering regulations • Practicality and cost, especially costs of separately metering animal drinking takes and telemetering.

Water permit  Mixed support and opposition to water transfer provisions transfers  Particular opposition from Māori  Concern about water banking, payments for transfer and embedding of rights of existing users

Permitted  General support about the reduction in permitted groundwater takes limit although rationale sought for volumes (15m3/day and including 35m3/day). reduction of  Farming interests seeking per property allowance groundwater volume

Registration  Mixed support for registration of permitted takes. and metering  Mixed views regarding metering of certain permitted takes, of permitted especially from the dairy industry takes

Recognition of  Local authorities generally supportive of provisions – Schedule 7 municipal requires clarification. water takes  Most other submitters were supportive of the intent of the provisions.  Water Management Plan requires delineation and a specific water management response for essential and non-essential municipal users.

Special  Mixed support and opposition - dairy industry support intention provisions for of rule existing  Some submitters concerned about rewarding non-compliant unauthorised users dairy shed  Some submitters proposed that rule should only apply in water use resources that are not already fully allocated

Managing  One submitter noted that the policy will be redundant once WMA takes at low processes are complete – suggest deleting policy flows or  Clarification sought that these polices apply post-WMA (i.e. not aquifer levels with default limits)  Proposed other uses (firefighting, dairy shed wash-down, manufacturing, mine dewatering) to be provided for at low flows or sought that some uses be removed from the list

2 Page 56 of 274 Region - wide Water Quantity Proposed Plan Change 9 Progress Update

Instream flows  Intent of policy is supported; some concerned limits are too and allocation conservative and arbitrary. Range of alternatives suggested limits – including use of proposed NES for guidance. resource  Councils seek greater flexibility in setting interim water allocation consent limits on a case by case basis. considerations  Mixed response to ‘generally decline policy’ for applications in fully allocated resources  General support for the ‘consider granting’ policy for water allocation where limits are not exceeded  Municipal supply and regional infrastructure seek longer consent terms Priority for  Several submitters opposed polices and rules that have the existing users effect of prioritising or strengthening the rights of existing consent holders over new comers

The role of  Most Māori submitters raised concern about the extent of Māori and consultation with Māori and the sought a greater role for Māori in Māori rights decision making regarding water allocation and interests  For many Māori submitters the matters that are set to be determined in the second step in the process (Water Management Area plan changes) are wanted now.

4 Notification of submissions and preparation for hearings

It is intended to notify for further submissions on 30 May 2017 with a 20 working day period. This is double the minimum timeframe provided by the RMA and Council’s standard practice.

Staff anticipate hearings to be held in October/November 2017.

Recommendations for the appointment of a hearing panel will be provided at the next Regional Direction and Delivery (RDD) Committee meeting in June. 5 Implications for Māori

Māori have a high level of interest in this plan change and constitute the largest group of submitters. Due consideration will be given to this in the development of the Section 42a report.

One of the lessons learnt from the Regional Coastal Environment Plan process was strong support for the use of Māori commissioners on plan hearing panels. This will be one of the criteria for the PC9 hearing panel.

6 Council’s Accountability Framework

6.1 Community Outcomes

This project/proposal directly contributes to the Water Quality and Water Quantity Community Outcomes in the council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025 - “Our water and land management practices maintain and improve the quality and quantity of the region’s water resources.”

3 Page 57 of 274 Region - wide Water Quantity Proposed Plan Change 9 Progress Update

Plan change 9 contains policies and rules designed to strengthen water allocation limits and management ahead of subsequent more detailed sub regional plan changes in each of the regions nine Water Management Areas.

6.2 Long Term Plan Alignment

This work is planned under the Regional Planning activity of the Long Term Plan 2015- 2025.

Current Budget Implications

This work is being undertaken within the current Regional Planning activity budget in the Annual Plan 2016/17 of the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Future Budget Implications

Future work is provided for in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Glenys Kroon Senior Policy Analyst (Water Policy) for Water Policy Manager

9 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

4 Page 58 of 274

Receives Only – No Decisions

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: David Phizacklea, General Manager, Strategy & Science

Freshwater Futures Update

Executive Summary

An update is provided of work underway in implementing the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014.

Plan Change 10 (Lake Rotorua Nutrient Management) hearings on submission concluded on 4 May 2017. During the hearings key technical questions were raised and answered which has required significant input from staff and council experts.

An important aspect for the future operation of the Rotorua Wastewater Treatment Plant will be the ability to reflect changes from rural to reticulated urban land use in an accounting mechanism. Under the banner of the Rotorua Lakes Programme the Regional Council and Rotorua Lake Council have developed a nutrient accounting mechanism to recognise urban growth and the transition of rural land to reticulated urban land.

Council hearings on Proposed Change 3 (Rangitāiki River) to the Regional Policy Statement were postponed due to the region wide state of emergency, with new hearing dates set down for 12 and 19 June 2017 to hear submissions.

Te Maru o Kaituna meeting on 13 April 2017 was also postponed due to the region wide state of emergency, with a new date was set for 16 May 2017. The proposed Kaituna River Document ‘Kaituna, he taonga tuku iho – a treasure gifted to us’ will be tabled at the May forum meeting for approval. The Kaituna River Document is still expected to be finalised and approved by late 2017. A verbal update will be provided at the meeting.

Ministry for the Environment carried out a review of the implementation of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management in October 2016, and is expected to release its review report in May 2017.

Submissions closed on 28 April 2017 for MfE’s package on Clean Water 2017, which Bay of Plenty Regional Council submitted on. Additional work is progressing on the sector approach for meeting the timelines for swimmability in October 2017, with further information being provided in May 2017 on templates and timelines.

‘Our Freshwater 2017’ was released by MfE and Statistics NZ on 27 April 2017. This report highlighted concerns around nitrate levels, E. coli levels in urban areas and threats to our native fish species. Bay of Plenty Regional Council issued out a press release on 27 April 2017, whilst this highlighted good results in some areas there are areas of concern and a full

Page 59 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update update will be provided at the next RDD meeting.

Local Government New Zealand has confirmed dates for a Freshwater Symposium (29 and 30 May 2017). The purpose of this symposium is to outline and discuss strategic issues to freshwater, and highlight current achievements on freshwater management in NZ. All elected officials are invited from the local government sector.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Freshwater Futures Update

1 Overview

The purpose of this report is to share key activities and/or discussion points from each committee, group or panel meeting involved in implementing the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM). The report will also provide a national update on freshwater matters.

1.1 Background - How it all fits together

Past Freshwater Futures presentations have included a diagram of how these committees, panels and groups work together (Figure 1). Council is the decision maker with recommendations from Co-Governance Committees who have had input from both Community Groups and Tangata Whenua. Council also receives water information/advice both at a national and regional level.

Figure 1: Bay of Plenty Regional Council Water Relationships

2 Page 60 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update

2 RMA Statutory Changes

Council is actively working on three freshwater plan changes to the operative Regional Water and Land Plan:

(1) Proposed Plan Change 9 – Region-wide Water Quantity plan change;

(2) Proposed Plan Change 10 – Lake Rotorua Nutrient Management; and

(3) Proposed Plan Change 12 –Rangitāiki and Kaituna-Pongakawa-Waitahanui Water Management Areas.

We are also working on a change to the operative Regional Policy Statement: Proposed Change 3 (Rangitāiki River).

See separate reports which are being provided on Plan Change 9 and Plan Change 12 to the RDD May 2017 meeting.

2.1 Plan Change 10 – Lake Rotorua Nutrient Management

The hearings for PC10 commenced on the 13 March 2017. Approximately 50 submitters identified that they would like to present their submission to the Panel.

Council and a number of submitters have presented their evidence to the Hearing Panel already. This was well received with a number of detailed questions being asked by the Panel. The Panel also provided submitters present an opportunity to ask questions of clarification.

During the hearing the commissioners have been very interested in evidence presented by experts and submitters. This has often resulted in the request for further information from Council, or questions consistently being asked of experts and submitters. To date these matters have included:

 How Council is currently managing phosphorus and how PC 10 could be amended to increase its focus on phosphorus.  How the 435t/N target is allocated across sectors  The legal status and economic impact of the integrated framework.  The economic impacts of PC10  The nitrogen allocation provided to forestry and underdeveloped Māori land  Alternative options to PC10 requested by submitters.  The level of engagement and consultation with the community  The level of involvement with StAG.  The level of compliance farms currently have with their 2022 managed reduction target and the requirements of the resource consent process.

In many cases additional evidence has been prepared and submitted by Council. Overall the level of preparation for the hearings and the hearing process has been resource intensive and has required significant input from staff and council experts. The approach taken by the Panel will ensure robust recommended decisions on Plan Change 10 are provided to Council.

The hearings are expected to conclude on the 4 May 2017 with Counsel closing statements. Panel recommendations will be brought to RDD at its August meeting for consideration.

3 Page 61 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update

2.1.1 Plan Change 10 – A Mechanism to account for urbanisation of rural land

Within the Lakes Programme and allied to Proposed Plan Change 10 Lake Rotorua Nutrient Management, Rotorua Lakes Council has a strong interest in seeing the waste water treatment systems recognised in relation to the improvements in water quality that they have brought historically to Lake Rotorua. Further to this, the Rotorua Lakes Council wishes to see that the proposed Rotorua Wastewater Treatment Plant (RWWTP) is able to meet future consent conditions. Without prejudicing the resource consenting process, an important aspect for the future operation of the RWWTP will be the ability to reflect changes from rural to reticulated urban land use in an accounting mechanism.

Under the banner of the Rotorua Lakes Programme the Regional Council and Rotorua Lakes Council have developed a nutrient accounting mechanism to recognise urban growth and the transition of rural land to reticulated urban land. The reticulation of houses that operate septic tanks has a benefit in terms of a reduction in nitrogen being lost to the lake. This benefit also has the potential to be extended to other lake catchments where communities may be reticulated back to Rotorua.

The accounting mechanism is designed to accurately recognise the difference in nitrogen loss that occurs when rural land within the Lake Rotorua Groundwater Catchment becomes urban land connected to Rotorua’s reticulated sewerage system, and when existing point source loads to the lake are connected.

The addition of extra load to the sewerage system places pressure on the consent limit (current or future) for the RWWTP. To recognise the benefits and to acknowledge the urban growth pressures facing Rotorua the accounting mechanism noted above was developed.

This provides an opportunity for any consent limit to be based on allowing increased loads but on the basis of there being no net increase in the total load of nitrogen to the Lake.

Under the mechanism, subdivision and land uses must be able to demonstrate that there is adequate nitrogen available as a Nitrogen Discharge Allocation (NDA) to support potential connections to the sewerage system. This acts to prevent “double dipping” if an NDA is sold or transferred.

Staff from both councils have agreed that the accounting mechanism that has been developed and reported to Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Strategy Group would be better suited to being more formalised as a Memorandum of Understanding. Staff are progressing this between the partners under the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme.

2.2 Proposed Change 3 (Rangitāiki River) to the Regional Policy Statement

The Hearing Committee had a pre-hearing workshop on Tuesday 11 April 2017. Councillor von Dadelszen has been appointed Chairperson of the hearing committee. Independent Commissioner Karamea Insley has been appointed Deputy Chair. Due to the recent flooding within the Rangitāiki River catchment the decision was made to postpone the commencement of hearings by a month. The new hearing dates are Monday the 12 and 19 of June. The staff recommendations report on all submissions and other supporting documents are now available on Council’s website.

4 Page 62 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update

3 Co-Governance Forum Updates

In addition to the statutory changes noted above we also have co-governance work underway with Te Maru o Kaituna and the Rangitāiki River Forum.

3.1 Te Maru o Kaituna – River Document

At its 16 February 2017 meeting, staff presented to Te Maru o Kaituna a draft version of the Proposed Kaituna River Document. After feedback from members on each section of the draft, staff were requested to make the changes and prepare a revised version for consideration at Te Maru o Kaituna’s next meeting. It was agreed that the next version needs to be approved for notification so that the statutory deadline for public notification can be met.

A revised version of the Proposed Kaituna River Document ‘Kaituna, he taonga tuku iho - a treasure gifted to us’ has now been prepared, along with a consultation brochure to encourage interested persons to read the full proposed document and make a submission.

The 13 April 2017 Te Maru o Kaituna Meeting was postponed due to the region-wide state of emergency and severe weather warnings on that day. The new meeting date is set for 16 May 2017, hence a verbal update can be provided to the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee on 18 May regarding the outcome of that 16 May meeting. It is still anticipated that the submissions, hearings and deliberations process can be completed in June-October 2017, with the first Kaituna River Document finalised and approved in late 2017.

3.2 Rangitāiki River Forum

The Rangitāiki River Forum received an update on the progress of Proposed Change 3 (Rangitāiki River) to the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement at their forum meeting on the 22 March.

The Forum also received a Freshwater Futures update from the Regional Council, Three Waters Programme update from the Whakatāne District Council in the same meeting. The Forum expressed support to the Regional Council submits an application to the Ministry of the Environment’s Freshwater Improvement Fund for a wetland restoration project in the Rangitāiki catchment.

It is also important to note that the Taupō District Council and Ngāti Hineuru joined the Rangitāiki River Forum, given effect to the Hineuru Claims Settlement Act 2016.

Mr Earl Rewi was also introduced as the Ngāti Whare Forum representative replacing Mr Daryl Christie.

4 Additional projects supporting the management of our Freshwater Resources

In addition and in support of our statutory changes, we have a large programme of work underway within BOPRC to improve our management of freshwater, this includes investment in modelling and accounting, additional science monitoring and increasing our communication to the public. An update is provided below on our progress.

4.1 Modelling and Accounting

5 Page 63 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update

In August 2016, Council approved additional funding to support catchment modelling for the Kaituna and Rangitāiki WMA’s. Separate models associated with flood effects input into this catchment model, however the focus of this catchment model is to help us assess the impacts from land activities and the follow on impact to our waterways for contaminant loading.

An open tender process was followed and a vendor (Williamson Water Advisory) was selected in January 2017. We have provided relevant data to the vendor to help them calibrate the model, as we progress this we have been engaging industry bodies (e.g. Beef and Lamb) to ensure we have robust information.

It is expected that the vendor will deliver the finalised model by August 2017 to support our limit setting process.

4.2 Communications

Regular Freshwater Flash e-newsletters are issued out, the last one was sent out in February 2017 and the next one is due in May 2017.

Following our February Freshwater Flash – industry partners have been promoting our freshwater flash with Dairy NZ including this within their own newsletter.

On World Water Day (22 March) we reached out to our communities and ran special promotions throughout the day with local press and radio stations to raise awareness of our precious water resource. 5 National Updates

At a national level there are key activities underway that may impact our work programme within the Bay of Plenty. See details below.

5.1 NPS-FM implementation summary

MFE visited each of the regions in September 2016, in order to produce a national snapshot of:

 the current state of major water catchments across New Zealand  council progress towards implementing the NPS-FM  a commentary on the likely outcomes/effectiveness of council implementation, and how their current approaches compare to the requirements of the NPS-FM and the RMA.

MFE have advised BOPRC that they plan to release this information in late May 2017 and have asked staff to review our original response to identify any key changes. BOPRC staff will reflect key decisions from recent RDD meetings in our updates to MFE.

5.2 Clean Water 2017

BOPRC has drafted a submission to MFE’s Clean Water 2017 package, which was circulated to Councillors on Friday 21 April. In general we support the proposals but have recommended:

6 Page 64 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update

 aligning development of 'swimmability' targets with wider NPS-FM implementation, including by extending timeframes to develop them, and the scope of the proposed targets;

 providing flexibility under proposed E. cold monitoring requirements; and

 a number of relatively minor changes to the proposed NPS-FM amendments to increase clarity, flexibility and practicality.

 Developing a national framework for assessing tangata whenua values (e.g. mahinga kai) while maintaining some flexibility to account for regional differences and supporting the breadth of the proposed changes to Te Mana o Te Wai to enable councils to provide variation in how they may interpret a holistic approach

Submissions on this package close on 28 April 2017.

A small working group has been established to ensure (as a regional sector) we are able to efficiently deliver against the requirements put forward by the minister regarding swimmability. Planning is underway between MfE staff and this working group, with the aim to release a detailed timeline and templates for each regional council to complete to support delivery of swimmability targets. The timeline and templates are expected to be available by May 2017. BOPRC ICM team are gathering data in advance to support this request.

5.3 Land and Water Forum (LAWF)

5.3.1 LAWF Plenary

The LAWF bring together a range of industry groups, environmental and recreational NGO’s, iwi, scientists and other organisations with a stake freshwater management. The group is made up of approximately 67 organisations.

The purpose of LAWF is to develop shared vision and a common direction for freshwater management in New Zealand and provide advice to the Government through a stakeholder-led collaborative process. To date this has involved the development of four reports with over 200 recommendations covering: the development of a national framework; providing recommendations regarding the need for integrated decision-making in catchments and continuous improvement of management practices to improve water quality and clearer rights to take and use water within set limits. The most recent report focused on how to maximise the economic benefits of freshwater while managing within water quality and quantity limits that are set consistent with the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management 2014 (NPS-FM).

Future forum work includes the further population of the National Objectives Framework and comment on the overall implementation of the NPS-FM. By December 2017 the Forum will review the overall changes to water policy and its implementation, lessons learned and further work required to achieve the overall purpose.

On 28th February the LAWF met with Minister Smith to discuss Governments Clean Water reforms. Discussions focussed on clarifying issues around swimmability, MCI (Marco-invertebrates) targets and algal growth in rivers. The minister agreed to discuss details of final package after public submissions have been received.

7 Page 65 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update

5.3.2 LAWF Small Group

A small group of approximately 22 organisations, along with partners from local and central government meet monthly and this group generate the advice for Central Government. The small group then seeks feedback on this advice through a larger plenary group before submitting formal recommendations back to central government.

Chairman Leeder is a member of the small group.

On 28th March a small group of LAWF met to discuss updates to NOF (National Objectives Framework), draft submission from LAWF on Clean water 2017, Resource Legislation Amendment Act and Good Management Practice (GMP).

Following the withdrawal of Forrest and Bird and other contributors (Federated Mountain Clubs, Fish and Game and the Environmental and Conservation Organisations (ECO) from the LAWF, it was agreed that in principle LAWF is an independent advisory body to the Government on water and land management and therefore should stand regardless of political swings. Members of LAWF resolved to carry on with current tasks and then re-evaluate later this year.

5.4 Our Freshwater 2017

Our Freshwater 2017 is a report that was released by MFE and Statistics NZ on the 27th April. The purpose of the report is to provide a baseline on New Zealand’s quality of our waterways; water quantity and flows; biodiversity in rivers and lakes; and the cultural health of fresh water.

Key findings from the report are:

 nitrogen levels are getting worse at 55 percent and getting better at 28 percent of monitored river sites across New Zealand

 phosphorus levels are getting better at 42 percent and getting worse at 25 percent of monitored river sites across New Zealand

 of the 39 native fish species (reported on), 72 percent are either threatened with or at risk of extinction

 E.coli levels are 22 times higher in urban areas and 9.5 times higher in pastoral rivers compared with rivers in native forest areas

 51 percent of water allocated for consumptive use is for irrigation, and 65 percent of that is allocated to Canterbury.

Although we have seen some good results in some areas there are areas of concern and a full update will be provided at the next Committee meeting.

Within the Bay of Plenty Region we are seeing increases in nitrates in our rivers.

Fish surveys in Bay of Plenty showed some exciting results in the region with two endangered native fish (Dwarf Galaxiads and koaro) found in a number of upper catchment streams. It was the first time koaro have been found in the Rangitāiki catchment.

8 Page 66 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update

In addition, a joint project with the Department of Conservation, Te Arawa Lakes Trust and Ngāti Rangiwewehi to help native fish has had positive results. This includes the installation of a weir in Hamurana Stream near Rotorua, providing a barrier to prevent trout moving into the upper reaches of the stream, leaving the habitat safe for our native fish, especially koaro. The weir doesn’t stop the koaro as they are famous for their ability to climb steep waterfalls and rocks. The outcome is also a win for downstream users as there are still trout in the lower reaches of the stream for recreational fishermen.

As we progress our Freshwater Futures work across the region we will conduct similar studies of native fish species across the region, and we will continue working with local communities to make improvements to our native fish habitats.

5.5 Freshwater Symposium

LGNZ is holding a symposium on freshwater management on 29 and 30 May 2017.

The purpose of the event is to:

 Outline the strategic issues around fresh water for New Zealand, local government and its communities;

 Put the spotlight on current water management achievements and regional councils’ role; and

 Showcase how various key stakeholders are meeting the challenges to improve the management of fresh water.

This is a symposium for all elected members from local government and interested staff. The link below provides details of agenda and information on how to register.

http://www.lgnz.co.nz/events/lgnz-symposium-freshwater-2017/

5.6 Iwi Leaders Forum

This forum was very active in support of changes for greater iwi participation to the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill which received Royal assent on Monday 18th April 2017, meaning it is now law (Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017).

Another key area of focus will be the Waitanga Tribunal claims on geothermal and freshwater, hearings are planned to take place in May 2017 in Waikato (Hopu Hopu).

6 Implications for Māori

Implications for Māori regarding proposed plan changes 9 and 10 have been canvased this and previous reports to this Committee and Komiti Māori. Māori submitters have presented evidence to the Plan Change 10 Hearing Panel.

For the Water Management Areas of Rangitāiki, Kaituna/ Pongakawa/Waitahanui opportunities for involvement in engagement on freshwater discussions will continue to be provided to iwi and hapū with relationships with the Rangitāiki and Kaituna/, Pongakawa/Waitahanui WMA. Iwi and hapū were invited and have been identifying their preferred methods for engagement as well as the names and contact details for people in their communities with values and interests in freshwater (including Māori Land Trustees, kaitiaki and others) so that Council can initiate for their involvement in

9 Page 67 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update

works. Staff have also collated (but have not interpreted) two sets of data from iwi and hapū management plans, settlement statute and deeds, water related cultural impacts assessments, iwi websites, the Māori Contacts Database and other reliable sources as a ‘reasonable step’ in preparing for conversations with iwi and hapū. The first set of collated data identifies what iwi and hapū have written to Council and expressed in relation to fresh water and freshwater ecosystems and their management and decision-making. The second set of collated data relates to the identification of tangata whenua interests in water, including the extent of the lands owned and/or managed by Māori people, iwi, their commercial entities and private Māori land owning affiliates. Collated data sets could be mapped for the purpose of focused engagement with iwi and hapū of the WMA’s.

Council staff acknowledge that in keeping with operative specific directive regional policy IW 2B(b) that ‘recognises that only tangata whenua can identify and evidentially substantiate their relationships and that of their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu and other taonga’, and with the requirements of NPSFM Policy and Objective D1, the interpretation of iwi and hapū documents and other planning instruments requires the involvement of those tangata whenua and cannot be undertaken by Council staff alone.

6.1 Co-Governance Groups

The Rangitāiki and Kaituna River and their catchments have significant meaning to many iwi. Two co-governance forums have been established under treaty legislation. River documents have either been developed or are in development. Proposed Change 3 to the Regional Policy Statement serves to recognise and provide for the Te Ara Whānui o Rangitāiki – Pathways of the Rangitāiki river document. This change is in progress and when operative will further enable the aspirations of the forum to be implemented over time.

7 Council’s Accountability Framework

7.1 Community Outcomes

Council’s Freshwater Futures work directly contributes to the ‘Water Quality and Water Quantity’ Community Outcome in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

7.2 Long Term Plan Alignment

This work is planned under various activities within the Long Term Plan 2015-2025, including Land and Water Framework, Regional Planning, Kotahitanga/Strategic Engagement, Data Services, Science and communications.

7.3 Current Budget Implications

This work is being undertaken within the current budget for the activities in the Annual Plan 2016/17 of the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

7.4 Future Budget Implications

Future work is provided for in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

10 Page 68 of 274 Freshwater Futures Update

Ian Morton Strategy & Science Manager for General Manager, Strategy & Science

10 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

11 Page 69 of 274

Page 70 of 274

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Chris Ingle, General Manager, Integrated Catchments

Special Management Areas for addressing localised water quality issues

Executive Summary

The Integrated Catchments team are proposing two Special Management Areas in order to address localised water quality problems. The two Special Management Areas are the Kaiate Stream watershed, where bacterial contamination is affecting a local swimming area, and the Ngongotahā sub-catchment, where erosion is affecting land and stream health. Both areas are highly valued by the community, and we can take operational action to help address the problems.

The Areas won’t be defined or specified through our statutory planning frameworks. Rather, they are simply intended as an operational tool – allowing the identification of an urgent area to work on and a work plan set up to focus on mitigating the issue. It will also allow resources to be deployed as a priority, and in some cases outside the scope of our existing Standard Operating Procedures.

Staff are seeking approval of this approach in accordance with the Terms of Reference for the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee, which delegates authority to the Committee to approve and review operational policy and plans. At this stage there are no budget implications for identifying these two Areas. However, options to mitigate water quality issues may fall outside the current Long Term Plan and these will be bought back to Regional Council for decision.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Special Management Areas for addressing localised water quality issues;

2 Approves the Special Management Area concept as a matter of operational policy;

3 Notes that the purpose of Special Management Areas is to allow the focus of operational effort on mitigating localised water quality problems, where action may be outside the scope of current Standard Operating Procedures;

Page 71 of 274 Special Management Areas for addressing localised water quality issues

4 Approves the general criteria for considering a Special Water Management Area as described in Section 3 of this report;

5 Approves the Kaiate Stream watershed and the Ngongotahā sub-catchment as Special Management Areas;

6 Notes that all operational work undertaken in each Special Management Area will have regard to existing policies and regulations.

1 Purpose

To approve the concept of Special Management Areas for addressing localised water quality problems, and the use of Special Management Areas in the Kaiate Stream watershed and the Ngongotahā sub-catchment.

2 Background

There is a significant programme of freshwater management work underway through Regional Council’s Freshwater Futures. The national scene and Regional Council’s role in freshwater management was recently discussed with this Committee at the 16 March 2017 Freshwater Workshop, along with current and future approaches for implementing the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 (NPS- FM).

While the programme progresses, Integrated Catchment teams in the Regional Council continue to work directly with landowners to mitigate the impacts of land use on water quality. This work includes fencing and planting riparian margins, restoration of wetlands, building detainment bunds, incentivising land use change and providing advice on sustainable management practices.

There are some streams and sites in the region facing localised water quality problems that can be improved through this operational work. Where these sites are considered to be a priority, the Integrated Catchments team are proposing to identify them as Special Management Areas. 3 Special Management Areas

The Integrated Catchments team are proposing Special Management Areas in order to address localised water quality problems. These will be areas where operational teams can prioritise resources and focus effort in order to mitigate issues such as bacterial contamination in a specific waterway.

The intent is not to define or specify Special Management Areas through our planning frameworks, or set up policies or rules to support them. Rather, they are simply intended as an operational tool – allowing the identification of an urgent area to work on and a work plan set up to focus on mitigating the issue. It will also allow resources to be deployed as a priority, and in some cases outside the scope of our existing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).

The criteria for using Special Management Areas are:

 The area is at a sub-catchment scale or smaller  There is a significant localised water quality problem that is affecting the community

2 Page 72 of 274 Special Management Areas for addressing localised water quality issues

 There are operational options available to begin addressing the water quality problem immediately  The problem in the area cannot be resolved by simple interventions: a wide- ranging programme of work is required  Any operational activity will have regard to existing policies and regulations. It is expected that in prioritising areas for action, the type of work undertaken may go beyond the standard land management ‘service’ that the Regional Council currently provides. Land management activities are guided by two SOPs - the Riparian Management Plan SOP, and the Biodiversity Programme SOP. These SOPs provide operational policy and procedural guidance on when Land Management Officers can provide funding and other incentives to achieve Council’s outcomes around the sustainable management of water and land resources.

Working outside the SOPs in Special Management Areas may mean offering increased incentives to landowners (e.g. higher grant rates), or different types of incentives (e.g. incentivised land use change outside the Lake Rotorua catchment). These decisions will ultimately come back to Regional Council if significant, but staff on the ground will be looking at a wider range of options than normal given the priority status of the Areas.

4 Special Management Areas

The Integrated Catchments team are proposing two Special Management Areas – the Kaiate Stream watershed and the Ngongotahā sub-catchment.

4.1 Kaiate Stream watershed

The map of the Kaiate Stream watershed is provided in Appendix 1.

4.1.1 Issue

The Kaiate Falls is a popular swimming and recreational area in Welcome Bay, and is considered to be a local treasure. A permanent health warning was issued by Toi Te Ora for Kaiate Falls and stream in 2015. The warning was issued because monitoring records showed a history of unsafe levels of E. coli bacteria at this site especially in summer and after heavy rainfall events. This is most likely due to run-off from surrounding farmland and faecal matter from birds that nest and feed above the falls.

In 2015/16, unsafe levels of E. coli at Kaiate Falls were recorded more often than any other bathing site in the region. Monitoring from this current summer shows a continued trend of unsafe levels, but fewer events considered “red alert”.

4.1.2 Action to date

The Regional Council as well as Ngā Whenua Rahui and Western Bay of Plenty District Council have been working closely with landowners in pastoral areas above the falls on fencing and planting waterways to try and improve water quality in the stream. We also support a very active care group in this sub-catchment (the Waitao Landcare Group) who work on planting riparian areas. This care group won the 2016 River Story Award for their outstanding efforts.

3 Page 73 of 274 Special Management Areas for addressing localised water quality issues

This collaborative work has been underway for a number of years and good progress has been made on the ground. Despite this, monitoring records have shown a history of unsafe levels of E. coli bacteria at the Falls.

When the permanent health warning was issued in 2015, Regional Council instigated further monitoring and investigations to better understand the source of contaminants in the sub-catchment, and to inform our management options. This has included microbial source tracking to determine the types of bacteria present, as well as extensive monitoring of additional sites to identify areas where the contamination is coming from.

What we do know is that the main types of bacteria are ruminant (from cow, sheep, deer and goats) with an avian influence at several locations – probably from birds that nest and feed above the Falls. We also know bacteria is coming into the stream from a number of different tributaries, including one with extensive forest cover, in an unpredictable manner. There is a concern that the bacteria is entering water through different ways than the ‘normal’ process of surface water runoff. Specific sediment monitoring is now underway as there is a concern that bacteria may be surviving for extended periods in the soil, potentially acting as “reservoirs”.

We have continued to work with landowners to improve management practices while these investigations have been underway.

4.1.3 Next steps

Unfortunately riparian planting and fencing of waterways in pastoral areas does not yet appear to be reducing E.coli concentrations in the stream. The catchment is characterised by steep slopes and prominent v-shaped valleys which promotes quick sub-surface flow and run-off. Management focus may need to shift to fencing off and planting ephemeral flow paths and seeps, incentivising land use change from pasture to trees, or even land purchase – actions not currently planned and budgeted for through the Long Term Plan. These are also actions that can be expensive and difficult to negotiate with landowners.

We have recently established a Kaiate Task Force made up of science, sustainable land management, compliance and policy staff. The purpose of the Task Force is to propose and implement a set of options that will ensure the Kaiate Falls will be swimmable again. By defining the watershed as a Special Management Area, the Task Force can look at options and actions that are outside the scope of our SOPs but that may be the best chance we have of reducing contamination in the waterway.

4.2 Ngongotahā sub-catchment

The map of the Ngongotahā sub-catchment is provided in Appendix 2.

4.2.1 Issue

The Ngongotahā sub-catchment has high rainfall combined with steep slopes and a specific geological composition (diatomaceous earth) that makes the area prone to erosion, causing great problems for landowners and depositing silt into the stream. The Ngongotahā stream is a very popular trout fishing stream, and the silt affects trout spawning areas. The nutrients washed into the stream during high rainfall events end up in Lake Rotorua. The control of erosion in this sub-catchment is therefore a problem for lake water quality as well as for local landowners and anglers.

4 Page 74 of 274 Special Management Areas for addressing localised water quality issues

In the extreme weather event in mid-March this year, debris washed down the stream destroyed two stream crossings on landowners’ driveways, leaving the owners with no easy way to access their properties from Paradise Valley Road. The large chasms left behind after the wash outs are clear evidence of the destructive potential of the stream.

4.2.2 Action to date

There is a long history of interactions with landowners in this sub-catchment. Each high rainfall event would bring calls from landowners worried about erosion. Prior to the three extreme weather events occurring in March and April this year, council staff had been working closely with landowners experiencing specific erosion issues, eg. the development of a large head wall gully and the erosion of a stream bank near to a house. In addition, staff had met with Rotorua Lakes Council staff to discuss the inadequacy of certain culverts as well as other erosion issues. Following the severe weather, work to mitigate the head wall gully was delayed due to the landowners’ stream crossing on their driveway washing out, and this work is still incomplete.

Staff have also attended two meetings with the Upper Ngongotahā Catchment Group, in December 2016 and February 2017, and on both occasions council funded a facilitator to ensure the meetings were productive. At the first meeting, the geology of the area was explained, together with an account of work previously undertaken. At the second meeting the potential next steps were discussed together with feedback on progress with the erosion issues that were being managed at the time.

The Rural Community Board of Rotorua Lakes Council recently convened a public meeting to discuss the issues in the Ngongotahā sub-catchment and along Paradise Valley Road. Council staff attended and provided background information and discussed next steps. Ngongotahā sub-catchment landowners advocated strongly for more council assistance.

4.2.3 Next steps

The Upper Ngongotahā Catchment Group now plans to develop a sub-catchment management plan, assisted by council staff. It is expected that the plan will include actions that are not usually in the scope of council work such as the proactive, wholesale removal of trees that could be washed down the stream in extreme weather events. In addition further investigation of potential sites suitable for detainment bunds and more protection areas along the routes of ephemeral water flows are also likely to be needed. By defining the Ngongotahā sub-catchment as a Special Management Area, Land Management staff can look at actions and options beyond the scope of our SOPs to find ways of preventing further damage during high rainfall events.

Staff will also continue to work closely with the landowners currently affected by erosion problems to mitigate the issues, and provide land management advice in relation to the drive wash-outs being fixed by the landowners.

5 Statutory assessment

A brief statutory context of the two Special Management Areas is provided in Appendix Three. In summary:

 The local scale of the Special Management Areas means that they are not considered catchments at risk under the Regional Policy Statement WL2B.

5 Page 75 of 274 Special Management Areas for addressing localised water quality issues

 Works envisaged to improve water quality in these Special Management Areas are generally considered business as usual activities which are unlikely to trigger the need for resource consent under the Regional Water and Land Plan, Rotorua District Plan and Western Bay of Plenty District Plan. The nature, location and scale of some works which may be necessary could trigger resource consents.  Some work may be required in esplanade reserves or strips, or on, in or above the beds of rivers. In these cases ownership and strip agreements will need to be considered and taken into account.  It isn’t anticipated that the recent Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 will change requirements in relation to water quality improvement works in these local catchments.

6 Council’s Accountability Framework

6.1 Community Outcomes

This proposal directly contributes to the Water Quantity and Quality, and Environmental Protection Community Outcome/s in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

6.2 Long Term Plan Alignment

This work is planned under the Integrated Catchments Activity in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Current Budget Implications

This work is being undertaken within the current budget for the Integrated Catchments Activity in the Annual Plan 2016/17.

Future Budget Implications

Future work undertaken within Special Management Areas may fall outside Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025. Any options or actions that are outside the budget for the Integrated Catchments Activity will be bought to Regional Council for approval.

Sarah Omundsen Tauranga Catchments Manager for General Manager, Integrated Catchments

10 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

6 Page 76 of 274

APPENDIX 1

Map of the Kaiate Stream watershed

Page 77 of 274

Page 78 of 274 1885000

C K Y C U T T IN G R O W A A D N I T A E O V RI R D L O IL A H D R D A E O M R M S U L S L A F m E a T re IA t A S K te aia K

O T ta E we P ra U Str K eam E Q U A R R Y

5815000 R 5815000 O A D

m GARRET a T R e O r AD t S a o ir a w O

y r a d n D u A o O b

R t n O e A T m I h A c t W a c - b u s e t a i a K / a o t i a

O w a ir o a S t r e a m

1885000

Projection and Grid Information Waitoa/Kaiata Sub-catchment HORIZONTAL DATUM: New Zealand Geodetic Datum 2000 For practical purposes, NZGD2000 equates to WGS84 2011 High Resolution Aerial Photography VERTICAL DATUM: Moturiki PROJECTION: New Zealand Transverse Mercator 2000 Page 79 of 274Graphic Scale GSP-536997_1 © Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 2017 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 © Sourced from Land Information New Zealand data. Sheet 1 of 6 CROWN COPYRIGHT RESERVED Printed 27/03/2017 Kilometres

Page 80 of 274

APPENDIX 2

Map of Ngongotaha stream sub-catchment

Page 81 of 274

Page 82 of 274 !@ Destroyed Crossing

Roads

Rivers & Streams

Ngongotaha Subcatchment

Lake Rotorua

oad ley R ise Val Parad

Ngongotaha Subcatchment Rotorua SPagecale 831: 8of0, 027400 770 0 770 1,540 2,310 3,080 3,850

Metres

Page 84 of 274

APPENDIX 3

Special Management Areas Statutory Assessment

Page 85 of 274

Page 86 of 274 1 Statutory Assessment of Special Management Areas

The following provides a brief outline of the statutory context in which these two Special Management Areas sit. The Regional Policy Statement (RPS), Regional Water and Land Plan (RWLP), relevant District Plans, the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 (RLAA) as well as the government’s Cleanwater 2017 reform package have been considered.

1.1 RLAA, NPSFM, Cleanwater 2017

It isn’t anticipated that the recent Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 will change requirements in relation to water quality improvement works in these local catchments. Submissions closed yesterday on the government Cleanwater 2017 package of reforms. This included not only changes to the NPSFM but also includes proposed stock exclusion regulations and swimmability targets. While these will need to be taken into account it is not envisaged that works likely to be undertaken to improve water quality in the Special Management Areas will be at odds with these rather works will be actively progressing these.

1.2 Regional Policy Statement (RPS)

In summary the ‘catchments at risk’ are defined under RPS Policy WL2B with the trigger described in Method 21. Method 21 details that we need to regularly monitor the quality of surface freshwater bodies not identified as being at risk and assess the results of that monitoring against relevant planning provisions and previous monitoring. Where water quality is likely to become degraded and is trending away from achieving or bettering relevant provisions then it is considered a ‘catchment at risk’. Under RPS Policies WL4B, 5B, 6B catchments at risk require limits for contaminants to be set and rules introduced to manage nutrient losses. Resource consents will be required for increased discharges to the catchment and specific provisions relate to Rotorua Lakes which includes the Ngongotaha catchment.

All of the Lake Rotorua catchment is defined as a catchment at risk (RPS WL2B). The Ngongotaha Stream catchment, being a part of the Lake Rotorua catchment, is therefore a catchment at risk. Processes are already underway to address RPS requirements for this catchment at risk under RWLP Plan Change 10 and further work is underway as part of the wider freshwater management work through Freshwater Futures to implement the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM) . For Kaiate Stream and Falls, the scale of the issue being local doesn’t trigger a wider catchment response unless the catchment is defined as being at risk.

1.3 Regional Water and Land Plan (RWLP)

Works envisaged to improve water quality in these Special Management Areas are generally further business as usual activities which are unlikely trigger the need for resource consent. The nature, location and scale of some works which may be necessary could trigger resource consents. Examples might be larger bunds in ephemeral flow paths, works in, on or over the beds of streams, or the removal of trees from within riparian areas where machinery may be required in the bed of streams. Any requirements will be determined as part of the catchment plan development.

Ngongotaha Stream catchment

Page 87 of 274 Ngongotahā Stream is listed in the RWLP as a nationally significant habitat for trout with fishery values. The Eastern Fish and Game’s trout hatchery is located on the Ngongotahā Stream in Paradise Valley. There are times in the trout spawning calendar listed in the RWLP which need to be considered when undertaking works that affect habitats. Paradise Valley Springs is also listed in the RWLP as a threatened habitat for blue duck. The lower reaches of the Ngongotahā Stream is within the Upper Kaituna River Scheme maintenance area shown in the RWLP.

Kaiate Stream watershed There are no specific references to the Kaiate Stream or watershed above the falls within the RWLP.

1.4 District Plans

Rotorua District Plan – Ngongotahā Stream catchment Mount Ngongotahā is within the Ngongotahā Stream catchment and is identified as an outstanding landscape area, as is Lake Rotorua and it’s margins (which include the Ngongotahā Stream delta area). The Ngongotaha catchment also contains a number of significant natural areas, and some archaeological sites many of which are located close to the streams. The location and extent of these features are shown on the district planning maps which will be consulted prior to any proposed works to determine requirements such as permitted criteria to be worked within or alternatively any resource consent requirements.

The whole of the Ngongotahā Stream and parts of its tributaries are identified areas for esplanade reserve acquisition. Many of the esplanade reserves are designated under the district plan especially where the Ngongotahā Stream makes its way through the urban area. The Ngongotahā trout hatchery is located adjacent to the Ngongotahā Stream on Paradise Valley Rd and is a designated site for this purpose.

Western Bay District Plan – Kaiate Stream & Falls The Western BOP District Plan identifies much of the land in the upper catchment as a significant ecological feature recommended for protection (RAP) with parts around the Te Puke Quarry Road area within an Outstanding Landscape Feature. Sections of the Kaiate Stream directly below the falls is shown as having an esplanade strip in places with other parts proposed as esplanade strip or reserve.

Proposed works maybe on esplanade reserves or strips, or on, in or above the beds of rivers. In these cases ownership and strip agreements will need to be considered and taken into account.

Page 88 of 274

Receives Only – No Decisions

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Nassah Steed, Acting Regional Integrated Planning Manager

Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

Executive Summary

The Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 (Amendment Act) received the Royal assent on 18 April 2017. This report includes an overview of the amendments to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and briefly reports on the final form of provisions that were the object of key submission points from Bay of Plenty Regional Council.

The four most significant changes to the RMA as promoted by the Ministry for the Environment are:

 Requiring councils to follow national planning standards will improve the consistency and reduce the complexity of plans;  Faster and more flexible planning processes: the Act provides three different tracks by which a council can produce a plan: the existing track that now has tighter timelines, a new collaborative track, and a streamlined track;  Reduced requirements for consents (largely aimed at district consents); and  Stronger national direction including around requiring provision for growth like housing, and provision for national regulations to address issues like dairy stock in rivers.

Other changes that are significant for the Regional Council are:

 Mana Whakahono a Rohe (Iwi Participation Arrangements) that formalise or develop the process by which iwi authorities and local authorities discuss, agree, and record how tangata whenua (through iwi authorities) are to participate in resource management and decision-making processes under the RMA;  The reversal of the default from subdivisions requiring consent to not requiring consent unless a district rule requires consent.

The Council can expect to see some changes in reporting as these changes are bedded into planning and consenting processes under the RMA.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017.

Page 89 of 274 Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

1 Purpose

The purpose of this report is to

 advise the Committee that the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 (Amendment Act) has received the Royal assent,

 provide an overview of its provisions, and

 report on the extent to which the Council's submissions are reflected in the Amendment Act.

The Amendment Act can be found at this link:

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2017/0015/latest/whole.html#DLM6669207

The parent Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) (including the amendments of the Amendment Act but excluding those not yet in force) can be found at:

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/whole.html

2 Background

The latest of the Government’s RMA reforms is now law. The Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 received the Royal assent on 18 April 2017. Much of the Amendment Act commenced the next day, 19 April 2017. These reforms are the second phase of changes that National committed to when elected in 2008. The RMA amendments vary from those proposed in August 2013 but which were not able to be introduced. Nevertheless, at 213 pages with 286 sections and nine schedules, the Amendment Act is a most significant amendment to the RMA. The most recent substantive Resource Management Amendment Act commenced in 2013. (The Resource Management Amendment Act 2016 related only to the Environment Court.) 3 Overview

The Council’s lawyers, Cooney Lees Morgan, have prepared an overview of the Amendment Act and have agreed to the overview being used to brief the Council. Section references in the overview are to the new RMA section numbers of the incorporated amendments. The overview is attached as Appendix 1. 4 Council’s submission

At its meeting on 16 February 2016, the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee received a report that updated the Committee on central government environmental reforms including a presentation on the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill 2015. Committee feedback was incorporated in the Council’s submission on the Bill lodged on 14 March 2016.

This report briefly reviews the Council’s general submission points on key parts of the Bill and how they have been addressed in the final statute.

2 Page 90 of 274 Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

4.1 Changes to Functions and Duties1

Sections 30 and 31 of the RMA are amended to remove hazardous substances functions and include development capacity functions, commencing 19 April 2017. Interestingly, the inclusion of the development capacity functions, new sections 30(1)(ba) and 31(1)(aa), post-dates the release of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity 2016 which came into effect on 1 December 2016. These changes, which establish the degree of rigour required for growth management such as the RPS’s urban limits, were supported.

4.2 Natural Hazards2

Section 6 of the RMA is amended by inserting “the management of significant risks from natural hazards” as a new matter of national importance, commencing 19 April 2017. This was strongly supported. The RPS’s risk management approach to natural hazards is affirmed by this enhanced recognition in the RMA.

4.3 National Policy Statements and National Environmental Standards3

Amendments have been made to sections 43, 43A, 43B, 43E, 43G (repealed), 44, 44A, 45A (inserted), 46 (repealed), 46A, 46B, 47 – 52, 55 – 58, and 58A (repealed) of the RMA, commencing 19 April 2017. The amendments include allowing the Minister to follow the process already set out in the RMA or to establish and follow a process that allows for public submission. This was supported in principle.

4.4 National Planning Standard (formerly National Planning Template)4

New sections 58B to 58K are inserted into the RMA, commencing 19 April 2017. These insertions establish a framework for achieving greater consistency in plan structure across New Zealand. This can be compared with the BOPRC decision to bring all the regional plans together, with national planning standards aiming for more consistency at a national scale. While the process for preparing national planning standards provides for public submissions on a draft, the first set of national planning standards is to be approved by 19 April 2019. If the standard requires it, local authorities must amend its documents to the timeframe of the standard or, if none is specified, within one year of notification in the Gazette of the approval of the standard. For the first standards, five years is allowed if no time is specified in the standard. Documents must be available on a searchable internet site one year from notification of approval of the standard.

4.5 Collaborative Planning Process5

New section 80A is inserted into the RMA and Schedule 1 to the RMA is amended, including by inserting Part 4, commencing 19 April 2017. These insertions establish the collaborative planning process. The Council’s submission expressed reservations about the Bill’s collaborative planning process; those reservations remain. A collaborative group must include at least one person to represent the tangata whenua and not more than one elected member of the local authority using the collaborative process. Among matters a local authority must consider when determining whether to

1 Sections 12 and 13 of the Amendment Act. 2 Section 6 of the Amendment Act 3 Sections 28 to 49 of the Amendment Act 4 Section 50 of the Amendment Act 5 Sections 66 and 119 of the Amendment Act

3 Page 91 of 274 Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

use the collaborative planning process is “whether the local authority has the capacity to support the collaborative planning process, having regard to the financial and other costs of the process”. Now that “collaborative” has a specific meaning in the RMA, care should be taken when promoting ‘collaboration’ that expectations aren’t raised beyond what is intended.

4.6 Streamlined Process6

New section 80B is inserted into the RMA and Schedule 1 to the RMA is amended, including by inserting Part 5, commencing 19 April 2017. These insertions establish the streamlined planning process. This allows a local authority to apply to the responsible Minister for an expeditious planning process that is proportionate to the complexity and significance of the planning issues. The local authority must follow the process set by the Minister, who makes the final decision. It will be of interest to see in what circumstances this option is taken up.

4.7 Mana Whakahono a Rohe: Iwi Participation Arrangements7

New subpart 2 of Part 5 (sections 58L – 58U) is inserted into the RMA, commencing 19 April 2017. The purpose of a Mana Whakahono a Rohe is to provide an opportunity for iwi authorities and local authorities to discuss, agree, and record how tangata whenua (through iwi authorities) are to participate in resource management and decision-making processes under the RMA. A Mana Whakahono a Rohe may be initiated by one or more iwi authorities or a local authority. These provisions link with other amendments so that, for example, the consultation with tangata whenua during the preparation of a proposed policy statement or plan required by Schedule 1, clause 3(1)(d), is subject to new clause 1A. Clause 1A states that any proposed policy statement or plan must be prepared in accordance with any applicable Mana Whakahono a Rohe. Section 32 is amended so that its evaluation report must summarise all advice received from iwi authorities and the response to it. A Mana Whakahono a Rohe may specify any arrangement under the Act including consultation and notification of resource consent matters. Existing relationship agreements relating to resource management may, by agreement, be treated as Mana Whakahono a Rohe. Any iwi participation legislation and agreements under such legislation are not limited by Mana Whakahono a Rohe. The Council submitted that iwi will need to be resourced to participate but this remains to be seen. The select committee report indicates that many late changes to this subpart are responsive to submissions from both iwi and local authorities about burden and capacity.

4.8 New Regulation-making Powers8

New sections 360D and 360E are inserted into the RMA, commencing 19 April 2017. Section 360D enables central government to make regulations to prohibit or remove specified rules or types of rules that would duplicate, overlap with, or deal with the same subject matter that is included in other legislation. Concerned that such regulation could override current development restrictions within existing plans, the Council’s submission opposed this section.

New paragraph (hn) is inserted into section 360(1) of the RMA providing for national regulation to fence stock out of water bodies, commencing 19 April 2017. This was supported by the Council.

6 Sections 66 and 119 of the Amendment Act 7 Section 51 of the Amendment Act 8 Sections 116 and 114(7) of the Amendment Act

4 Page 92 of 274 Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

4.9 Activities meeting certain requirements are permitted activity9

New section 87BB is inserted into the RMA, commencing 18 October 2017. This was opposed by the Council as not being appropriate in the regional context. The section sets out requirements for an activity to be considered a permitted activity: the activity is marginally or temporarily non-complying, any adverse effects are no different from what would occur without the non-compliance and are less than minor, and that the consent authority, in its discretion, decides to notify the person proposing to undertake the activity that the activity is a permitted activity.

4.10 Fast Track Applications10

New sections 87AAC – 87AAD, 115(4A) and 360G are inserted into the RMA, commencing 18 October 2017. The amendments provide for the ability for certain activities to be processed within a 10 working day period. Under section 360G, central government may make regulations prescribing certain classes of activities for fast- track applications. The Council opposed the use of fast track applications for regional activities; regional activities have not been excluded from the exercise of this regulation-making power.

4.11 Notification criteria11

Replacement sections 95 – 95B are inserted into the RMA and sections 95C and 95D are amended, commencing 18 October 2017. The Council opposed the new notification criteria for both public and limited notification. The replacement sections do not include an equivalent to the existing replaced section 95A(4) which gives a consent authority discretion to notify if it decides that special circumstances exist. BOPRC’s experience has been that submitters often add value in that they raise issues that ought to be addressed but which haven’t arisen directly from the application.

4.12 Limits on submission content12

New section 41D is inserted into the RMA, commencing 18 October 2017. The Council opposed the provisions to impose limits on submission content and the requirement that the authority must strike out a submission. The new section states that an authority conducting a hearing may direct that a submission or part of a submission be struck out in certain given circumstances. New section 108AA is inserted into the RMA, commencing 18 October 2017. This sets a tighter scope on matters that can be addressed by consent conditions.

4.13 Financial Contributions13

Sections 108(2)(a), (9) and (10), sections 108AA(5) (as inserted by section 147 of the Amendment Act), 110 and 111 of the RMA, that authorise conditions requiring financial contributions, are repealed commencing 18 April 2022. The Council opposed the repeal of financial contributions. Development contributions are covered by the Local Government Act 2002 but they can be set only by territorial authorities. BOPRC currently has provisions in the Regional Water and Land Plan and On-site Effluent Treatment Regional Plan enabling it to charge a financial contribution as an option to

9 Section 135 of the Amendment Act 10 Section 134, 148 and 173 of the Amendment Act 11 Sections 137, 138 and 139 of the Amendment Act 12 Sections 132 and 147 of the Amendment Act 13 Subpart 3 of the Amendment Act

5 Page 93 of 274 Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

mitigate environmental effects. The amendment removes this ability. The extended period, five years, before these amendments commence may allow regional councils to seek corrective amendments.

4.14 RMA Charges14

Among other changes, new section 36(1)(cc) is inserted into the RMA, commencing 19 April 2017. The Council supported the ability to charge for monitoring of permitted activities but this is linked to section 43A(8) which relates to activities permitted by a national environmental standard.

4.15 Better alignment between Acts

Parts 3 (relating to the Public Works Act 1981), 4 (relating to the Conservation Act 1987) and 5 (relating to the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012) of the Amendment Act were supported by Council. 5 Other changes of interest

5.1 Subdivision15

Replacement section 11(1)(a) and new subsection (1A) are inserted into the RMA, commencing 18 October 2017. These amendments reverse the default from all subdivisions requiring subdivision consent to subdivision consent being required only when the subdivision contravenes a national environmental standard or a rule in a district plan or proposed plan. This change has implications for the BOPRC as current practice is that subdivision consent applications sent to the Regional Council trigger responses seeking conditions that achieve regional objectives. Without the trigger, provisions to achieve regional objectives would need to be set out in plans with a corresponding rule requiring subdivision consent. District plans have not yet (at the time of writing) been examined to ascertain whether Bay of Plenty subdivisions will still require consent.

5.2 Rules affecting existing use rights16

Section 85 of the RMA is amended and replacement subsections inserted, commencing 19 April 2017. Included in the amendments is the change of section title from ‘Compensation not payable in respect of controls on land’ to “Environment Court may give directions in respect of land subject to controls”. The amendments to this section, together with a consequential amendment to RMA section 86 and to the Public Works Act 1981, will need to be examined more closely as the Council considers developing rules that affect existing use rights. Initial indications are that the amendments clarify the policy intent rather than shift it substantively.

5.3 Procedural principles17

New section 18A is inserted into the RMA, commencing 19 April 2017. This requires processes that are timely, efficient, consistent, cost-effective and proportionate to the functions or powers being performed, relevant policy statements and plans with clear and concise wording, and collaboration by local authorities on their common resource

14 Section 20 of the Amendment Act 15 Section 127 of the Amendment Act 16 Sections 68 and 69, and Part 3 of the Amendment Act 17 Section 9 and 18 of the Amendment Act

6 Page 94 of 274 Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

management issues. New section 35(2)(ca) is inserted into the RMA requiring these matters to be monitored and reported on at least five yearly.

6 Some implications for the Bay of Plenty Regional Council

While some of the amendments have been promoted as delivering faster and more flexible planning processes, other amendments prescribe more rigour in the consultation that is required when a proposed policy statement or plan is being prepared. While the formal submission process may be quicker, the overall time taken to prepare a policy statement of plan may not be affected.

With its 286 sections and nine schedules commencing over various timeframes (19 April, 1 June, and 18 October 2017, and 18 April 2022), the Amendment Act is complex and technical. Many of the provisions, such as Mana Whakahono a Rohe, will require more detailed analysis so that how the law is complied with meets the efficiency interests of BOPRC and its partners.

7 Māori Implications18

The Amendment Act is a most significant amendment to the RMA since it was first enacted in 1991. Implications for Māori are likewise significant particularly in terms of Mana Whakahono a Rohe iwi participation provisions whereby iwi can initiate an agreement negotiation process. It will require a collective mandate to act, represent and participate in the consenting, planning and policy realm. It will also require resourcing and time to initiate, manage and respond. An unknown is how the process will be resourced and administered for both BOPRC and tangata whenua.

New section 34A(1A) is inserted into the RMA, commencing 19 April 2017. This includes the requirement, when appointing hearing panels, to consult tangata whenua through iwi authorities as to whether it is appropriate to appoint a commissioner with an understanding of tikanga Māori and the perspectives of local iwi and hapū. While BOPRC already appoints hearing commissioners with expertise in tikanga Māori, iwi authorities aren’t necessarily consulted as part of the selection process.

The Amendment Act’s collaborative planning processes for developing regional policy statements, district and regional plans will limit appeal rights to questions of law. The streamlined process has no appeal right. These will work against iwi and hapū particularly those who tend to pursue wide ranging appeals or have limited resources and often struggle to keep up with the many planning and decision-making processes going on at any particular point in time.

Because of their cultural sensitivity some iwi and hapū choose not to divulge the location of culturally significant sites on private land. Enabling subdivision as a permitted activity unless it contravenes a rule in an NES or district plan could adversely affect tangata whenua particularly if there are sites of cultural significance on the site which is not protected by a district plan. Similarly many areas of contaminated soil are not discovered until subdivision occurs.

18 Various including section 17 of the Amendment Act

7 Page 95 of 274 Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

8 Council’s Accountability Framework

8.1 Community Outcomes

The Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 directly contributes to the Environmental Protection, Economic Development and Regional Collaboration and Leadership Community Outcome/s in the council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

8.2 Long Term Plan Alignment

This work is planned under the Regional Planning activity in the Long Term Plan 2015- 2025.

Current Budget Implications

Work involved in implementing requirements of the Amendment Act sits under the Regional Planning Activity in Year 3 of the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Future Budget Implications

The Amendment Act’s implications on Regional Council’s future work are wide ranging and there is insufficient funding in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025 to resource the various work streams that its implementation will require in policy, planning and consents. A separate paper on responsive planning is being reported to Council workshop on 19 May 2017 seeking an additional $200,000 funding to enable sufficient resourcing to proactively engage in and implement the requirements of the Amendment Act and various other central government policy initiatives currently underway or pending.

Martin Butler Regional Planner for Acting Regional Integrated Planning Manager

10 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

8 Page 96 of 274

APPENDIX 1

Cooney Lees Morgan overview of Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

Page 97 of 274

Page 98 of 274

Next Round of RMA Reforms Passed

The Resource Legislation Amendment Bill received Royal assent on Tuesday 18th April 2017, meaning it is now law (Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017).

The Select Committee and minority party negotiation processes have resulted in some changes since the Bill was initially proposed.

The amendments will come into force at different stages, as follows: - Amendments to the Exclusive Economic Zone Act come into force on 1 June 2017; - Changes relating mostly to consenting and amendments to the Conservation Act come into force on 18th October 2017; - Changes relating to financial contributions and conditions of consent come into force in 5 years (18th April 2022); and - The rest of the Act came into force on Wednesday 19th April 2017.

We set out some of the key changes to the legislation as a result of the Amendment Act below.

Greater iwi participation (now in force)

 The Amendment Act adds a new subpart to Part 5 of the RMA, Mana Whakahono a Rohe: Iwi participation arrangements. Their purpose is to provide a mechanism for iwi authorities and local authorities to discuss, agree and record ways in which tangata whenua may participate in resource management and decision-making processes (planning and consents).

Iwi authorities may invite one or more local authorities to initiate an iwi arrangement at any time (other than in the period 90 days before a general election). After receiving an invitation local authorities are required to hold a hui within 60 days (unless otherwise agreed) to discuss and agree on a process for negotiating the iwi arrangement.

There is scope to negotiate a joint or multi party Mana Whakahono a Rohe. Where a Mana Whakahono a Rohe already exists an iwi authority in the same area needs also to first consider joining the existing Mana Whakahono a Rohe (s 58P(2)).

If the parties agree, existing relationship agreements are able to be treated as a Mana Whakahono a Rohe (s 58O(7)).

A Mana Whakahono a Rohe negotiation will not hold up RMA processes that are in train (s 58O(9)).

A dispute resolution process is included (refer ss 58R and 58S).

 New s 32(4A) requires a s 32 report to summarise all advice received from iwi authorities and the response to that advice, including any provisions that are intended to give effect to that advice. There are requirements to prepare proposed policy statements and plans in accordance with any applicable Mana Whakahono a Rohe (Sch 1, cl 1A) and to have particular regard to any advice from iwi authorities before notifying a proposed policy statement or plan (Sch 1, cl 4A(1)). Adequate time and opportunity must be given for iwi authorities to provide advice.

Page 99 of 274 RMB-N-176-V5:rmb 2

 Requirements to consult with tangata whenua through iwi authorities when appointing hearing panels as to whether it is appropriate to appoint a commissioner with an understanding of tikanga Māori and the perspectives of local iwi and hapū (s 34A(1A)).

Speeding up planning processes (now in force)

 Two new planning tracks intended to speed up policy and plan making:

o Collaborative planning process (Sch 1, Part 4). Collaborative group set up, including tangata whenua, territorial authority and customary marine title group representatives, other persons considered by the local authority to have knowledge, experience and skills relevant to the resource management issues to be considered, and requiring authority or heritage protection authority representatives (refer s 40). The group prepares a report and Council in conjunction with the group prepares the plan / policy statement to give effect to the consensus position in the report. A review panel established by the local authority hears submissions and makes recommendations. The Council accepts or rejects the recommendations and can decide alternative provisions. Appeals to the Environment Court are by way of rehearing (same evidence, new evidence only with leave of the Court) or on a question of law.

If a policy statement or plan is prepared using the collaborative process any variation must also be undertaken using that process.

o Streamlined process for specific issues (s 80B and Sch 1, Part 5), requiring an application to the Minister. Section 80(C) sets out various criteria, including for example that the proposed planning instrument will implement a national direction, is urgent, or is required to meet a significant community need. Written submissions allowed, but generally no hearing (unless directed by the Minister) and no appeal rights (except against decisions of requiring authorities or heritage protection authorities in relation to designations and heritage orders).

 An option for limited notification of plan changes (Sch 1, cl 5A).

Stronger national direction (now in force)

 National Planning Standards (was National Planning Template in Bill) are introduced (new ss 58B to 58J). These will set out requirements relating to any aspect of the structure, format or content, including rules, of regional policy statements, regional plans and district plans that the Minister considers requires national consistency, is required to support the implementation of an NES, NPS, NZCPS or regulations, or is required to assist people to comply with the new procedural principles (see below). New s 58C sets out the scope and contents of Planning Standards and is very broad in focus. It can specify form and structure of plans and policy statements and specific provisions that need to be included.

The first Planning Standard is to be approved by 19th April 2019. A draft will be publicly notified for submissions. That first Planning Standard must contain a structure and form for policy statements and plans, definitions, and requirements for the electronic functionality and accessibility of policy statements and plans (s 58G).

Local authorities will be required to amend their policy statements and plans to give effect to Planning Standards (or include specific provisions as directed). Where directed to, this is to be done without using a Schedule 1 process (s 58I(2)-(3)). If the Planning Standard directs a local authority to choose from a range of provisions, one of the Schedule 1 processes will be required in order to apply the provision to the local circumstances (s 58I(4)).

 National Environmental Standards and Policy Statements can now also apply to a specified district or region (s 43(4) and s 45A(3)). New s 45A includes much greater detail on what NPSs must and may state. Page 100 of 274 RMB-N-176-V5:rmb 3

 The regulation making powers in s 360 have been widened and allow, for example, for regulations that prohibit or remove certain rules that would duplicate, overlap with or deal with the same subject matter as in other legislation. This does not include rules that regulate the growing of crops that are GMOs (s 360D(2)) (ensuring councils remain free to regulate GMOs, which was an outcome of the negotiations with the Maori Party). Some of these came into effect on 19th April 2017 and others will come into effect on 18th October (eg those relating to notification of consent applications).

Fast-tracking consents (from 18th October 2017)

 Fast-tracking for boundary infringements where the neighbours approve (many plans already permit this) and controlled activities requiring consent under a district plan (not subdivision). Applications cease to be fast-track if the Council decides to notify them or a hearing is to be held. (New ss 87AAB to 87AAD). 10 day timeframe for decisions for fast track applications (s 115(4)).  Provisions allowing councils to treat some activities as permitted (where effects are minor and there are marginal or temporary non-compliances) – s 87BB.

Natural hazards

 New section 6(h) is “the management of significant risks from natural hazards”. This is expected to be followed with a new National Policy Statement on Natural Hazard Management. This section is now in force.

 Section 106, which allows for subdivision consents to be refused or granted subject to conditions in certain circumstances has been amended to refer more broadly to significant risk from natural hazards (no longer lists erosion, falling debris, subsidence, slippage, or inundation from any source). New s 106(1A) sets out what the assessment of risk requires. These will come into effect on 18th October.

Council functions and principles (now in force)

 New function for district and regional councils (s 31(1)(aa) and s 30(1)(ba)) to ensure sufficient development capacity in relation to housing and business land to meet expected demands of the region. Explanation and definitions set out in s 30(5) of the Act.

 The function relating to adverse effects of hazardous substances (ss 30(1)(c)(v) and 30(1)(d)(v)) has been deleted.

 New procedural principles in section 18A. This section requires that all persons exercising powers and performing functions “take all practicable steps” to use timely, efficient, consistent and cost-effective processes that are proportionate. It also requires policy statements and plans to include only those matters relevant to the purpose of the Act and are worded in a way that is clear and concise. This re-states best practice, but there is a requirement now under s 35(2) to monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of processes used by Council.

Notification and s 104 (from 18th October 2017)

 New step-by-step process for notification introduced:

o Public notification is precluded for all controlled activities, and for restricted discretionary activities (RDA) and discretionary (D) subdivision or residential activity consents (ie regional or district, associated with the construction, alteration or use of 1 or more dwellinghouses on land to be used for residential purposes), RDA, D or NC boundary activities (s 95A(4) and (5)). Special circumstances still applies (s 95A(9).

Page 101 of 274 RMB-N-176-V5:rmb 4

o Limited notification of controlled activities requiring consent under a district plan (except subdivision) is precluded. New s 95B(10) allows for limited notification to others if there are special circumstances. o In essence, only non-complying subdivision consents can be publicly notified, and only RDA – NC subdivision consents can be limited notified, unless special circumstances exist).

 Section 104 - A consent authority will need to have regard to any positive effects to offset adverse effects i.e. offsetting and environmental compensation measures (s 104(1)(ab)), which confirms the approach consent authorities are already taking. Also applies to notices of requirement - s 171(1B).

 From 18 April 2022 – New section 108AA - Councils cannot include a condition unless the applicant agrees or the condition is directly connected to one or both of the following:

(i) An adverse effect of the activity on the environment; (ii) An applicable district rule or regional rule or NES (only ‘applicable’ where the application of that rule or standard is the reason, or one of the reasons, consent is required); or

The condition relates to administrative matters that are essential for the efficient implementation of the relevant resource consent.

Financial contribution conditions are not affected (s 108AA(5)) until April 2022 (see below).

Financial contributions (from 18th April 2022)

 From 18th April 2022 the subsections of s 108 that authorise conditions requiring financial contributions, as well as other financial contribution related sections, are repealed. The taking of financial contributions can continue under s 108AA until such time as district plans are amended or the five year period passes.

Environment Court / Appeals

 No right of appeal on a boundary activity, subdivision or residential activity unless they are non-complying activities (s 120(1A)). Appellants can only appeal in respect of a matter raised in their submission. This section applies from 18th October 2017.

 Court now doesn’t require consent of parties to organise alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Parties must participate unless the Court grants leave to the contrary. A representative of a party at ADR and Court conferences must have the authority to make decisions on their behalf (i.e. Practice Note is now enshrined) (ss 267-268A). These sections are now in force.

Bits and pieces (all in force unless stated otherwise)

 The presumption for subdivision has been reversed – it is permitted unless otherwise regulated in a district plan (amended s 11). This applies from 18th October 2017.

 Section 14(3)(b)(ii) has been amended so that it is no longer an “individual’s” animals drinking water but now a “person’s”. A person includes companies / a body of persons. This settles the debate over whether farming entities can rely on this section for their stock drinking water takes.

 Further amendments have been made to the administrative charges provisions in s 36, including an ability to charge for monitoring of permitted activities if an NES empowers it, and new criteria in s 36AAA which local authorities must have regard to when fixing charges under s 36.

Page 102 of 274 RMB-N-176-V5:rmb 5

 Section 69 (Rules relating to water quality): Schedule 3 (Water quality classes) no longer applies to fresh water (s 69(4)).

 Amendments to s 85 - In an appeal against planning provisions, where the Court concludes that a planning provision makes land incapable of reasonable use and places an unfair or unreasonable burden on any person who has an interest in the land, it can require a local authority to either change the provision or acquire the land under the Public Works Act 1981 (PWA) (whichever the local authority considers appropriate). The acquisition under the PWA can only occur if the person with the interest in the land agrees. The Court has always been able to direct modification or deletion of planning provisions in these circumstances. It will be interesting to see whether this amendment changes the current practice.

 There appears to be greater scope for a consent authority to review land use consents granted by a regional council (refer for example new s 128(1)(ba) and (bb)).

 Submissions (or parts of submissions) can be struck out at Council level hearings for the various reasons set out under new s 41D. A right of objection applies under s 357. This applies from 18th October 2017.

Alignment with other statutes

 Management of hazardous substances has been removed because this is covered by the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996.  Charging development contributions has been removed because this is covered by the Local Government Act 2002.  The notified concessions process under the Conservation Act 1987 has been aligned with the RMA timeframes  Objections process for land acquisition under Public Works Act has been aligned with the RMA. Non-land related compensation under PWA has been increased to a maximum of $50,000 to provide greater incentives for landowners to enter into agreements with the Crown.

A full copy is available here: Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017

If you would like to discuss the proposed changes, please feel free to call a member of our Team:

 Mary Hill - 07 927 0590  Paul Cooney - 07 927 0520  Sharron Wooler - 07 927 0502  Rachael Zame – 07 927 0522  Rachel Boyte – 07 927 0530

Page 103 of 274 RMB-N-176-V5:rmb

Page 104 of 274

Receives Only - No Decisions

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: David Phizacklea, General Manager, Strategy & Science

Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements

Executive Summary

The Resource Legislation Amendment Act includes new provisions on the way Māori are involved in the management of natural resources through iwi participation agreements known as Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe. Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe provides a framework for councils to meet their existing obligations to consult with local iwi.

In summary Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe provides:

 A mechanism for iwi authorities and councils to discuss, agree and record ways in which tangata whenua may, through iwi authorities, participate in resource management and decision-making processes, and

 A key process to assist councils to comply with their statutory duties under the Resource Management Act.

This report outlines the key provisions of Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe. Further work including further legal analysis will be undertaken to ensure the implications for Council are clearly understood including any resourcing implications.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements.

1 Purpose

The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements under the Resource Management Amendment Act 2017.

On the 27 April 2017 Komiti Māori recommended that a report be prepared to the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee meeting on the Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe and its implications for Council.

2 Introduction

Page 105 of 274 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements

The Resource Legislation Amendment Act received its Royal Assent on 18 April 2017. One of the underlying features of the legislation is improving the way councils involve Māori in the management of natural resources is through iwi participation agreements known as Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe (TMWH). It provides a framework for councils to meet their existing obligations to provide opportunities for Maori to participate in the decision making processes of Council and how iwi would like to be consulted/engaged. Some councils already have similar agreements through Treaty settlements or good practice.

Through TMWH iwi can participate in the preparation and change of a policy statement or plan, agreeing on consultation processes and the development of monitoring methods.

TMWH recognises that Māori have a right to be involved in the management of natural resources, particularly fresh water management as expressed in the National Policy Statement for Fresh Water Management (NPS-FM). TMWH will provide a conduit for iwi to ensure their involvement in fresh water management is clearly articulated and implemented. TMWH has alignment with Te Mana o Te Wai in the NPS-FM.

The benefit to Council is TMWH can provide opportunities to better understand iwi aspirations, consolidate iwi engagement across Council and build practical and sustainable relationships with iwi.

The challenges for Council will be the complexity of developing multiple agreements with iwi and other councils, acknowledging overlapping iwi interests, and the funding and staff resources required to undertake the work. 3 Bay of Plenty Cultural Context

There is a rich cultural dynamic in the Bay of Plenty. We have multiple iwi, hapū and associated marae.

Treaty Landscape

2 Page 106 of 274 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements

The Treaty landscape poses benefits and challenges for Council and Māori. Treaty settlements provide enhanced opportunities for iwi to be more actively involved in decision making processes, and enables financial empowerment to support kaitiaki responsibilities.

Many hapū and iwi are active participants in RMA processes. Due to the high demand that Councils have on iwi through limited resourcing and budget, the responses and interaction from iwi can oftentimes be reactionary. This Council has a series of plan changes and reviews in process running concurrently, requiring Iwi to provide rapid responses to very complex issues.

TMWH will provide clarity on what is expected from Council, how this will be delivered, what the iwi contribution to decision making will be, how iwi capacity may be supported, and how to effectively plan the allocation of staff and financial resources. A full list of iwi and hapū authorities is attached to this report.

Expectations and Legal Advice

At this stage there are indications that a number of iwi will be preparing invitations to Council. It is expected that the content of those invitations will have implications for the planning, consenting and Maori policy teams, and that consideration should be given to how best to allocate and organise staff to respond to invitations. Staff also suggest that legal advice on the implications for Council be prepared to ensure that Council’s statutory and legal obligations to these new arrangements are clearly understood.

4 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe – Summary of Key Components

4.1 Purpose:

 To provide a mechanism for iwi authorities and local authorities to discuss, agree, and record ways in which tangata whenua may, through their iwi authorities, participate in resource management and decision-making processes under the RMA.

 To assist local authorities to comply with the statutory duties under the RMA, including through the implementation of sections 6(e) Kaitiakitanga, 7 (a) Matters of National Importance and 8 (Treaty of Waitangi).

Relevant iwi authority means an iwi authority whose area of interest overlaps with, or is adjacent to, the area of interest of an initiating iwi authority. Attached to this report is the specific Mana Whakahono a Rohe provisions under the Resource Legislation Act 2017.

4.2 Guiding principles:

When developing TMWH, participants must use their best endeavours to:

 Achieve its purpose

 Enhance opportunities for collaboration amongst the participants

 Achieve the most effective and efficient means of meeting the statutory obligations of participants

3 Page 107 of 274 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements

 Work together in good faith and in a spirit of cooperation

 Communicate with each other in an open, transparent and honest manner

 Recognise and acknowledge the benefit of working together by sharing their respective vision

 Commit to meeting statutory time frames and minimise delays and costs

Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe does not limit the requirements of any relevant iwi participation legislation or the agreements associated with that legislation.

4.3 Initiation of Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe

 An invitation from one or more iwi authority to local authorities can take place at any time (with the exception of the period 90 days before a Council election).

 Councils must advise any relevant iwi authorities and local authorities that the invitation has been received.

 Council must convene a hui within 60 working days from receipt of the invitation unless agreed otherwise by relevant parties.

 The hui will discuss the process for negotiation of one or more TMWH, which parties are to be involved and the times by which specified stages of negotiations must be concluded.

 If one or more local authorities in an area are negotiating a TMWH and a further invitation is received, the participating iwi authorities and relevant local authorities may agree on the order in which they negotiate the agreement.

 Existing agreements can be (if agreed to) treated as if it were a TMWH.

 Participating authorities must take account of the extent to which resource management matters are included in any iwi participation legislation and seek to minimise duplication.

4.4 Council can initiate Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe

 A local authority may initiate TMWH with an iwi or authority or hapū.

 TMWH must be concluded 18 months after the date on which the invitation is received or within a period agreed by the participating authorities.

4.5 Content

 Agreement on how the iwi authority may participate in the preparation or change of a policy statement or plan, including the use of the pre-notification, collaborative, or streamlined planning processes under Schedule 1 of the RMA.

 How consultation will be undertaken.

 How participants will work together to develop and agree on methods for monitoring under the RMA.

4 Page 108 of 274 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements

 How to give effect to requirements under any relevant iwi participation legislation.

 Process for identifying and managing conflict and resolving disputes.

 Consultation and notification on resource consent matters, where the RMA provides for this action

 Circumstances in which an iwi authority may be given limited notification as an affected party

 Any arrangement relating to other functions under the RMA

 If there are two or more iwi authorities, how those iwi will work collectively together to participate with local authorities

 Unless agreed by all parties, the content must not be altered and TMWH cannot be terminated

4.6 Disputes:

 There is a prescribed disputes resolution process under this sub-part of the Act.

 The costs for any dispute resolutions process undertaken will be met by each of the participants.

4.7 Review and Monitoring

 A review must be completed no later than six months after the date of the Mana Whakahono a Rohe, unless a later date is agreed by the participating authorities.

 A joint review must be carried out after every sixth anniversary. 5 Implications for Council at a glance

A thorough analysis of the implications for Council (positive and challenging) was requested by the Chair of the committee. Some initial analysis has been undertaken and staff would like to present this verbally when speaking to the report. At this stage the preliminary analysis indicates that there are no direct impacts on other legislation where Council has a statutory responsibility. The new provisions formalise how iwi will participate in the decision making processes of Council pertaining to resource management.

The following positive implications are anticipated:

 Formality of TMWH will hold parties to account and ensure contract agreements are met.

 Formalise and clarify the way iwi are to participate in the decision-making processes of Council.

 Opportunity for more structured and consistent approach to Māori engagement.

 Clarity around RMA planning, especially regarding who to engage with and when.

5 Page 109 of 274 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements

 Opportunity for iwi to initiate a process and outcome that meets specific needs.

 Opportunity to develop enduring and long term Iwi-Council relationships based on mutual aspirations.

 Ability to integrate planning and funding of Maori outcomes into the Annual and Long Term Plans.

 Ability to recognise hapū autonomy.

 Mutual obligations between Iwi-Council.

The following challenges are anticipated:

 Pressure of timeframes to establish agreements (multiple meetings, discussions and conversations to reach agreement within statutory timeframes)

 Complexity of managing multiple agreements with multiple authorities (councils and iwi).

 Will require coordination of staff resources from across council, which may place pressure on other priorities.

 Cost of developing, implementing, and monitoring the agreements.

 Complexity of managing overlapping interests.

 Taking into account current plan change engagement processes with the new agreements 6 Implications for Maori

TMWH provides a legal framework for Council with clear legislative directives. TMWH will significantly improve Council-Iwi engagement processes and thereby reflect in better informed decisions being made.

Te Ao Māori will be acknowledged and will feature prominently in key Council decision- making processes.

TMWH recognises that Māori must be involved in the management of natural resources, particularly fresh water management as expressed in the National Policy Statement for Fresh Water Management (NPS-FM). TMWH will provide a conduit for iwi to ensure their involvement in planning and policy matters like fresh water management is clearly articulated.

While greater consideration to staff resources and funding will be required, there are benefits through the formalisation of arrangements with iwi. In effect, these are contractual agreements that will set out the specific obligations of respective parties. Clarity on how to engage and how to enable Maori participation in decision making processes and resource management will eliminate doubt as to how and what will involve Māori. A more responsive approach can be achieved through a formalised statutory arrangement enabling smarter deployment of resources and funds.

The challenges for Council and Iwi will be around the complexity of developing multiple agreements, overlapping iwi interests, costs and resourcing.

6 Page 110 of 274 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi Participation Agreements

7 Council’s Accountability Framework

7.1 Community Outcomes

Implementation of Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe directly contributes to the Regional Collaboration and Leadership Community Outcome in the council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025. Māori engagement and relationships is a significant consideration in Council work streams.

7.2 Long Term Plan Alignment (LTP)

The responsibility to develop, formalise, implement and monitor TMWH will be shared across relevant Council teams.

Under the LTP, the Regional Planning Activity has responsibility to implement planning documents under the RMA. TMWH is a new work stream.

The Māori Policy team are able to facilitate and co-lead this work, but it does not have the resources or all of the necessary technical knowledge to manage multiple agreements. Given the focus on planning it will require resourcing from planning teams and possibly other teams who undertake the regulatory functions of council.

Current Budget Implications

There are no current budget implications, however given the Amendment to the Act formalises agreements with iwi, careful consideration of budget allocation over the next 3-6 months will be required.

Future Budget Implications

The scope and scale of TMWH into the near future is unknown. Some of the initial ground work will be partially provided for in Council’s LTP 2015-2025 through individual budgets dedicated to Māori engagement, Treaty and relationship work.

Staff will carry out an assessment of potential costs for consideration in the next Long Term Plan.

Anaru Vercoe Maori Policy Team Leader for General Manager, Strategy & Science

11 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

7 Page 111 of 274

Page 112 of 274

APPENDIX 1

Attachment Te Mana Whakahono text_clear copy (2)

Page 113 of 274

Page 114 of 274 Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi participation Agreements

38 New subpart 2 of Part 5 and new subpart 3 heading in Part 5 inserted After section 58J (as inserted by section 37 of the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2015), insert: Subpart 2—Mana Whakahono a Rohe: Iwi participation arrangements

58K Definitions In this subpart and Schedule 1,— area of interest means the area that the iwi and hapū represented by an iwi authority identify as their traditional rohe initiating iwi authority has the meaning given in section 58N(1) iwi participation legislation means legislation (other than this Act), including any legislation listed in Schedule 3 of the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, that provides a role for iwi or hapū in processes under this Act Mana Whakahono a Rohe means an iwi participation arrangement entered into under this subpart participating authorities has the meaning given in section 58N(5) participating iwi authorities means the iwi authorities that— (a) have agreed to participate in a Mana Whakahono a Rohe; and (b) have agreed the order in which negotiations are to be conducted relevant iwi authority means an iwi authority whose area of interest overlaps with, or is adjacent to, the area of interest of an initiating iwi authority relevant local authority means a district or regional council whose area of interest overlaps with, or is adjacent to, the area of interest represented by the initiating iwi authority. Purpose and guiding principles

58L Purpose of Mana Whakahono a Rohe The purpose of a Mana Whakahono a Rohe is— (a) to provide a mechanism for iwi authorities and local authorities to discuss, agree, and record ways in which tangata whenua may, through their iwi authorities, participate in resource management and decision-making processes under this Act; and

(b) to assist local authorities to comply with their statutory duties under this Act, including through the implementation of sections 6(e), 7(a), and 8. 58M Guiding principles In initiating, developing, and implementing a Mana Whakahono a Rohe, the participating authorities must use their best endeavours—

Page 115 of 274 (a) to achieve the purpose of the Mana Whakahono a Rohe in an enduring manner:

(b) to enhance the opportunities for collaboration amongst the participating authorities, including by promoting— (i) the use of integrated processes: (ii) co-ordination of the resources required to undertake the obligations and responsibilities of the parties to the Mana Whakahono a Rohe:

(c) in determining whether to proceed to negotiate a joint or multi-party Mana Whakahono a Rohe, to achieve the most effective and efficient means of meeting the statutory obligations of the participating authorities:

(d) to work together in good faith and in a spirit of co-operation:

(e) to communicate with each other in an open, transparent, and honest manner:

(f) to recognise and acknowledge the benefit of working together by sharing their respective vision and expertise:

(g) to commit to meeting statutory time frames and minimise delays and costs associated with the statutory processes:

(h) to recognise that a Mana Whakahono a Rohe under this subpart does not limit the requirements of any relevant iwi participation legislation or the agreements associated with that legislation. Initiating Mana Whakahono a Rohe

58N Initiation of Mana Whakahono a Rohe Invitation from 1 or more iwi authorities (1) At any time other than in the period that is 90 days before the date of a triennial election under the Local Electoral Act 2001, 1 or more iwi authorities representing tangata whenua (the initiating iwi authorities) may invite 1 or more relevant local authorities in writing to enter into a Mana Whakahono a Rohe with the 1 or more iwi authorities. Obligations of local authorities that receive invitation (2) As soon as is reasonably practicable after receiving an invitation under subsection (1), the local authorities—

(a) may advise any relevant iwi authorities and relevant local authorities that the invitation has been received; and

(b) must convene a hui or meeting of the initiating iwi authority and any iwi authority or local authority identified under paragraph (a) (the parties) that wishes to participate to discuss how they will work together to develop a Mana Whakahono a Rohe under this subpart. (3) The hui or meeting required by subsection (2)(b) must be held not later than 60 working days after the invitation sent under subsection (1) is received, unless the parties agree otherwise.

Page 116 of 274 (4) The purpose of the hui or meeting is to provide an opportunity for the iwi authorities and local authorities concerned to discuss and agree on—

(a) the process for negotiation of 1 or more Mana Whakahono a Rohe; and

(b) which parties are to be involved in the negotiations; and

(c) the times by which specified stages of the negotiations must be concluded. (5) The iwi authorities and local authorities that are able to agree at the hui or meeting how they will develop a Mana Whakahono a Rohe (the participating authorities) must proceed to negotiate the terms of the Mana Whakahono a Rohe in accordance with that agreement and this subpart. (6) If 1 or more local authorities in an area are negotiating a Mana Whakahono a Rohe and a further invitation is received under subsection (1), the participating iwi authorities and relevant local authorities may agree on the order in which they negotiate the Mana Whakahono a Rohe. Other matters relevant to Mana Whakahono a Rohe (7) If an iwi authority and a local authority have at any time entered into a relationship agreement, to the extent that the agreement relates to resource management matters, the parties to that agreement may, by written agreement, treat that agreement as if it were a Mana Whakahono a Rohe entered into under this subpart. (8) The participating authorities must take account of the extent to which resource management matters are included in any iwi participation legislation and seek to minimise duplication between the functions of the participating authorities under that legislation and those arising under the Mana Whakahono a Rohe. (9) Nothing in this subpart prevents a local authority from commencing, continuing, or completing any process under the Act while waiting for a response from, or negotiating a Mana Whakahono a Rohe with, 1 or more iwi authorities. 58O Other opportunities to initiate Mana Whakahono a Rohe Later initiation by iwi authority (1) An iwi authority that, at the time of receiving an invitation to a meeting or hui under section 58N(2)(b), does not wish to participate in negotiating a Mana Whakahono a Rohe, or withdraws from negotiations before a Mana Whakahono a Rohe is agreed, may participate in, or initiate, a Mana Whakahono a Rohe at any later time (other than within the period that is 90 days before a triennial election under the Local Electoral Act 2001). (2) If a Mana Whakahono a Rohe exists and another iwi authority in the same area as the initiating iwi wishes to initiate a Mana Whakahono a Rohe under section 58N(1), that iwi authority must first consider joining the existing Mana Whakahono a Rohe. (3) The provisions of this subpart apply to any initiation under subsection (1). Initiation by local authority (4) A local authority may initiate a Mana Whakahono a Rohe with an iwi authority or with hapū. (5) The local authority and iwi authority or hapū concerned must agree on—

Page 117 of 274 (a) the process to be adopted; and

(b) the time period within which the negotiations are to be concluded; and

(c) how the Mana Whakahono a Rohe is to be implemented after negotiations are concluded. (6) If 1 or more hapū are invited to enter a Mana Whakahono a Rohe under subsection (4), the provisions of this subpart apply as if the references to an iwi authority were references to 1 or more hapū, to the extent that the provisions relate to the contents of a Mana Whakahono a Rohe (see sections 58L, 58M, 58Q, 58S, and 58T). 58P Time frame for concluding Mana Whakahono a Rohe If an invitation is initiated under section 58N(1), the participating authorities must conclude a Mana Whakahono a Rohe within—

(a) 18 months after the date on which the invitation is received; or

(b) any other period agreed by all the participating authorities. Contents

58Q Contents of Mana Whakahono a Rohe (1) A Mana Whakahono a Rohe must—

(a) be recorded in writing; and

(b) identify the participating authorities; and

(i) how an iwi authority may participate in the preparation or change of a policy statement or plan, including the use of any of the pre-notification, collaborative, or streamlined planning processes under Schedule 1; and

(ii) how the participating authorities will undertake consultation requirements, including the requirements of section 34A(1A) and clause 4A of Schedule 1; and

(iii) how the participating authorities will work together to develop and agree on methods for monitoring under the Act; and

(iv) how the participating authorities will give effect to the requirements of any relevant iwi participation legislation, or of any agreements associated with, or entered into under, that legislation; and

(v) a process for identifying and managing conflicts of interest; and

(vi) the process that the parties will use for resolving disputes about the implementation of the Mana Whakahono a Rohe, including the matters described in subsection (2). (2) The dispute resolution process recorded under subsection (1)(c)(vi) must—

(a) set out the extent to which the outcome of a dispute resolution process may constitute an agreement—

(i) to alter or terminate a Mana Whakahono a Rohe (see subsection (5)):

Page 118 of 274 (ii) to conclude a Mana Whakahono a Rohe at a time other than that specified in section 58P:

(iii) to complete a Mana Whakahono a Rohe at a later date (see section 58S(2)):

(iv) jointly to review the effectiveness of a Mana Whakahono a Rohe at a later date (see section 58S(3)):

(v) to undertake any additional reporting (see section 58S(5)); and

(b) require each of the participating authorities to bear its own costs for any dispute resolution process undertaken. (3) The dispute resolution process must not require a local authority to suspend commencing, continuing, or completing any process under the Act while the dispute resolution process is in contemplation or is in progress. (4) A Mana Whakahono a Rohe may also specify—

(a) how a local authority is to consult or notify an iwi authority on resource consent matters, where the Act provides for consultation or notification:

(b) the circumstances in which an iwi authority may be given limited notification as an affected party:

(d) if there are 2 or more iwi authorities participating in a Mana Whakahono a Rohe, how those iwi authorities will work collectively together to participate with local authorities:

(e) whether a participating iwi authority has delegated to a person or group of persons (including hapū) a role to participate in particular processes under this Act. (5) Unless the participating authorities agree,—

(a) the contents of a Mana Whakahono a Rohe must not be altered; and

(b) a Mana Whakahono a Rohe must not be terminated. (6) If 2 or more iwi authorities collectively have entered into a Mana Whakahono a Rohe with a local authority, any 1 of the iwi authorities, if seeking to amend the contents of the Mana Whakahono a Rohe, must negotiate with the local authority for that purpose rather than seek to enter into a new Mana Whakahono a Rohe. 58R Resolution of disputes that arise in course of negotiating Mana Whakahono a Rohe (1) This section applies if a dispute arises among participating authorities in the course of negotiating a Mana Whakahono a Rohe. (2) The participating authorities—

(a) may by agreement undertake a binding process of dispute resolution; but

(b) if they do not reach agreement on a binding process, must undertake a non-binding process of dispute resolution. (3) Whether the participating authorities choose a binding process or a non-binding process, each authority must—

Page 119 of 274 (a) jointly appoint an arbitrator or a mediator; and

(b) meet its own costs of the process. (4) If the dispute remains unresolved after a non-binding process has been undertaken, the participating authorities may individually or jointly seek the assistance of the Minister. (5) The Minister, with a view to assisting the participating authorities to resolve the dispute and conclude a Mana Whakahono a Rohe, may—

(a) appoint, and meet the costs of, a Crown facilitator:

(b) direct the participating authorities to use a particular alternative dispute resolution process for that purpose. 58S Review and monitoring (1) A local authority that enters into a Mana Whakahono a Rohe under this subpart must review its policies and processes to ensure that they are consistent with the Mana Whakahono a Rohe. (2) The review required by subsection (1) must be completed not later than 6 months after the date of the Mana Whakahono a Rohe, unless a later date is agreed by the participating authorities. (3) Every sixth anniversary after the date of a Mana Whakahono a Rohe, or at any other time by agreement, the participating authorities must jointly review the effectiveness of the Mana Whakahono a Rohe, having regard to the purpose of a Mana Whakahono a Rohe stated in section 58L and the guiding principles set out in section 58M. (4) The obligations under this section are in addition to the obligations of a local authority under—

(a) section 27 (the provision of information to the Minister):

(b) section 35 (monitoring and record keeping). (5) Any additional reporting may be undertaken by agreement of the participating authorities. 58T Relationship with iwi participation legislation A Mana Whakahono a Rohe does not limit any relevant provision of any iwi participation legislation or any agreement under that legislation.

Page 120 of 274

APPENDIX 2

Iwi and Hapu in the region May 2017 (1)

Page 121 of 274

Page 122 of 274 Iwi-Māori Information by Māori Constituencies 2016

KŌHI IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀTI AWA Nga Maihi Tu Teao Te Teko Ngāi Taiwhakaea II Taiwhakaea Whakatāne MAUNGA: Pūtauaki Ngāi Tamaoki Ruaihona Te Teko Kaputerangi Ngāi Tamawera Uiraroa Te Teko Ngāi Te Rangihouhiri II Te Rangihouhiri II Whakatane AWA: Rangitāiki Ngāti Awa ki Poneke Te Tumu Herenga Victoria University; Ōhinemataroa Waka Wellington Tarawera Ngāti Awa ki Tamaki Makaurau Mataatua Mangere Ngāti Hāmua Te Mapou Te Mapou NGA MŌTŪ: Whakaari Ngāti Hikakino Puawairua Paroa Moutohorā Ngāti Hokopū – Te Hokowhitu a Tu Ki Te Hokowhitu a Tū Ki Whakatane Motiti Te Rāhui Te Rāhui Rūrima Ngāti Hokopū – Te Whare o Toroa Te Whare o Toroa Whakatāne Ngāti Maumoana Te Hinga o te Ra Mōtītī Iskand TOKA: Te Paepae o Aotea Ngāti Pūkeko Pūkeko Poroporo Ngāti Rangataua Rangataua Pahou Ngāi Tamapare Rewatu Paroa Ngāti Wharepaia Te Hokowhitu Whakatāne Te Kahupake Te Teko Te Pahipoto Kōkōhinau Te Teko Te Patuwai Toroa Whakatāne Te Tāwera Iramoko Matatā Te Warahoe Tokitareke Te Mahoe Te Whānau o Tariao Tapuke Rangimarie Poroporo Tuariki Tuariki Te Teko

Page 123 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀTI MANAWA Moewhare Moewhare Murupara Ngāi Tokowaru Tipapa Murupara MAUNGA: Tawhiuau Ngāti Hui Rangitahi Murupara AWA: Rangitāiki Ngāti Koro Painoaiho Murupara NGĀTI WHARE Ngāti Hāmua ki Te Whaiti Waireporepo Te Whaiti Ngati Kohiwi Waikotikoti Te Whaiti MAUNGA: Tūwatawata Ngāti Mahanga Ngāti Te Au Te Murumurunga Te Whaiti AWA: Whirinaki Ngāti Te Karaha Wheao Ngāti Tuahiwi Ngāti Whare ki Nga Potiki Warahoe ki Te Whaiti Waireporepo Te Whaiti NGĀI TAI Ngāi Tai Tōrere-nui-a-rua Torere Umupuia Auckland MAUNGA: Kapuarangi Rangiahua AWA: Wainui

WHAKATŌHEA Ngāi Tamahaua Ōpape Opape Ngāti Irapuia Opeke Waioeka MAUNGA: Mākeo Ngāti Ngahere Te Rere Ōpōtiki Tarakeha Ngāti Patumoana Waiaua Waiaua Maungarangi Ngāti Ruatakena Omarumutu Omarumutu AWA: Otara Waioeka Waiōtahe Waiaua

Page 124 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION WHAKATŌHEA/TŪHOE Ūpokorehe Roimata Kutarere Kutarere Kutarere MAUNGA: Hiwarau Te Kahikatea Waimana Tirotirowhetu Maromahue Waiōtahe Rongopopoia Opotiki AWA: Te Karaka Kutarere Waiōtahe

TE WHĀNAU A APANUI Te Whānau a Haraawaka Tunapahore Hāwai Te Whānau a Hikarukutai Maraenui Maraenui MAUNGA: Whanokao Te Whānau a Kahurautao Pāhāoa Te Kaha Tikirau Te Whānau a Kaiaio Maungaroa Te Kaha Kakanui Te Whānau a Kauaetangohia Kauaetangohia Whangaparaoa Cape Runaway AWA: Mōtū Te Whānau a Maruhaeremuri Wairūrū Raukōkore Haparapara Te Whānau a Nuku /Ngāti Horowai Ōmaio Ōmaio Kereu Te Whānau a Pararaki Maru-o-Hinemaka Raukōkore Te Whānau a Rutaia/Ngāti Terewai Ōtūwhare Ōmaio Te Whānau a Tapuaeururangi Pōtaka Potaka Te Whānau a Te Ehutu Te Kaha Te Kaha Te Whānau a Toihau/Hinetekahu Waiōrore Waiōrore Te Whānau a Tutawake Whitianga Whitianga Ngāti Horomoana Maraenui Maraenui

Page 125 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀI TŪHOE Tamakaimoana Piripari Waimana MAUNGA: Huiarau Maungapōhatu Tuapou Waimana Matakuhia Ōtekura Ruatāhuna Maunga-Taniwha Maungapōhatu Ruatāhuna Manawaru Kākahu Tāpiki Tipapa Ruatāhuna Panekiri Otekura Ruatāhuna Parekohe Ngāi Te Paena Uwhiare Ruatāhuna Taiarahia Ngāi Te Riu Tātāhoata Ruatāhuna Tapanaua Ngāti Kuri Kino Te Waiiti Te Waiiti Tawhiuau Ngāti Manunui Te Umuroa Ruatāhuna Te Kaokaoroa o Taiarahia Ngāti Rongo Paneteuru Te Tahu o Haokitaha Ōwhakatoro Ruatoki Te Ika-Whenua-a-Tamatea Tauarau Ohaua Ruatāhuna Tamakaimoana Ōtekura Ruatāhuna AWA: Ōhinemataroa Tauranga/Waimana Ngāti Tāwhaki Ngahina Ruatoki Hopuruahine Oputao Ruatāhuna Papueru Ruatāhuna Moana: Waikaremoana Ngaputahi Te Urewera Te Totara Ruatoki Mataatua I Ruatāhuna Ngāti Hāmua Waikirikiri Rūātoki Waikotikoti Te Whaiti Ngāti Mura Te Putere Raupunga Ngāti Koura Ōtenuku Rūātoki Papakāinga Rūātoki

Page 126 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION Ngai Tūhoe continued Ngāti Rongo Ōwhakatoro (Te Mauku) Tawera Paneteure (Kaiti) Rūātoki Tauarau Rūātoki Ngāti Tāwhaki Ngāhina Rūātoki Te Māhurehure Rewarewa Rūātoki Te Whanau Pani Ohotū Rūātoki Waimako Tuai Te Urewera Te Tōtara Rūātoki Ngāti Wharepakau/Ngāti Kohiwi Waikotikoti Te Whaiti Te Karaha Waikotikoti Minginui Warahoe ki Te Whaiti Waikotikoti Minginui Ngāti Hinekura Te Kūha Tārewa Tuai Nga Maihi Tawhana Waimana Ngāi Tamatea Ōmuriwaka Ōmuriwaka Ngāi Tamatuhirae Matahī Waimana Ōmuriwaka Waimana Whakarae Waimana Ngāi Tātua Piripari Waimana Ngāti Raka Tataiahape Waimana Ngāti Rere Rahiri Waimana Tanatana Waimana Te Whakatāne Whakarae Waimana Tauanui Waimana Te Kahikatea Waiotahe Ngāi Tūranga Pikitoi Te Pou ā Hīnau Waimana Te Kahikatea Waiōtahe Tamakaimoana Piripai Nukuhou Tuapō Waimana Ngāti Haka/Patuheuheu Waiohau Waiohau Taraparaoa Te Putere Raupunga Ngāti Ruapani ki Waikaremoana Ngāti Huri

Page 127 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION Ngai Tūhoe continued Ngāi Tamaruarangi Raroa Waimana Kāingaroa Te Huingawaka Kaingaroa Ngāi Tūhoe ki Rotorua Mataatua II Rotorua Ngāi Tūhoe ki Tamaki Te Tira Hou Auckland Tūhoe Potiki Te Hinota Ohope Ngāti Mare Waikotikoti Te Whaiti Nga-tau-e-maha Tawhana Tawhana NGĀTI TŪWHARETOA (BAY Ngāi Tamarangi Tohia o te Rangi Kawerau Hahuru Poutomuri OF PLENTY) Ōniao Matatā Ngāti Iramoko Umutahi Matatā MAUNGA: Pūtauaki Nati Irawharo Hahuru Onepū Ngāti Manuwhare Ōniao Matatā AWA: Tarawera Ngāti Peehi Hahuru Onepū Te Takanga i o Apa Ngāti Poutomuri Hahuru Onepū Ngāti Umutahi Hahuru Onepū Umutahi Matatā Ōniao Matatā Te Aotahi Hahuru Onepū Te Tawera Iramoko Matatā Ngāti Kai Kino Ōniao Matatā NGĀTI RANGITIHI Ngāti Mahi Rangitihi Matata

MAUNGA: Tarawera (Mount) Ngāti Rangitihi Rangitihi Matata Ngāti Tionga Rangitihi Matata AWA: Tarawera (River)

MOANA: Tarawera (Lake) NGĀTI POROU There are no Marae in close proximity to the

BOPRC region.

Page 128 of 274 ŌKUREI IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀTI PIKIAO Ngāti Hinekura Hinekura Rotoiti

Tokerau Tokerau MAUNGA: Matawhaura Pounamunui Otaramarae Ngāti Hinerangi Taheke Ōkere Falls AWA: Kaituna/Ōkere river Ngāti Hinekiri Taheke Ōkere Falls Ngāti Kahumatamomoe Waiatuhi Mourea MOANAL Rotoiti Ngāti Kawiti Tapuaeharuru Rotoiti Rotoehu Ngāti Paruaharanui Taupari Mourea Rotomā Waiatuhi Mourea Ōkataina Ngāti Pikiao Te Awhe Maketū Ngāti Tamateatutahi Tapuaeharuru Rotoiti Ngāti Rangiunuora Punawhakareia Rotoiti Taurua Rotoiti Ngāti Te Takinga Te Takinga Mourea Waiatuhi Mourea Patuwai Pukehina Pukehina Te Awhe Maketū Ngāti Rongomai Tapuaekura Rotoiti Ruato Rotoiti Ngāti Tukiterangi Ruato Rotoiti

Page 129 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀTI RANGITEAORERE Ngāti Rangiteaorere Mataikotare Te Ngae

MAUNGA: Rangitoto Whakapoungakau

AWA: Waiohewa Stream

MOANA: Rotokawau Rotorua TE URE O UENUKUKŌPAKO Ngāti Te Kanawa Ruamatā Rotokawa Ngāti Te Ngākau Tarukenga Mamaku / NGĀTI WHAKAUE Ngāti Tura Parawai Ngongotahā Ngararanui Waitetī Ngongotahā MAUNGA: Pukepoto Ngāti Hauora Pikirangi Rotokawa Rangitoto

AWA: Waiohewa Stream

MOANA: Rotokawa Rotorua TŪHOURANGI Ngāti Hurunga Te Rangi Apumoana Lynmore Hurunga o te Rangi Ngāpuna MAUNGA: Tarawera Ngāti Hinemihi Hinemihi Ngāpuna Ngāti Kahu Upoko Hurunga o te Rangi Ngāpuna AWA: Puarenga Ngāti Kahupoko Apumoana Lynmore Ngāti Puta Te Pākira Whakarewarewa MOANA: Tarawera Ngāti Taeotu Apumoana Lynmore Ngāti Taoi Te Pākira Whakarewarewa Ngāti Tumatawera Apumoana Lynmore Ngāti Tuohonoa Hinemihi Ngāpuna Ngāti Uruhina Te Pākira Whakarewarewa Ngāti Wahiao Te Pākira Whakarewarewa Tūhourangi Tūhourangi Rangiuru

Page 130 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀTI TARĀWHAI Ngati Hinemihi Hinemihi Ngapuna Ngāti Rangitakaroro Tarawhai Rotoiti MAUNGA: Matawhaura

MOANA: Ōkataina Rotoiti NGĀTI WHAKAUE Ngāti Hurunga Te Rangi Hurunga o te Rangi Ngāpuna Ngāti Karenga Tumahaurangi Koutu Ngāti Pukaki Waikuta Ngongotahā MAUNGA: Ngongotahā Te Papaiouru Ōhinemutu Pukeroa Ngāraranui Waitetī (Weriweri) Ngongotahā Oruawhata Ngāti Taeotu Te Papaiouru Ōhinemutu Ngāti Te Rangiwaho Te Papaiouru Ōhinemutu AWA: Utuhina Stream Ngāti Te Roro o te Rangi Pikirangi Rotokawa Ōwhata Ōwhata MOANA: Lake Rotorua Te Kuirau Ōhinemutu

Ngāti Tūnohopū Tūnohopū Ōhinemutu Ngāti Whakaue Te Papaiouru Ōhinemutu Ngāti Kea Tārewa Rotorua Ngāti Korouateka Ōwhata Ōwhata Ngāti Rangitunaeke Waikuta Ngongotahā Ngāti Rautao Te Awawherowhero Ngongotahā Ngāti Taharangi Tārewa Rotorua Ngāti Te Ngākau Tārukenga Ngongotahā Ngāti Tuarā Tārewa Rotorua Ngāti Tura Tārukenga Ngongotahā Ngāti Tuteaiti Parawai Ngongotahā Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū Whakaue Maketū Te Whatumairangi Parawai Ngongotaha

Page 131 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀTI TAHU/NGĀTI Ngāti Mataarae Mangahoanga Reporoa WHAOA Ngāti Rahurahu Waimahana Reporoa Ngāti Tahu Ohaki Reporoa

MAUNGA: Kakaramea Mangahoanga Reporoa Paeroa Range Te Toke Reporoa Waimahana Reporoa AWA: Waikato River Ngāti Te Rama Te Toke Reporoa Ngāti Whaoa Mangahoanga Reporoa Te Toke Reporoa NGĀTI KEAROA/NGĀTI Ngāti Kearoa Kearoa Horohoro TUARA Rongomaipapa Horohoro Tarewa Rotorua

MAUNGA: Horohoro Ngāti Tuara Kearoa Horohoro Rongomaipapa Horohoro AWA: Waikato River Pokaitu Stream Tarewa Rotorua Te Wai o Kererua Stream Kopaki Stream Patiki Stream NGĀTI RONGOMAI Ngāti Rongomai Ruato Rotoiti

MAUNGA: Matawhaura Tapuaekura a Hatupatu Rotoiti

Te Waiiti Rotoiti MOANA: Rotoehu Waiatuhi Mourea Rotoiti

Page 132 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀTI RANGIWEWEHI Ngāti Kereru Tarimano Awahou Ngāti Ngata Tarimano Awahou Ngāti Te Purei Tarimano Awahou MAUNGA: Ngongotahā Ngāti Rehu Tarimano Awahou AWA / MOANA: Lake Rotorua Ngāti Tāwhaki Tarimano Awahou Te Awahou River Ngāti Whakakeu Tarimano Awahou Hanumarama Stream Ngāti Whakaokorau Tarimano Awahou Taniwha Springs Ngāti Kereru Tarimano Awahou Ngāti Rangiwewehi Ki Tai Haraki Te Puke Ngāti Rangiwewehi Ki Uta Tawakeheimoa Awahou RAUKAWA

TUWHARETOA (Taupō)

NGĀTI HINEURU There are no Marae in close proximity to the

BOPRC region. MAUNGA: Titiokura

AWA: Mohaka

Page 133 of 274

MAUĀO IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION WAITAHA Haraki Haraki Te Puke Hei Haraki Te Puke MAUNGA: Pāpāmoa Hills Manoeka Te Puke Ōtānewainuku Ōtawa Puwhenua

AWA: Kaituna

NGĀTI WHAKAUE KI Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū Whakaue Kaipapa Maketū MAKETŪ

MAUNGA: Pukemaire

AWA: Kaituna

NGĀTI MĀKINO Ngāti Mākino Ōtamarākau Otamarakau Pukehina Pukehina MAUNGA: Matawhaura Te Awhe Maketu Ngāti Te Awhe Ōtamarākau Otamarakau AWA: Rotoehu Te Awhe Maketu

Page 134 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION TAPUIKA Ngāti Kuri Te Matai Rangiuru Ngāti Marukukere Te Paamu Rangiuru MAUNGA Ngāti Moko Waitangi Waitangi Moko Te Puke AWA: Kaituna Ngāti Tuheke Makahae Te Puke Tawakepito Te Puke Ngāti Tauna Ngāti Te Kanawaihi Ngāti Ruangutu Ngāti Ngakohua Ngāti Totokau Ngāti Tukohuru Ngāti More Ngāti Marupuriri Ngāti Huaki Ngāti Tuheke Ngāti Taraokino Ngāti Te Kiri Ngāti Te Uarangi Ngāti Wahapua Ngāti Tu Ngāti Pahiko Ngāti Haungarangi Ngāti Tauraherehere Ngāti Ngarangipahi Ngāti Tukaheke Ngāti Hinerangi Ngāti Hineumu Ngāti Ngaroto Ngāti Te Pipi Ngāti Hinerua Ngāti Rangitihi Ngāti Tionga

Page 135 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀTI PUKENGA Ngāti Pūkenga Te Whetū o te Rangi Tauranga Manaia Tauranga MAUNGA: Mauāo Ngāti Hinemotu Kopukairoa Ngāti Kiorekino Hauturu Ngāti Kohokino Ngāti Te Matau AWA: Waitao Ngāti Te Rakau Ngāti Towhare Ngāti Whakina Te Tawera NGĀTI RANGINUI Ngāi Tamarawaho Huria Judea Ngāi Te Ahi Hairini Hairini Ngāti Hangarau Hangarau Bethlehem MAUNGA: Mauāo Ngāti Kahu Wairoa Bethlehem Ōtānewainuku Ngāti Pango Puwhenua Ngāti Rangi Maungatutu Ngāti Ruahine Waimapu Hairini Hikurangi-Katikati Ngāti Taka Tetereinga Te Puna Puwhanake Ngāti Te Wae Tuapiro Katikati AWA: Wairoa River Pirirakau Tutereinga Te Puna Waipapa River Poututerangi Te Puna Tawhitinui Ōmokoroa MOANA: Tauranga Harbour Paparoa Te Puna

Page 136 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀI TE RANGI Ngā Pōtiki Mangatawa Mangatawa Ngāpeke Welcome Bay Tahuwhakatiki Welcome Bay MAUNGA: Mauāo Ngāi Tamawhariua Te Rangihouhiri Matakana Island Pāpāmoa Hills Te Rereatukahia Katikati Ōtawa Ngāi Tūkairangi Hungahungatoroa Matapihi Kopukairo Whareroa Mt Maunganui Te Kura a Maia Ngāi Tuwhiwhia Opureora Matakana Island Mangatawa Ngāti He Te Kokakonui Oropi AWA: Wairoa River Maungatapu Maungatapu Ngāti Kahu Mangatawa Mangatawa MOANA: Tauranga harbour Ngāti Kuku Whareroa Mt Maunganui Ngāti Tapu Waikari Matapihi MŌTŪ: Matakana Ngāti Tauaiti Opureora Matakana Island Motiti Kutaroa Matakana Island Tūhua Te Ngare Rangiwāea Rangiwāea Island Karewa Opounui Rangiwāea Island Ngāi Tauwhao Rangiwāea Rangiwāea Island Opounui Rangiwāea Island Ōtāwhiwhi Katikati Te Rangihouhiri Ngāti Tahuora Mangatawa Mangatawa Ngāi Mateika Mangatawa Mangatawa

Page 137 of 274 IWI HAPŪ MARAE LOCATION NGĀTI HINERANGI Ngāti Kura Te Ōhākī Okauia Ngāti Rangi Hinerangi Tāwhaki Okauia Tamapango Okauia MAUNGA Ngāti Tamapango Hinerangi Tāwhaki Okauia Tamapango Okauia AWA Ngāti Tāwhaki Hinerangi Tāwhaki Okauia

Tamapango Okauia Ngāti Te Riha Te Ōhākī Okauia Ngāti Tokotoko Te Ōhākī Okauia Ngāti Whakamaungarangi Te Ōhākī Okauia Uri o Tangata Hinerangi Tāwhaki Okauia NGĀTI WHAKAHEMO Ngāti Whakahemo Pukehina Pukehina Te Awhe o te Rangi Maketū MAUNGA

AWA: Pongakawa Stream PARE HAURAKI

MAUNGA

AWA

Page 138 of 274

Page 139 of 274

Page 140 of 274

Receives Only – No Decisions

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Nassah Steed, Acting Regional Integrated Planning Manager

Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act applications in the Bay of Plenty region

Executive Summary

This report provides an overview of applications made under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 in the Bay of Plenty region. To date, Council has received notice of 24 applications. Many of these overlap and cover extensive areas of the region’s coastal waters. Based on progress to date, it is unlikely that decisions on applications will be received for at least another 2-3 years.

Areas subject to multiple applications are:

 Te Whānau a Apanui rohe (west of Tōrere to Pōtikirua (Lottin Point))  Whakaari (White Island)  Whakatōhea rohe (Ōhope to Ōpape)  Rūrima Islands  Maketū/Waihī Estuary area and adjoining coastal waters  Motiti and surrounding reefs, islands  Tūhua  Te Awanui Tauranga Harbour  Waihī Beach to Pāpāmoa and adjoining coastal waters

There is also an application made by the New Zealand Māori Council that covers the entire New Zealand coastline. Based on current knowledge, the only stretches of coastline not covered by an area specific application are Tōrere, Whakatāne/Coastlands and the area between Otamarakau and Pukehina.

Anyone applying for resource consent in an area covered by a customary marine title application has to notify and seek the views of the applicant group(s).

If customary rights applications are granted in our region there are statutory responsibilities for Council in terms of compliance monitoring, record keeping, consent processing and planning processes. The resource implications at not known at this stage.

Page 141 of 274 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act applications in the Bay of Plenty region

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act applications in the Bay of Plenty region;

1 Introduction

The Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 (“the Act”) sets out a legal framework for recognising customary interests in the marine and coastal area. The Act applies to harbours, estuaries and coastal waters in the territorial sea.

Applicants can either lodge an application with the High Court or seek to engage directly with the Crown (via the Office of Treaty Settlements (“OTS”)). This report contains brief details of all applications known to be received by the High Court and OTS as of 8 May 2017.

The deadline for lodging applications was 3 April 2017; however OTS is still processing applications and it is likely that we have not yet been served copies of all applications made to the High Court. Accordingly, more applications may be received.

2 Background

The Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 replaced the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004. Applications made to the Māori Land Court under the former legislation were transferred to the High Court for consideration.

Under the current legislation, iwi, hapū or whānau can apply for:

 Customary Marine Title (CMT) and/or

 Protected Customary Rights (PCR).

2.1 What is Customary Marine Title?

Customary Marine Title gives a group rights that are similar to a freehold landowner; however, a CMT can’t be sold and the Act requires that free public access, fishing and other recreational activities are allowed to continue.

To be eligible for CMT a group has to demonstrate that they:

 Hold the specified area in accordance with tikanga; and

 Have exclusively used and occupied the area from 1840 to the present day without substantial interruption.

2.2 What are Protected Customary Rights?

Protected Customary Rights are activities, uses and practices that have been undertaken since 1840 in a particular part of the coastal marine area in accordance with tikanga. Some examples of customary rights included in applications are tauranga waka (waka landing sites), gathering kaimoana, fishing, aquaculture, exercising

2 Page 142 of 274 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act applications in the Bay of Plenty region

kaitiakitanga (for example by way of rāhui) and extraction of fossils, sand, rock and other natural materials.

3 Applications in the Bay of Plenty region

Twenty-four applications are known to have been received in the Bay of Plenty region – seven seek direct engagement with the Crown and 17 are applications to the High Court. This number may increase once the Crown and High Court have finished processing all applications received. Appendix 1 includes a table of all known applications and these are shown in a map in Appendix 2.

Staff are also aware of an additional application made by Maanu Paul on behalf of the New Zealand Maori Council that applies to the entire coastline and territorial waters of New Zealand. Council has not been served with a copy of this application to date.

A number of the applications overlap, which means it will be difficult for any individual applicant group to demonstrate exclusive use and occupation of an area unless an agreement can be reached between the relevant parties.

Areas subject to multiple applications are:

 Te Whānau a Apanui rohe (west of Tōrere to Pōtikirua (Lottin Point))

 Whakaari (White Island)

 Whakatōhea rohe (Ōhope to Ōpape)

 Rūrima Islands

 Maketū/Waihī Estuary area and adjoining coastal waters

 Motiti and surrounding reefs, islands

 Tūhua

 Tauranga Harbour

 Waihī Beach to Pāpāmoa and adjoining coastal waters

Based on current knowledge, the only stretches of coastline not covered by an area- specific application are Tōrere, Whakatāne/Coastlands and between Otamarakau and Pukehina. However, the all-encompassing application made by the New Zealand Māori Council will capture these places.

3.1 Process and likely timeframes

3.1.1 Direct engagement with the Crown (Office of Treaty Settlements)

A flow chart of the process followed by the Crown is attached at Appendix 3. To date, the Crown has not reached an agreement with any applicant group in the region.

Office of Treaty Settlements staff have previously advised it will take 2-3 years to process an application once the Minister has decided to engage. To date the Crown has declined to engage on overlapping applications for customary marine title. Therefore the majority of applications in our region are likely to end up being

3 Page 143 of 274 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act applications in the Bay of Plenty region

determined by the High Court, although a group may be able to reach agreement with the Crown with regard to protected customary rights.

3.1.2 High Court process

To date the High Court process has moved at a slow pace.

One hundred and fifty applications were lodged with the Court as the 3 April deadline approached. The Attorney General is currently grouping these to allow applications that overlap to be considered together. It seems unlikely that substantial progress will be made on resolving these matters in the near future.

Expectations from government ministers (Prime Minister Bill English and Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson) are that only a small number of claims will be granted; however, this is yet to be tested through the legal process. 4 Regional Council Obligations for Protected Customary Rights and Customary Marine Title areas

Regional Council has a variety of duties and responsibilities under the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011 and Resource Management Act 1991 that relate to protected customary rights and customary marine title areas. The potential implications of these duties and responsibilities vary – some requirements are largely business as usual (such as duties related to record keeping and consent processing); others may be more significant, particularly those obligations relating to planning.

To date, only one application has been granted in New Zealand for a small area to the south west of Rakiura (Stewart Island), so the full implications are untested.

The only obligation which takes force before an application is granted is the requirement for resource consent applicants to notify and ‘seek the views’ of CMT applicants before lodging a consent application (s62 MACAA). Consents staff review applications to ensure this step has been undertaken.

If customary interests are formally recognised under the Act then Council obligations include:

4.1 Monitoring and compliance requirements

Regional Councils are required to:

 Monitor the exercise of protected customary rights, and compliance with any controls applied by the Minister of Conservation (s35(2)(e) RMA); and

 Take action to encourage public compliance with wāhi tapu conditions (s78-81 MACAA).

Comment: There does not appear to be any ability to recover the cost of this monitoring as protected customary rights can be exercised without resource consent. Costs associated with monitoring will vary depending on the location of activities and the type of controls (if any) imposed by the Minister. If protected customary rights are granted in the Bay of Plenty region, Council will need to consider what monitoring should be undertaken, how monitoring should be funded and how findings will be communicated with tāngata whenua and the community.

4 Page 144 of 274 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act applications in the Bay of Plenty region

The Office of Treaty Settlements has drafted regulations regarding wāhi tapu. These are expected to be gazetted in the near future, and will hopefully clarify expectations regarding Council’s role in “encouraging public compliance”.

4.2 Record-keeping duties

Regional Councils are required to keep records of every protected customary rights order in the region (s35(5)(jb) RMA).

Comment: This aligns with the existing duty to keep records of planning documents recognised by iwi and hapū.

4.3 Protection of customary rights via consenting

 Notice of applications must be given to affected protected customary rights groups or affected customary marine title groups (s95B, s95F, s95G RMA).

Comment: This will become part of business as usual for the Consents team.

 Cannot grant resource consents for activities (included controlled activities) that will have a more than minor adverse effect on the exercise of a protected customary right unless written approval is received or the application is for existing accommodated infrastructure (s55 MACAA and s104(3)(c) RMA).

Comment: This will become part of business as usual for the Consents team, but is likely to require additional expertise to assess whether effects on customary rights are more than minor.

 RMA permission right: CMT holders can grant or decline permission for an activity requiring a resource consent within the CMT area (s66 MACAA). Some existing activities and new infrastructure is exempt.

Comment: Consent applicants are required to request permission from CMT holders; however a process will need to be established for tracking whether permission has been received and a resource consent can commence.

4.4 Regional Planning

CMT holders can create a planning document which the Regional Council must take account in its decision-making. The planning document can identify issues and set out objectives and policies relevant to regulation and management of the area. Council planning documents must be reviewed to ensure that they recognise and provide for the CMT planning document. Until this occurs the planning document must be attached to the relevant Council plans and be given appropriate consideration during consenting.

Comment: This is potentially the most significant requirement for Council as it requires a review of the Regional Policy Statement, Regional Coastal Environment Plan and Regional Air Plan to determine whether changes are required to recognise and provide for the CMT planning document. Any changes required must go through the RMA Schedule 1 process.

5 Page 145 of 274 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act applications in the Bay of Plenty region

4.5 Assessment of Environment Effects Preparation

If a recognition order is made by the Court, the Minister of Conservation can direct the Regional Council to carry out an adverse effects assessment (Schedule 1 MACAA). That assessment will inform the Minister’s decision on whether and what controls should be imposed.

Comment: The resources required to undertake such an assessment will vary depending on the nature of customary activities included in the recognition order. It is not clear whether there is any ability to seek funding from central government to assist with carrying out such an assessment, if requested.

4.6 Summary

It is very difficult to determine the potential impact on Council workstreams until decisions are made by the High Court and Crown on the various applications made under the Act to recognise customary interests in the coastal marine area. Council has been lodging notices of interest in the High Court applications in order to keep abreast of developments and future requirements within the region. Council is maintaining a “watching brief” in these proceedings rather than being an active participant.

5 Implications for Māori

The process will be resource demanding and expensive for applicant groups. There will be tensions between applicant groups with overlapping application areas, similar to those experienced during Treaty of Waitangi/Tiriti o Waitangi historical claim processes. The applications in the Bay of Plenty region apply to extensive and overlapping areas. The onus of demonstrating whether an applicant holds the specified area in accordance with tikanga and exclusively used and occupied the area from 1840 to the present day without substantial interruption is high; particularly considering only one application to date has been successful and this applies to a small area of coast at Rakiura (Stewart Island).

If customary rights are recognised under the Act, the implications will be positive for the successful claimant groups, particularly in terms of their mana, rangatiratanga and kaitiakitanga. Many of the requirements applying to successful claimant groups are similar to those that already exist within the RMA (e.g. record keeping and taking into account customary rights in consenting processes). However, if customary marine title is granted, iwi and hapū will have the ability to significantly influence the regional planning framework and veto consent applications that would otherwise have been granted under the RMA.

In the interim, the requirement to undertake pre-lodgement consultation will be of particular importance to applicant groups. However, this requirement does not extend to oil and gas exploration permits issued by New Zealand Petroleum and Minerals under the Crown Minerals Act. This remains a significant issue for most Māori. 6 Council’s Accountability Framework

6.1 Community Outcomes

6 Page 146 of 274 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act applications in the Bay of Plenty region

This legislation potentially impacts the Regional Collaboration and Leadership Community Outcome in the council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025, as it may result in changes to regional planning documents.

6.2 Long Term Plan Alignment

Work associated with responding to this legislation is undertaken under the Regional Planning, Resource Consents and Māori policy activities in the Long Term Plan 2015- 2025.

Current Budget Implications

Work related to the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011 is being undertaken within the current budget for the Regional Planning and Māori Policy activities in the Annual Plan 2016/17.

Future Budget Implications

Depending on the nature of customary recognitions granted under the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, additional funding may be required that is outside the Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025. The resource implications are not likely to become clear for another 2-3 years as applications progress through the High Court and Crown engagement processes.

Jo Noble Senior Planner (RIN) for Acting Regional Integrated Planning Manager

10 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

7 Page 147 of 274

Page 148 of 274

APPENDIX 1

Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act Applications in the Bay of Plenty region - 8 May 2017

Page 149 of 274

Page 150 of 274 Applications made under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act in the Bay of Plenty region

This document contains brief details of all applications known to be received under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 as of 8 May 2017.

Crown engagement pathway Applicant What is sought Area(s) Notes

Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū Customary marine title and Between Te Tumu in the west and Waihi Also a similar application made by protected customary rights Estuary at Maketū in the east along the line Ngāti Whakaue to the High Court of mean high-water springs and extending out generally to the outer limits of the territorial sea. This area encompasses traditional fishing grounds of the Hapū located at Taumaihi, Motunau, Motuhaku and Otaiti Reef.

Ngā Potiki Protected customary rights a) Rangataua Bay and Estuary Also a corresponding application made to the High Court (transferred b) Along the Pāpāmoa coast between from the Foreshore and Seabed Omanu and Te Tumu legislation).

c) Surrounding and beyond the outer Crown declined to engage in relation islands to CMT.

Ngāi Te Rangi Settlement Trust Customary marine title and Tauranga Harbour and all Takutai Moana Also a corresponding application protected customary rights adjoining the area from Waihī Beach made to the High Court. (Waiororo Stream) to Wairakei Stream - includes Motiti and Tūhua.

Three Ngati Awa hapū: Te Tawera, Customary marine title and All common marine and coastal area from Concerns raised by Rūrima Island Ngati Hikakino and Ngai Te protected customary rights Waitahanui Stream (north of Matata) up to trustees and Ngai Taiwhakaea (a Rangihouhiri and including the inlet to the east of the Ngati Awa hapū) regarding Rangitaiki River. The application area overlapping interest. includes the Tarawera River and inlets and the seaward boundary is 22km offshore.

Insley Whānau – Christopher Customary marine title and From Waiōrore stream in the north, then Also an overarching Te Whānau a

Page 151 of 274 Applicant What is sought Area(s) Notes

Karamea Insley protected customary rights south to the river mouth of the Motu river, Apanui application made to the High out to and inclusive of Whakāri (White Court. Island), then back towards the coast of Te Kaha to include Hapuku and Snapper fishing grounds then back to Waiōrore stream mouth.

Michael Insley Whanau Customary marine title and From Waiōrore stream in the north, then Also an overarching Te Whānau a protected customary rights south to the Hawaii River mouth, out to and Apanui application made to the High inclusive of Whakaari (White Island) and out Court. towards the coastline of Te Kaha to include Hapuka and Snapper fishing grounds and then back to Waiōrore stream mouth

Te Whānau a Apanui (Edward Customary marine title and Line north from Puketapu Point to the point Also an overarching Te Whānau a Howell) protected customary rights where it intersects with a line that runs west Apanui application made to the High from just inside Ohae Point. Court.

Page 152 of 274 High Court pathway All High Court applications are for Customary Marine Title and Protected Customary Rights.

Applicant Area Status Interested parties

Te Runanganui o Ngāti Porou Mainly in the Gisborne region, but Lodged with High Court March 2017. TBA Trustee Limited possibly a small overlap into our region at Pōtikirua [Lottin Point]

Te Whānau ā Apanui and Te No clear map available – assumed Application originally made under the TBA Whānau a Rongomai to be all of the takutai moana Foreshore & Seabed Act 2004. associated with the land-based part of the rohe (between Pōtikirua Has not been publicly notified as a [Lottin Point] and Te Taumata o Marine and Coastal Area Act application. Apanui [west of Tōrere]).

The rohe of Te Whānau a Apanui New application made on 3 April 2017. TBA from Te Taumata o Apanui to Pōtikirua – all territorial sea. Applicant has filed Memorandum of Includes Whakaari. Counsel seeking to adjourn High Court proceedings while group engages in direct negotiations with the Crown.

Overlaps with applications made by the Insley whanau and Edward Howell.

Te Whānau a Te Harawaka (Bella Between Hāwai river and Mōtū Lodged with High Court April 2017. TBA Arapera Savage and Waipere River and all associated territorial Perese) sea

Te Whakatōhea (Adriana All of the takutai moana within the Next case management conference Attorney General Edwards) tribal rohe of Whakatōhea - from at deferred until after Easter 2017. BOPRC least Te Horo (between Ohope and Whakatane) in the west; to Te Rangi Publicly notified in June 2015. ODC (between Opape and Torere) WDC towards the east; and through at Application originally made under the least to the Motu Awa at its most Foreshore & Seabed Act 2004. Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Awa eastern extremity, and extending out

Page 153 of 274 Applicant Area Status Interested parties

to a distance of 12 nautical miles. Council of Outdoor Recreation NZ Rock Lobster Association Te Whānau a Apanui Ngāti Patumoana – John Hata Between Maraetōtara Stream and Lodged with High Court April 2017. TBA Ngawaikui Stream, including Ōhiwa (hapū of Whakatōhea) Harbour. Includes all the territorial Overlaps with Whakatōhea and Ngāti Ira sea in this area. applications.

Ngā hapū o Ngāti Ira o Waioweka Between Maraetōtara to Tarakeha Lodged with High Court April 2017. TBA Rohe at Ōpape (yet to be mapped). Publicly notified 27 April 2017.

Overlaps with Whakatōhea and Ngāti Patumoana applications.

Ngāti Awa and Rūrima Island One nautical mile around the Lodged with High Court April 2017. TBA Māori Reservation Rūrima Islands (Tokata, Rūrima and Moutoki Islands) The Ngāti Awa hapū application to engage with the Crown also encompasses the Rūrima Islands

Ngāti Tara Tokanui Trust Tūhua (Mayor Island) and takutai Lodged with High Court on 31 March TBA moana adjoining/near Aongatete 2017. River, Bowentown, Waihī Beach, Orokawa – includes part of Tauranga Harbour.

Ngā Hapū o Te Moutere o Motiti An area including Motiti Island and To be progressed with Ngāti Whakaue BOPRC [Motiti Rohe Moana Trust] the surrounding marine and coastal and Ngā Potiki High Court applications. Attorney general area. Amended application filed on 30 Te Whanau a Tauwhao ki Nga November 2016. Moutere Trust Public notification 10 Dec 2016. Te Rūnanga o Ngati Whakaue ki Maketū On hold pending public notification of

Page 154 of 274 Applicant Area Status Interested parties

overlapping applications. Ngāti Whakahemo

Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Awa Te Patuwai Tribal Committee Eunice Evans Adrienne Joy Paul Don Wills Edward Matehaere Ngarongaro Wikeepa Peter and Christine Grant Rauahi and Aporina Chapman Whānau Trust Astrolabe Community Trustee Ltd Ngā Potiki a Tamapahore Trust Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Te Rangi Ngai Te Hapū Incorporated Council of Outdoor Recreation Associations of New Zealand Motiti Avocadoes Ltd NZ Rock Lobster Industry Council CRA 2 Rock Lobster Management Ltd Mount Maunganui Environmental Group Ltd

Ngāi Te Hapū Incorporated Around Motiti Island – an area Not publicly notified yet. Likely to be TBA bounded by Otaiti in the north, progressed with the other applications

Page 155 of 274 Applicant Area Status Interested parties

Claiming to be a hapū of Ngāti Motuhaku island in the east, that relate to Motiti. Awa. Motunau island in the south-east and Okaparu reef in the northwest.

Ngāi Te Rangi Settlement Trust Tauranga Harbour and all Takutai Lodged with High Court on 3 April 2017. TBA Moana adjoining the area from Waihī Beach (Waiororo Stream) to Wairakei Stream - includes Motiti and Tūhua.

Ihakara Tangitu Reserve Waikaraka Estuary, Te Puna Lodged with High Court on 30 March TBA 2017

Ngāti Pūkenga Waihī Beach to Little Waihi – all of Lodged with High Court in April 2017 TBA territorial sea (includes Tūhua and Motiti)

Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū Along the coast from Te Tumu to To be progressed with Motiti Rohe BOPRC Pukehina and extends out to the Moana Trust and Ngā Potiki High Court territorial sea boundary, also applications. TCC encompasses Motuhaku Island, Motunau Island and waters to the Amended application filed on 30 Nov WBOPDC east of Motiti Island. 2016. Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Awa Publicly notified and notice served on interested parties. Ngāti Whakahemo Ngā Hapū o te Moutere o Motiti (Motiti Rohe Moana Trust)

Motiti Island Marae Committee

Ngai Te Hapū Incorporated Ngā Potiki a Tamapahore Trust

Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Te Rangi Iwi Trust

Page 156 of 274 Applicant Area Status Interested parties

Ngāi Te Rangi Settlement Trust

Ngāti Mākino Heritage Trust

Ngāti Pikiao Iwi Trust

Te Whānau a Tauwhao ki Ngā Moutere Trust

Astrolabe Community Trust

Carrus Corporation

Ford Land Holdings PTY Ltd

Council of Outdoor Recreation Associations of New Zealand The Rauahi and Aporina Chapman Whānau Trust

Koromatua Hapū of Ngāti Maketū Estuary, Kaituna River Lodged with the High Court on 3 April TBA Whakue of Te Arawa Waka mouth, part of Waihī Estuary and 2017. the takutai moana adjacent to the coast from end of Pukehina Spit to Overlaps Ngāti Whakaue application. Wairakei Stream mouth.

Ngā Potiki (Colin Reeder) Takutai moana off the Pāpāmoa To be progressed with Ngāti Whakaue TBA coast (from Ōmanu to Wairakei) and and Motiti Rohe Moana Trust High Court Rangataua Bay and estuary. applications once notified.

Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo  Pukehina Coast (from Lodged with High Court on 30 March TBA Ōkurei Point) and coastal 2017. waters including Motunau Island.

Page 157 of 274 Applicant Area Status Interested parties

 Waihī and Maketū Overlaps Ngāti Whakaue application. Estuaries.

Page 158 of 274

APPENDIX 2

Map of Marine and Coastal Area Act (Takutai Moana) Applications

Page 159 of 274

Page 160 of 274 Legend Applicant Group Ihakara Tangitu Re se rve Karam e a Insle y W hānau Korom atua Hapū of N gāti W hakue of Te Arawa W aka Mic hae l Insle y W hānau Motiti Rohe Moana Trust N gā Potiki N gā hapū o N gāti Ira o W aiowe ka Rohe N gāi Te Hapū Inc orporate d N gāi Te Rangi Se ttle m e nt Trust N gāti Awa Hapū (Enid Ratahi-Pryor) N gāti Awa and Rūrim a Island Māori Re se rvation N gāti Patum oana – John Hata (hapū of W hakatōhe a) N gāti Porou ki Hauraki (N gāti Porou ki Harataunga ki Mataora) N gāti Pūke nga N gāti Tara Tokanui Trust N gāti W hakaue ki Make tu Te Runanga o N gati W hakahe m o Te Runanganui o N gati Porou Truste e Lim ite d Te W hakatōhe a (Ad riana Ed ward s) Te W hānau a Apanui (Howe ll) Te W hānau a Te Harawaka Te W hānau a Te Harawaka (Be lla Arape ra Savage and W aipe re Pe re se ) Te W hānau ā Apanui and Te W hānau a Rongom ai

Eagle Te c hnology, Land Inform ation N e w Ze aland

Projection and Grid Information HORIZON TAL DATUM: N e w Ze aland Ge od e tic Datum 2000 Marine and Coastal Area - Takutai Moana (MACA) For prac tic al purpose s, N ZGD2000 e quate s to W GS84 VERTICAL DATUM: Moturiki PROJECTION : N e w Ze aland Transve rse Me rc ator 2000 Scale1:1200000 GSP-538560 © Bay of Ple nty Re gional Counc il, 2017 Page 1611 of0 2740 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 © Sourc e d from Land Inform ation N e w Ze aland d ata. She e t 1 of 1 CROW N COPY RIGHT RESERVED Kilom e tre s Printe d 5/05/2017

Page 162 of 274

APPENDIX 3

Process for Crown engagement under the Marine and Coastal Area Act

Page 163 of 274

Page 164 of 274 Process for Crown Engagement under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 (the Act) Pre-Engagement Determination Finalisation

Applicant group make an OTS undertakes OTS and the applicant Parties collect evidence If tests are met, Minister Recognition application for preliminary appraisal of group enter into formal relevant to determining offers to enter into a agreement is customary interests application, if required. engagement. whether the applicant recognition agreement. given legal under s 95 of the Act. group meets the tests effect. under s 51 and s58. Customary Applicant group OTS determines the Includes evidence marine title Applicant group comments on upper funding limit for collected by the Crown, requires an Act decides whether to No Application on or before preliminary appraisal. the applicant group. applicant group and of Parliament 3 April 2017. groups with enter into a and protected overlapping customary No recognition customary Yes OTS briefs the Minister interests. agreement with the rights require on factors relevant to Crown. an order in OTS assesses whether the the decision to engage Minster invites the council. application contains the including groups with applicant group to Yes required information. overlapping customary seek a mandate. Public enquiry process, interests and third seeking submissions. Applicant group Chief Executive party interests. ratifies recognition of LINZ enters If necessary OTS asks the agreement. agreement applicant group to Mandate recognised Crown and the details on provide additional Minister decides No by the Minister and Yes applicant group MACA register. information. whether to formally Minister for Māori exchange assessments engage under s 95(3). Development. Applicant group and of whether the Minister sign the No application meets the Application confirmed. Yes recognition tests in the Act. agreement. OTS and the applicant group An Independent OTS notifies relevant develop terms of Assessor (if appointed) agencies and local engagement. authorities of s62 considers evidence and requirements under the assessments, and Act and uploads the reports to the Minister. Applicant group Terms of engagement application information Note: the Minister responsible for overall to the MoJ website may apply to agreed and signed by Minister and the administration of the Act is the Minister High Court, applicant group. Minister decides for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations resubmit whether tests in the Act are met. Note: applicant groups can make an amended Minister informs application in the High Court and an If tests are not met, Cabinet and the application for Crown Engagement any application or Minister declines to applicant group of time before 3 April 2017. enter into a recognition make a new the decision. application agreement. Application not before 3 April Page 165 of 274 accepted 2017

Page 166 of 274

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Nassah Steed, Acting Manager Regional Integrated Planning

Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document Submission

Executive Summary

Feedback and approval is sought from the Committee on Regional Council’s draft submission to the Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document – attached to this report. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment notified the discussion document in February 2017 and submissions close on Friday 19th May 2017.

The Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document proposes new legislation to create publicly-controlled Urban Development Authorities (UDA’s) to empower national or locally significant urban development projects to access more enabling development powers and land use rules. UDAs would have a number of enabling powers that could be used to streamline and speed up large scale urban development projects.

While generally supportive of the concept some concerns are raised in the submission relating to the lack of recognition and involvement of regional councils, their functions and responsibilities, and associated plans and policy documents.

Staff will give a presentation to provide context and explanation of the draft submission.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document Submission;

2 Provides feedback and direction on the draft submission included as Appendix 1 to this report.

3 Approves the submission to be finalised, in accordance with the Committee’s direction, and lodged with the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment by Friday 19 May 2017.

Page 167 of 274 Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document Submission

1 Purpose

This report seeks the Committee’s direction on and approval of Regional Councils draft submission to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment discussion document on Urban Development Authorities (UDAs).

This draft submission follows on from the presentation by Vanessa Hamm of Hobec to the Council Workshop held on February 28th at Trinity Wharf. That presentation provided a summary of the proposal and outlined a number of considerations for Council. 2 Background

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment is proposing new legislation that would allow nationally or locally significant urban development projects to be built more efficiently than currently allows under the existing regime. In February 2017 a discussion document on Urban Development Authorities was released for comment, and submissions close on 19th May 2017. This is separate to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity.

The intent of the proposal is to improve delivery of urban development projects through the creation of publicly-controlled Urban Development Authorities (UDA’s) with a number of enabling powers. Theses powers could be used to streamline and speed up large scale urban development projects such as the acquisition of land, provision of infrastructure, oversee necessary development overriding district and regional plans, in relation to a specific project. Government would decide which enabling powers could be used for particular projects and not all powers would be granted for every project.

Overall the proposal is designed to streamline urban development at a neighbourhood scale but is not limited to housing and can include commercial and industrial development.

3 Regional Council Submission

3.1 Overview

Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC) is generally supportive of the proposal for UDAs. UDAs could be an effective growth management and development planning tool for progressing urban development in a comprehensive way. Staff have concerns around the lack of recognition of regional councils existing functions and associated plans and policy documents.

Most importantly these concerns are around the ability of the UDAs to override existing regional policy statements and district plans. While we appreciate the importance of the UDA being able to get on with development as intended, we are concerned matters addressed in regional policy statements and regional plans can be swept aside, even though these have been developed over a number of years with community and stakeholder input. We need to ensure that the need for expediency of development does not outweigh the importance of existing planning frameworks.

The current proposal allows the establishment of UDAs without the prior agreement of regional councils. Regional councils have important functions under the Resource Management Act – including the strategic integration of infrastructure with land use and the proposed new function to ensure there is sufficient development capacity in

2 Page 168 of 274 Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document Submission

relation to residential housing and business land to meet the expected long-term demands of the region. We are also responsible for the Regional Policy Statement (RPS) – a key strategic resource management planning document for the region which sets objectives, policies and methods for urban growth and development. In the western Bay of Plenty sub-region, the RPS sets out urban limits to cater for population growth out to 2051. We also have a critical transport role under the Land Transport Management Act 2003 including the responsibility of preparing a regional land transport plan and regional public transport plans as well as the funding and management of public transport services.

3.2 Key Submission points

The document is only at the discussion stage and thus the submission has been kept high level to focus on key matters that need to be addressed before the legislation is drafted and enacted. Key points the draft submission raises are:

 Need for greater recognition and role of Regional Council’s including when establishing UDAs, carrying out consultation during the initial assessment phase, consideration as an affected party

 The test for establishing a UDA should be regionally or nationally significant development projects

 Development plans should recognise Regional Council’s regulatory planning documents (e.g. RPS and regional plans)

 Include environmental features alongside commercial, residential and social features of a project area when reviewing existing context for a project; and

 Relevant regional consents (e.g. water takes) should still apply and be processed by Regional Councils’.

Overall the submission as drafted is consistent with those lodged by our partner agencies and SmartGrowth, but with a stronger emphasis on a collaborative approach and greater role for regional councils.

4 Implications for Māori

The proposal could remove the need to consider the RPS and regional plans which will likely have significant implications for Māori. Regional Council’s statutory plans and policy statement include a raft of provisions that recognise and provide for cultural considerations in resource management decision making processes. Iwi have fought hard during RPS and regional plan change development processes to ensure cultural considerations are supported by a robust policy and regulatory framework. They rely on these provisions to provide for their interests during nationally and locally significant development projects within the region. To then invoke a publicly controlled authority that can ignore these provisions and any regional council consent requirements will be a major concern for Māori.

Water generally, and in particular protecting its mauri, is a significant issue for iwi Māori nationally. Providing for a UDA to potentially make new classes of activities and override regional plan provisions could take away the right for Māori to have a say on water takes or discharges. It could also entail removing protection mechanisms in

3 Page 169 of 274 Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document Submission

district plans for historic heritage by making the destruction of sites of cultural significance permitted activities.

5 Council’s Accountability Framework

5.1 Community Outcomes

This proposal directly contributes to the Regional Collaboration & Leadership Community Outcomes in council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

5.2 Long Term Plan Alignment

Responses to the Urban Development Authorities discussion document are largely able to be met as part of the Regional Planning and Engagement activity work programmes in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Current Budget Implications

This submission is being undertaken within the current budget for the Regional Planning and Engagement Activity in the Annual Plan 2016/2017.

Future Budget Implications

Future work on Urban Development Authorities is not provided for in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Esta Farquhar Planner (Regional Integrated) for Acting Manager Regional Integrated Planning

10 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

4 Page 170 of 274

APPENDIX 1

Final Draft BOPRC submission to Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document 2 May 2017 clear copy

Page 171 of 274

Page 172 of 274 TOI MOANA - BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL’S Submission to the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment – Urban Development Authorities Discussion Paper

Explanation BOPRC Position

Proposals : Framework – Scope 1 The proposed legislation enables central government BOPRC supports the joint approach in which Central Government and Territorial and territorial authorities: local Authorities enable and empower new urban development authorities. BOPRC considers that it is wholly appropriate that this decision is made jointly, (a) to empower nationally or locally significant urban so that while national matters of importance can be addressed through an UDA, development projects to access more enabling local issues where the proposal will be advanced will also be considered. development powers and land use rules; and

(b) to establish new urban development authorities to This should however be extended so that regional councils and territorial local support those projects where required. authorities are able to identify and decide strategic objectives alongside Government, as contained in Proposal 6 (b).

Further, there should be a greater role for regional councils in the establishment of urban development projects and UDAs which is elaborated on below.

7 The choice of development powers must reflect the BOPRC supports this proposal which links a UDA’s development powers strategic objectives. specifically to the strategic objectives identified for that proposal Proposals: Framework – Scope 12 The proposed legislation is available to support urban BOPRC supports the urban focus of the UDAs. Development or redevelopment development wherever this may occur in New Zealand, in existing urban areas can be difficult and this proposal goes a considerable including in greenfield areas at or beyond the edge of way to overcoming many of the obstacles to development. We submit that 'urban any existing built-up area. development' should refer to:

1. Areas of land zoned 'urban' in an operative city or district plan; and/or 2. Areas of land identified or zoned as 'future urban' in an operative city or district plan; and/or 3. Areas of land within any urban limit contained in a Regional Policy Statement or growth management strategy/spatial plan.

This definition will ensure the focus of a UDA development proposal is in an urban area, which the territorial local authority considers is feasible for some

Objective ID: A2597363 Page 173 of 274

form of urban development and that is able to be serviced with trunk infrastructure. Importantly, it also means the public have had the ability to comment on whether it is appropriate for the area to be urbanised.

14 Both public and private sector developments are BOPRC supports this proposal which prevents the delegation of development eligible to become development projects under the powers to private sector developments. proposed legislation, but private developers cannot be delegated with the power to exercise any of the development powers.

Proposals: Framework – Application 15 Central government and territorial authorities together BOPRC supports the joint approach in which Central Government and Territorial select the particular development projects and areas in authorities select development projects. which the more enabling development powers can apply. However, BOPRC submits that there should be a greater role for regional councils in the initial selection stage because regional councils have legislative functions and responsibility for Regional Land Transport Plans, Regional Policy Statements, and, under the RMA, ensuring there is sufficient development capacity in relation to housing and business land to meet the expected demands of the region, as well as the strategic integration of infrastructure with land use.

In particular, the relevant regional council should be present at each stage of the establishment process (initiation, assessment, government agreement, public consultation and establishment stages) to ensure the statutory roles and functions of the regional council are recognised in establishing the UDA. 20 Features that warrant a development being considered for BOPRC supports the 'features' that warrant a development being considered for support under the proposed legislation include: support as a UDA. An additional consideration is the opportunities that exist in many urban areas for widespread intensification or development addressed (a) acute housing need; through the removal of some minor issue in a city plan, private development etc. (b) fragmented land ownership; For example if a UDA had the power to remove a covenant on a (c) large scale; property/properties to allow an access road to be built, this could open up a large (d) major infrastructure investment; areas for intensification and development. BOPRC queries whether this issue (e) high deprivation; and could be addressed through this legislation. (f) location across local authority boundaries

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 174 of 274 2

Proposals: Framework – Benefits

21 The strategic objectives the Government sets for a BOPRC agrees that the strategic objectives set for the development project development project can include conditions for the delivery should be able to include public good outcomes. This should be expanded of public good outcomes. however to recognise and ensure that some of the profit from a development can be required to be directed back into public good outcomes, once the strategic objectives for the project are achieved. It there is transparency of the strategic objectives sought and the opportunities to recycle profit from developments into further achievement of those objectives this could provide support for use of greater powers to enable developments - such as reduced rights of appeal and ability to acquire land compulsorily. Proposals: Processes – Establishment Stage 22 Territorial authorities can recommend that the Government BOPRC agrees that Territorial Local Authorities should be able to identify and consider a particular development project for access to recommend a development project. We assume, given Proposal 25, that that powers under the proposed legislation, or the Government Territorial Local Authorities can withhold their support for a proposal, thereby itself can initiate the process. vetoing the proposal for a UDA. Our view is that a UDA should not be able to be imposed upon a local area, but should advance with the full support and collaboration of the local authority.

Further, for the reasons set out at Proposal 15 above, the relevant regional council should be present at each stage of the establishment process (initiation, assessment, government agreement, public consultation and establishment stages) to ensure the statutory role and functions of the regional council are recognised in establishing the UDA. In this context this means that regional councils have the power to recommend that the Government consider a development project. 23 Prior to publicly proposing a development project for BOPRC supports this but considers that there should be more detail in the initial consideration, officials must undertake an initial assessment about how a proposal ‘fits’ with existing policy statements and assessment of the project that addresses issues that are plans. It is currently proposed that the assessment include a review of the appropriate for the scale and type of development “current planning provisions”. This should be extended to include: involved. • A review of current planning provisions in the regional policy statement and regional and district plans, together with an assessment of how the proposal aligns with or is inconsistent with those planning instruments. • If “planning, land use and consenting” powers are proposed for the UDA, an assessment of the implications of that for the relevant local authorities.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 175 of 274 3

24 To inform the existing nature and use of public BOPRC supports this with the exception that it does not include regional landholdings, the initial assessment must include: councils. For the reasons set out at Proposal 15 above, BOPRC submits that (a) consultation with the relevant public landholders; the parties who the government must engage with to inform the assessment should include regional councils. (b) requiring authorities; and (c) where they already exist, with the entities that are proposed to lead the development and be the urban development authority. 25 If satisfied that a proposed development project warrants For the reasons set out at Proposal 15 above, the relevant regional council the initial support of government, the Minister and the should be present at each stage of the establishment process (initiation, Mayor of the relevant territorial authority approve assessment, government agreement, public consultation and establishment consultation with the public. stages) to ensure the statutory role and functions of the regional council are recognised in establishing the UDA.

28 Government must engage with: Under the current UDA proposal, this is the first time the regional council must (a) relevant iwi and hap ū groups and post-settlement be consulted. This is not supported by BOPRC. governance entities that have an interest in land in the For the reasons set out at Proposal 15 above , the relevant regional council proposed project area; and should be present at each stage of the establishment process (initiation, (b) the relevant regional council. assessment, government agreement, public consultation and establishment stages) to ensure the statutory role and functions of the regional council are recognised in establishing the UDA.

Proposals: Processes – Development plan stage 36 The urban development authority is required to consult Under the current UDA proposal, this appears to be the only time the regional with relevant territorial authorities, the regional council, council must be consulted on the development plan which is when the first draft and central government agencies that supply public is released. Whilst this mandatory consultation is supported, BOPRC submits services, on the content of the draft development plan. that regional councils should be more involved because the development plan could have significant implications for the regional policy statement and regional and district plans. This is elaborated on at Proposal 41 below.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 176 of 274 4

38 If the process of preparing the development plan BOPRC opposes this proposal that enables a UDA to identify other development identifies other development powers that are needed to powers and seek to have these provided to them by Central Government. The realise the development project’s strategic objectives, range of powers available to an UDA should be clearly prescribed in advance. the urban development authority may apply to the This to prevent speculative development proposals that seek wide ranging Government to have those powers granted by powers that are unlikely to be granted. This could lead to significant time wasting amendment to the Order-in-Council establishing the over speculative and unlikely development proposals. project. Proposals: Processes – Contents of the Development Plan

40 The development plan must: BOPRC supports the requirement outlined in the proposal (but not reproduced at (a) state the strategic objectives set by the Proposal 40) that development plans must give effect to Treaty settlements and Government for the development project; adopt the same level of protection for sites of significance for mana whenua (b) identify how each of the development powers usually provided through district and regional plans. are proposed to be exercised (e.g. the nature BOPRC also submits that the development plan should be required to identify and location of new land use regulations, where any inconsistencies with the regional policy statement, and regional plans and reserves will be revoked or exchanged, where district plans. roads and other infrastructure will be created or re-aligned, and where any new schools or other central government services will be located); (c) show how the development powers will contribute to delivering the development project’s strategic objectives, including any public good outcomes that government has stipulated; (d) show how any conditions attached to accessing the development powers will be fulfilled; (e) include an assessment of effects on the environment, including cumulative effects; (f) if the urban development authority has been granted funding powers, state the range of any annual infrastructure charges and development contributions that it anticipates will be levied on land owners and developers, respectively; and (g) identify any further development powers that the urban development authority has not been

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 177 of 274 5

granted but proposes to apply for. Proposals: Processes – Objections

41 Affected persons can object to the recommended Affected persons is defined in the proposal in a manner which does not include development plan within a specified time by written regional councils. BOPRC submits that the proposed definition of affected submission to the urban development authority, stating persons should be amended to include regional councils, particularly given the the reason for the objections and the change the ramifications which a development plan can have for the regional policy person seeks to the recommended plan. statement and regional plans or district plans and given the extent of planning, land use and consenting powers which could be ascribed to the UDA.

42 If objections are received— BOPRC supports objections being heard by independent commissioners, but we consider it important that a representative from the local territorial authority sit (a) the urban development authority must submit the alongside the independent commissioners to bring a measure of local decision- recommended development plan to independent making into the mix. commissioners for examination, and provide the BOPRC considers that a hearing of objections from affected persons should be independent commissioners with copies of the mandatory, particularly given that there is no appeal right on the merits of the objections that the authority received, together with the development plan to the Environment Court. This will ensure greater rigour in authority’s views on those objections; the settling of the development plan. In the alternative, if a hearing of objections (b) the independent commissioners review the is not mandatory, merits appeals should be provided for. objections and the relevant parts of the recommended development plan; (c) the independent commissioners can seek further information from the urban development authority, objectors or an independent technical expert by either holding informal hearings (which are not mandatory) or commissioning reports; (d) the independent commissioners can recommend to the Minister that the development plan: i. be approved as recommended by the urban development authority; or ii. be approved subject to specified amendments that address the objections (and any consequential matters); or iii. be rejected entirely

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 178 of 274 6

Proposals: Processes – Approval of the development plan 46 The final development plan is not subject to appeal on If no merits appeals are to be provided for there should be greater procedural its merits to the Environment Court. safeguards in the process leading up to the determination of the development plan (see comments in relation to Proposal 42 above). If such amendments are not made, then merits appeals should be provided for. 48 The relevant territorial authority and regional council As set out above, the development plan should be required to identify any must have regard to the development plan when inconsistencies with the regional policy statement, and regional plans and district reviewing their own plans and policy statements. plans. This will ensure efficiency when the relevant territorial authority and regional council are subsequently required to have regard to the development plan when reviewing their own plans and policy statements. Proposals: Processes – Role of territorial authorities 50 No development project may be established without the BOPRC supports these proposals (50, 51, 52 & 53) which seek to ensure agreement of both central government and the relevant territorial authorities, have a key role in determining whether a development territorial authority (whose area the proposed project is established. boundaries of the development project will fall within). 51 The agreement of the Mayor of the relevant territorial authority must be obtained before public consultation can commence on establishing the proposed development project.

52 Following public consultation, the formal agreement of the relevant territorial authority must be obtained for the content of the recommendation that Cabinet makes to the Governor-General for the establishment of the development project.

53 The urban development authority is required to consult with relevant territorial authorities and regional council on the content of the draft development plan. Proposals: Processes – Role of Regional Council 55 A development project may be established without the BOPRC opposes this as the UDA proposal currently stands. Presently there is prior agreement of the regional council. very limited involvement of regional councils in the establishment of urban

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 179 of 274 7

development projects and UDAs. For the reasons set out at Proposal 15 this is opposed. In the absence of further involvement of regional councils in the establishment of urban development projects and UDAs, the prior agreement of the regional council should be required. Proposals: Urban Development Authorities – Organisational Form 56 The Government can allocate development powers to BOPRC supports the 'majority publicly owned' requirement for an UDA. In either new or existing entities, provided they are accordance with other submission points, BOPRC considers that Territorial publicly controlled and willing to take on the role. Local Authorities should play a core, collaborative role in UDAs. To this effect, we support the inclusion of an elected member from the relevant Territorial Local Authority being on a UDA board. This will contribute local decision making input as well as a measure of democracy to the UDA. 60 Provided they are majority publicly controlled, existing BOPRC supports the ability for Territorial Local Authorities to become a UDA. entities of the following types are eligible to become an However it notes that the description of council controlled organisations refers to urban development authority and be granted territorial authorities. It should be explicitly recognised that regional councils or development powers in respect of a development regional CCOs may be considered suitable entities for a UDA. project: (a) core Crown departments, agencies or departmental agencies; (b) statutory Crown entities, such as Housing New Zealand Corporation; (c) limited liability companies, including jointly controlled central and local government companies and state- owned enterprises; (d) council controlled organisations, whether owned and controlled by one territorial authority or by a group of territorial authorities and with or without a lesser shareholding held by central government or the private sector; and (e) territorial authorities

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 180 of 274 8

Proposals: Urban development authorities – Accountability and monitoring

64 A central government department will be tasked with While BOPRC supports central Government's role in monitoring the activity of monitoring the activity of urban development the UDA, we recommend that this be done in conjunction with the Territorial authorities. Local Authority. In this way Central Government can monitor progress towards achieving national objectives, while the territorial authority can monitor other agreed strategic objectives and how these are being achieved within the local community.

Proposals: Land assembly – Market based negotiations 72 The urban development authority can only apply for BOPRC supports these land assembly powers as it will make it easier for a UDA compulsory land acquisition within a specified time after to assemble fragmented sites and thereby make a development more likely to be a development plan is finalised. economically feasible.

73 At the landowner’s discretion, an urban development authority can pay for all or part of the land in the form of an equity stake in the development project. 74 An urban development authority can dispose of its land, including by sale, lease, easement, or transferring the land to other government agencies.

Proposals: Land assembly – Compulsory acquisition 75 An urban development authority can dispose of its land, BOPRC supports these compulsory acquisition proposals. We are of the view including by sale, lease, easement, or transferring the that UDAs should have access to these powers, subject to the requirements in land to other government agencies. proposal 78, including seeking approval from the Minister for Land Information .

76 With respect to the process of compulsory acquisition, urban development authorities operate with equivalent powers to other entities that can access compulsory acquisition.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 181 of 274 9

77 Urban development authorities can access the benefit of compulsory land acquisition for purposes that are no more and no less than the purposes for which both central and local government can currently exercise compulsory land acquisition.

78 The exercise of any power of compulsory land acquisition must comply with the process and requirements set out in the Public Works Act 1981, including the following requirements: (a) the Minister for Land Information must exercise the power in accordance with existing tests in the Act and must be satisfied that: i. the objectives for which the land needs to be taken are clear; ii. alternative sites or methods of achieving the objectives have been considered; and iii. it is fair, sound and reasonably necessary to invoke the powers in order to achieve those objectives; (b) there is an obligation to first negotiate in good faith to acquire the land; (c) the landowner has the right to be compensated so that they are left in no worse (or better) situation than before the land acquisition; (d) the landowner has the right to have the amount of compensation determined independently; and (e) the landowner continues to have the right to object to the taking of the land to the Environment Court. 79 An urban development authority can access the benefit of compulsory acquisition only within the boundaries of the development project area.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 182 of 274 10

Proposal: Land assembly – Value of compensation

82 In calculating compensation for land acquired or taken, BOPRC opposes this proposal. We consider that the landowner whose land is no allowance is made for any increase or reduction in acquired for the development, should be able to have a share in the betterment the value of the land as a result of a development profits resulting from the higher residential density development associated with project. the proposed development. At minimum the full economic cost to landowners should be compensated - perhaps with a standard mark up to reflect the increase in value associated with the development. Such an approach would make the development more likely to garner landowner support.

Proposals: Land assembly – Assembling public land 83 The proposed legislation: While BOPRC is neutral on this proposal, it reinforces the submission point made to proposal 22 in which we seek greater power for territorial local (a) includes a power to require relevant local authorities authorities to identify and recommend a development project. Otherwise a UDA and council controlled organisations, district health may be advanced contrary to local community wishes, whilst also being required boards and Crown entities (e.g. Housing New Zealand to transfer publicly owned land to support a development proposal which it Corporation) to transfer land that they own within a opposes. development project area to the Crown for transfer to

the public entity responsible for leading the Similarly to the submission point made to proposal 82, Territorial Local development project; Authorities that are required to transfer public land to the proposed development (b) provides that the power can only be exercised by should be able to have a share in the betterment profits resulting from proposed the Governor-General, on the recommendation of the development. Minister responsible for the proposed legislation, the Minister of Finance, and the Minister for Land Information; (c) includes an obligation to compensate the public entity in the same manner as it would be if the land was compulsorily acquired under the Public Works Act 1981; and (d) provides that, in calculating compensation, no allowance is made for any increase or reduction in the value of the land as a result of a development project.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 183 of 274 11

Proposals: Reserves – General matters 89 Powers over reserves only apply to the following types BOPRC opposes UDAs having powers to reclassify reserves. Given that the of reserves, provided that a reserve of this type either primary purpose of UDAs is for development in urban areas, existing reserves in exists or is created within a development project area such areas are a critical component of urban form. It is our experience that the (“Identified Reserves”): public highly value existing reserves in urban environment. This is increasingly so when there is potential for greater density of development - as onsite amenity (a) recreation reserves; tends to be replaced with public amenity in parks, reserves and streetscapes. (b) local purpose reserves; Enabling UDAs to remove such reserves will undermine future urban form and (c) scenic reserves; likely lead to strong community opposition to future development proposals. (d) historic reserves; and These powers could be amended so that UDAs can work collaboratively with (e) government purpose reserves. territorial authorities to determine the future of reserves within a development project. Proposals: Planning, land use and consenting – Decision-making considerations 97 Regardless of whether it is the urban development Natural Hazards and Climate Change should come in as a compulsory strategic authority, the territorial authority or a regional council objective for every project. which is the decision maker, when making decisions on planning and land use regulation that apply to any part of a development project area, the decision maker must have regard to the following matters, giving weight to them in the order listed: (a) first, the strategic objectives of the development project; (b) secondly, the matters in Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (“RMA”), which provide that Act’s core purpose and principles; and (c) thirdly, other relevant matters listed in sections 66 and 74 of the RMA for decisions on the development plan, and sections 104-107 of the RMA for decisions on resource consents and development consents.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 184 of 274 12

Proposals: Planning, land use and consenting – Role of existing RMA instruments and entities 98 To the extent it is necessary to achieve the strategic Proposal 98 (a) and (b) - BOPRC is partly supportive of this proposal. In objectives of the development project: particular we support the ability for a development plan to override provisions in the operative district plan. However BOPRC opposes overriding of the regional (a) the development plan can override one or more of policy statement or regional plans which in many cases deliver on National the existing and proposed: district plan, regional plan Policy Statements, or provide important regional direction on matters such as and the applicable regional policy statement that would natural hazards and climate change. Given the separation of functions between otherwise apply to the development project; regional and district councils, there is no strong reason why the development (b) the Government can choose the extent to which one plan should override the regional policy statement or regional plans. or more of the district plan, regional plan and regional policy statement can be overridden in each case; Proposal 98 (c), (d) and (e) - BOPRC recognises the value of a UDA having (c) an urban development authority can be granted the planning and consenting powers, however we consider that this power should be planning and consenting powers of a regional council retained with the existing consenting authorities, who should be working and territorial authority; collaboratively with the UDA. Tauranga's experience with the process under the (d) the Government can impose conditions on the use HASHAA has been positive in this regard with potentially close parallels to how a of any planning powers that are granted (such as a UDA process could operate. condition to comply with a rule concerning discharges in a regional air plan, notwithstanding that the The value of this approach is that the UDA can focus on achieving the strategic Government is granting a power to override the regional objectives of the development proposal, leaving the consenting process to the plan more generally); and local authorities which not only know and understand local conditions, also has (e) the urban development authority can take on the vast experience in consent processes. This approach would be a more efficient compliance and enforcement responsibilities and and robust approach. powers of a territorial authority and regional council, for breaches of the development plan and associated Compliance and enforcement responsibilities should similarly remain with the development consents (except where the authority is local authorities. the developer and a development consent has been required, in which case compliance and enforcement will rest with the relevant local authority). 100 If the urban development authority is granted planning BOPRC does not support a right of veto in this way. A preferable approach and consenting powers, then in the period before the would be to require the views of the UDA to be ascertained before the local development plan takes effect, it can veto or require authorities make a decision so that the views and any requests of the UDA can conditions to be attached to any resource consent or be factored into the decision making process. plan change that the relevant territorial authority or regional council is considering in respect of the development project area, provided it is necessary to Objective ID: A2601549 Page 185 of 274 13

realise the development project’s strategic objectives. Proposals: Planning, land use and consenting – Development plan 101 When planning powers have been granted for a BOPRC’s comments at Proposal 98 above explain its concerns with a development project: development plan overriding or effectively replacing the regional policy statement and regional plans. (a) the development plan overrides or effectively Proposals 101 and 102 provide for an alternative planning approach and activity replaces the regional policy statement, regional plan status to a development project . Our view is that introducing a dual system is and district plan (as applicable, to the extent permitted both unnecessary and too complex when the operative district plan should by the scope of the powers that the development suffice. Another option may be to adopt rules of relevant planning documents project has been granted); with specific clauses to override particular provisions if that is what the (b) until the development plan is approved and notified, development project is seeking to achieve. Regardless, having the local planning the current rules in the relevant territorial authority’s documents form a starting point would be beneficial in ensuring local district plan and the relevant regional council’s regional environment issues inform the development plan. plan(s) continue to apply; and (c) the urban development authority must provide an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed rules in the development plan with respect to controlling land-use and managing effects on the environment. 102 The development plan must: The removal of certain classes of consent activity (discretionary and non- (a) show how the planning powers will be used to complying) and the introduction of new terms of consent classes is confusing. deliver on the strategic objectives and relevant matters The existing consent classes prescribed by the RMA are appropriate and should under the Resource Management Act 1991 (“RMA”); be retained. (b) identify, for the project, which provisions in a The UDA proposal requires more thought as to the implications for National regional policy statement, regional plan and district plan Policy Statements which are implemented primarily by regional councils. For will continue to apply and incorporate them by example, the National Policy Statement Freshwater Management 2014 is reference into the development plan; implemented by regional councils its regional policy statement and regional freshwater plans, while the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement has also (c) prescribe the development rules to apply within the resulted in regional councils undertaking natural character mapping (for development project; example). If the development plan must give effect to any applicable national (d) provide for the following classes of development level RMA instruments (New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement, national policy activities: statements, national environmental standards and regulations) (Proposal 102(i)) i. activities that can occur without any need for a then this will mean certain aspects of the regional policy statement or regional development consent (the equivalent of a permitted plans cannot be overridden. activity under the RMA); BOPRC supports the requirement for the development plan to adopt the same Objective ID: A2601549 Page 186 of 274 14

ii. activities that require a development consent but that protection for significant historic heritage sites usually provided for through must be approved, subject to a discretion to impose a district and regional plans (Proposal 102(j)). range of conditions in restricted circumstances (the BOPRC supports the requirement for the development plan to have regard to the equivalent of a controlled activity under the RMA); relevant regional policy statement and regional plan but submits that the iii. activities that require a development consent and requirement should be stronger – for example, a requirement that the where there is discretion to approve or decline the development plan not be inconsistent with the relevant regional policy statement application (with or without conditions), but where the and regional plan . exercise of that discretion is restricted to defined matters (the equivalent of a restricted discretionary consent under the RMA); iv. activities that are expressly prohibited in the development plan (the equivalent of prohibited activities in the RMA); (e) classify all activities identified in the plan under one of the categories described above; (f) treat all other activities, for which rules have not been expressly included in the development plan, under a separate consenting process; (g) describe the processes to be used for: i. obtaining development consents; and ii. establishing and rolling-over designations within the project area; (h) describe how the project will be integrated back into the wider planning context of the surrounding district at the completion of the project; (i) give effect to any applicable national level RMA instruments (New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement, national policy statements, national environmental standards and regulations); (j) adopt the same protection for significant historic heritage sites usually provided for through district and regional plans; and (k) have regard to the relevant regional policy statement and regional plan Objective ID: A2601549 Page 187 of 274 15

Proposals: Planning, land use and consenting – Consenting and enforcement 105 An urban development authority can be granted the In cases where the local authorities retains the planning and consenting planning and consenting powers of a regional council functions, do they have to plan/consent based on the classes of development and territorial authority. Where such powers are not contained in proposal 101 (d) or revert to the existing consent classes in the granted to an urban development authority, regional operative district or regional plan? This requires clarification . Our view is that the councils and territorial authorities continue to undertake existing consent classes are appropriate. this function. 106 Regardless of who acts as consent authority, when making decisions on development consents under the development plan (or on resource consents under a regional or district plan) for activities taking place within a development project area, the decision-maker must have regard to the following matters, giving weight to them (greater to lesser) in the order listed: (a) first, the strategic objectives of the development project; (b) secondly, the matters in Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (“RMA”); and (c) thirdly, other relevant matters in sections 104-107 of the RMA Proposals: Planning, land use and consenting – Activities included in the development plan (Process A) 108 For activities included in the development plan: (a) an application for development consent must contain an assessment of environmental effects, including cumulative effects; (b) the application is non-notified, unless: i. special circumstances exist; or ii. notification is required by a National Environmental Standard; or iii. the development plan requires notification; or iv. the applicant requests notification; or v. the proposed activity is one that would otherwise have required a

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 188 of 274 16

regional council to act as the consent authority and is not an activity for which consent must be granted, in which case limited notification applies; (c) non-notified applications must be processed within 15 working days; (d) if notification is required then: i. a notification decision is required within 10 working days; ii. the time limit for submissions (written only) is 15 working days (but may be extended, at the discretion of the urban development authority); iii. the decision maker must consider submissions but not hold public hearings; and iv. a decision must be given within 15 working days from the close of submissions; (e) if the development plan provides that the activity must be approved, then consent must be granted and the activity must comply with any relevant requirements in the plan or regulations; (f) where the development plan gives the decision- maker discretion to approve or decline an application, that discretion must be exercised within the parameters described in the development plan and any applicable regulations; (g) in either case, the development consent may have conditions attached to the extent allowed under the development plan; (h) the applicant has access to mediation and judicial review, but has no rights of appeal on the merits of a decision to grant or decline consent; (i) the applicant can appeal against any conditions imposed on a development consent; and (j) third parties have no rights of appeal, but continue to have access to judicial review.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 189 of 274 17

Proposals: Infrastructure – General Matters The proposed legislation includes powers to: 112 create (declare), stop, move, build and/or alter: local BOPRC supports these proposals to enable a UDA to plan and deliver and private roads; connections to state highways; and infrastructure to service the proposed development with the exception of scope any related ancillary or underlying infrastructure such as for regional land transport functions to be overridden (Proposal 114). lighting, signage, cycle-ways, and footpaths; The Regional Land Transport Plan is developed through a rigorous statutory 113 stop, move, build and/or alter: water supply, process and the proposed powers regarding land and/or public transport wastewater, storm water, fire hydrants, and land facilities and services (including timetables bus routes) should not be able to be drainage infrastructure systems, including related trunk overridden by the UDA, not least because this could have ramifications beyond infrastructure and plant; the boundaries of the urban development project area. This should be addressed in a collaborative way between the UDA and the regional council. 114 stop, move, build, create, extend and/or alter: any land and/or public transport facilities and services, together BOPRC otherwise notes again its statutory functions in relation to land transport with network infrastructure associated with transport, under the Land Transport Management Act 2003, and its statutory RMA function including services such as timetabled bus or rail routes of the strategic integration of infrastructure with land use through objectives, and any ancillary infrastructure such as bus shelters, policies and methods, as highlighting why regional councils should have a interchanges, park-and-ride facilities and railway greater role in the establishment of UDAs and urban development projects. stations; 115 notify, contract with and/or require network utility operators to stop, build, move and/or alter electricity, gas, telecommunications or other privately owned utility services and to empower the urban development authority to undertake this work if the network utility operator refuses or fails to do the work in a reasonable time. 116 carry out any preliminary earthworks, construction, demolition, removal, placement or alteration works to enable infrastructure systems and services to be stopped, moved, built, declared and/or altered;

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 190 of 274 18

117 enter public and privately-owned land, subject to reasonable notice conditions, to undertake preliminary assessments of a development project area and to identify, define and protect infrastructure corridors and systems that will connect to a new development; and

118 vest any new infrastructure for a development project in the host territorial authority or relevant public agency or network operator at no cost to the receiving organization, with the timing of the transfer to be discretionary depending on which entity owns the infrastructure. Proposals: Infrastructure – Independent method for providing infrastructure 119 The proposed legislation includes powers to require the BOPRC opposes powers be given to the UDA that enables them to 'require' relevant territorial authority to alter or upgrade any Territorial Local Authorities to alter, upgrade or develop trunk infrastructure to remote trunk infrastructure systems that are necessary support the proposed development. Consistent with the collaborative approach to support the development project, if that work is not being advocated by TCC, we consider that this should be a matter of negotiation being undertaken by the urban development authority. and discussion between the UDA, Central Government and the Territorial Local Authority. Investing in trunk infrastructure is an expensive process that weighs heavily on existing ratepayers. Territorial Local Authorities and their communities would be wary of a requirement that may impose significant additional costs on them, in order to deliver an urban development. 121 An urban development authority can become an BOPRC considers that further clarification is required in relation to this proposal, approved public organisation under the Land Transport particularly where regional councils or territorial authorities are also making Management Act 2003 for the purposes of accessing applications to the national land transport fund. Again, this would preferably be the Government’s National Land Transport Fund for co- handled in a collaborative manner. investment to construct major local roads or connections to state highways within the authority’s project area(s). Proposals: Infrastructure – Link with local government planning

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 191 of 274 19

123 The proposed legislation includes powers to: Similarly to the submission point made above on proposal 119, BOPRC is of the view that regional councils and Territorial Local Authorities should not be 'forced' (a) require that local territorial authority long-term plans, to alter long-term plans and regional land transport plans etc. to deliver the regional land transport and public transport plans and strategic objectives in a development project. This should be done in an open, other local government statutory planning documents considered and collaborative way. must not be inconsistent with the strategic objectives of development projects within the areas covered by those plans, but include no requirement that development projects are specifically identified and included in local government planning documents or budgets; and (b) suspend part of, or recommend changes to, regional land transport or public transport plans, as they apply to a development project, where a project or service set out in the plan may compromise the proposed development or would no longer apply because of the development. Proposal: Infrastructure – Performance requirements and standards 125 Prior to exercising any powers relating to physical The list of consultees does not appear to include regional councils. Given infrastructure, the urban development authority must regional councils’ statutory functions in relation to land transport under the Land consult and collaborate with the relevant government Transport Management Act 2003 this should be extended to include regional agencies, road controlling authorities, and/or territorial councils as matters such as levels of service, operating implications and authorities to establish for a development project the connections to existing systems are relevant to the delivery of regional land proposed infrastructure location, system performance transport. requirements, construction and quality standards, levels of service, operating implications and connections to existing systems.

Proposals: Infrastructure – Winding up the development project

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 192 of 274 20

127 When the urban development authority or other BOPRC strongly supports the proposal that if assets have debt or other financial relevant public entity owns trunk infrastructure assets at liabilities attached to them, those assets can only be transferred to a receiving the time that the development project is wound up: organisation with that organisation's prior agreement. This should be the case (a) if there is no debt attached to those assets, the where there is any proposal to transfer assets to a regional council, territorial proposed legislation includes a power to vest the trunk authority or council controlled organisation. infrastructure at no cost in the appropriate receiving organisation; (b) if those assets have debt or other financial liabilities attached to them, those assets can be transferred to a receiving organisation only with that organisation's prior agreement; (c) if those assets are owned by the Crown, final approval of any transfer agreement must be made by the Minister responsible for the proposed legislation and the chief executive of the receiving organisation; and (d) if the assets are carrying debt and no organisation is willing to receive them, ownership and debt obligations must remain as they are and any public entity that owns the assets must continue to exist until the debt is repaid, albeit solely as a holding vehicle. 131 The terms on which any assets, liabilities, revenue BOPRC supports this proposal. streams, rights, obligations, designations and on-going management requirements are transferred to a receiving organisation must be negotiated between the relevant entity and that receiving organisation.

Proposals: Funding and financing – General matters

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 193 of 274 21

133 The proposed legislation includes a power to levy BOPRC generally supports the ability for UDAs to recover costs associated with targeted infrastructure charges on property owners the proposed development - including targets infrastructure charges. Further, within the development project area (only) that apply BOPRC supports the requirement that the Territorial Local Authority collects any annually and are calculated to provide sufficient infrastructure charges on behalf of the UDA and carries out enforcement, so long revenue to pay for infrastructure and amenities that are as there is no additional cost to the ratepayer. However, BOPRC does not contained within the project area over the life of the understand why territorial local authorities may be the collection agency for assets. targeted infrastructure charges but not development contributions and suggests this is clarified.

Proposals: Funding and financing – Cross border funding issues 140 The urban development authority can seek to recover BOPRC supports the proposals 140-143 and the use of an independent decision from the relevant territorial authority an appropriate maker to determine cost sharing for facilities. There is a strong likelihood that share of the costs of providing facilities and amenities many development proposals will leverage off existing amenities in the that benefit landowners outside the development surrounding area- parks, reserves, open space, etc. It is only fair that developers project area. within the proposed development make a contribution to the costs of these facilities. 141 If the territorial authority does not agree to pay an appropriate share of the costs for such infrastructure, or does not agree to the amount or to any sharing arrangements with the urban development authority, the proposed legislation includes a mechanism through which the urban development authority can apply to an independent decision-maker who has the power to determine to what extent the territorial authority will be subject to the costs of infrastructure and amenities within the area.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 194 of 274 22

142 The territorial authority has no power to levy development contributions on developers operating within the development project area, but the territorial authority can seek to recover from the urban development authority a share of the costs for providing head works, trunk infrastructure and wider services and amenities that benefit land owners within the project area. 143 If the urban development authority does not agree to include within the development contributions that it levies on developers operating in the area an appropriate charge for benefits being supplied from outside the project area, the proposed legislation includes a mechanism through which the territorial authority can apply to an independent decision-maker. That decision-maker has the power to determine to what extent the urban development authority will be subject to development contributions to pay to meet the costs of head works, trunk infrastructure and wider services and amenities that benefit land owners within the project area. Proposals: M āori interests – Honouring Treaty settlements 146 The proposed legislation cannot override or amend BOPRC supports these provisions which will ensure Maori interests are upheld arrangements in any legislation, deed, or deed of through any UDA Ied development proposal. settlement arising from a settlement of historical Treaty claims, whether already enacted or enacted in the future.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 195 of 274 23

Other matters Thresholds for selecting urban development projects. Criteria or thresholds for selecting urban development projects- BOPRC is of the view that, given the far-reaching implications of this proposal (Central Government, Territorial Local Authorities, Requiring Authorities, Maori, infrastructure providers, the UDA itself, etc), a minimum threshold of development is required before a UDA or development proposal is considered. This threshold may be a minimum number of new houses/businesses to be developed in the development proposal. Importantly though, this need not equate to a single site, but may be distributed across the city. The role of Territorial Local Authorities The role of Territorial Local Authorities - as outlined in a number of submission points, BOPRC is of the view that Territorial Local Authorities should be involved in the creation of UDAs and development proposals. It is our view that the relevant Territorial Local Authority has a range of functions and responsibilities to serve its community and should not be excluded from critical decisions about a UDA or development proposal that will affect that community. This involvement need not be a handbrake on development, but rather a collaborative partner in which the skills and resources of the Territorial Local Authority are bought to aid the UDA deliver the strategic objectives in the development proposal.

Objective ID: A2601549 Page 196 of 274 24

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Stephen Lamb, Natural Resources Policy Manager

Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw

Executive Summary

The Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw (the Bylaw) has been in place since 2010 and is due for a review under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA). The Bylaw has successfully ensured the replacement of about 505 old burners and phased out 850 indoor open fires.

Despite this success, the Bylaw would benefit from being updated and improved. The review is an opportunity to amend the regulations and definitions in the Bylaw. Three options for amendment of the rules were assessed and discussed by the Rotorua Air Quality Working Party (Working Party). The option selected was to amend the Bylaw to be consistent with the intended direction of the next generation regional air rules and make some changes to improve implementation.

Key changes are:

 Inclusion of definitions for each type of solid fuel burner in the interpretation section.

 The Point of Sale Rule will require indoor open fires to be rendered inoperable and may no longer be replaced with another type of solid fuel burner. Requirements for other types of burners remain the same – they must be removed or replaced before the house is sold.

 The New Burner Rule previously allowed any burner to be installed provided it had a design standard of 1.5g/kg. The amended rule now restricts new burners to pellet burners. Woodburners may be installed but only as replacements for existing burners and only if they have a design standard of 0.5g/kg.

The new Bylaw needs to go through the special consultative process as set out in the LGA. This requires the preparation of a Statement of Proposal and public submissions and hearings.

At a meeting of the Strategy, Policy and Finance Committee of the Rotorua Lakes Council on 11 May 2017 a resolution is being sought that the Rotorua Lakes Council (RLC) adopt the Bylaw and Statement of Proposal on 25 May 2017. If RLC approve the draft new Bylaw it will be released for public submissions on 26 May 2017.

Staff will keep this Committee updated on the progress of the new Bylaw.

Page 197 of 274 Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw.

2 Endorses the new Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw.

3 Approve the 2017 contracting agreement for enforcement and administration of the new Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw by the Bay of Plenty Regional Council for signing by the Chief Executive.

1 Purpose

This report updates the Committee on the progress of the Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw and seeks the endorsement of the new bylaw and transfer agreement. 2 Background

The Rotorua Air Quality Working Party (Working Party) was formed in May 2015 and is chaired by Councillor Thurston. Its membership includes Rotorua Lakes Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Regional Council), Toi te Ora Public Health, Ministry for the Environment and Housing New Zealand. The Working Party, and its predecessor, the Rotorua Air Quality Joint Committee, have been the foundation for the successful collaboration required to introduce and implement the Bylaw.

The Regional Council developed the Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw (the Bylaw) in 2010 as a collaborative project with the Rotorua Lakes Council (RLC). Its purpose was to reduce the emissions from domestic burners to ensure the Rotorua Airshed meets the daily ambient air quality standard for PM10 in the National Environmental Standard for Air Quality (NESAQ).

Using a Bylaw to manage domestic burners was a unique and innovative approach that has been commended by many in the air quality sector including the Ministry for the Environment. South Waikato District Council and Auckland Council have both attempted to introduce local bylaws to manage burners with no success to date. This highlights the unique achievement of the Regional Council and RLC in collaborating to introduce the only bylaw of its kind in New Zealand.

One of the main reasons for pursuing a local bylaw is the special consultation process through the Local Government Act, 2002 (LGA) which has a minimum public consultation period of one month (section 83) and a process that does not allow for further submissions or appeals. This step, via the Environment Court, can delay equivalent regional rules under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) by several years.

The Bylaw has a second advantage over regional rules in that it targets the burners themselves, rather than the emissions. The rules in the Bylaw require burners to be removed or replaced, ensuring that old burners are no longer installed in the property. This can be monitored and enforced relatively easily using building permits.

Regional rules can only regulate the discharge from the chimney. Therefore a non- complying burner may still be installed or kept in a home but not used. This gives less

2 Page 198 of 274 Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw

certainty for the Council that the emissions have been removed from the airshed. If such burners are used, monitoring and enforcement is significantly more problematic as it involves being on-site and monitoring smoke discharged from a chimney.

The three rules of the Bylaw targeted Rotorua burners are, in summary:

 New burner rule – From December 2010, new burners installed in houses must be “complying” with a design standard of 1.5g/kg and efficiency of 65%.

 Point of Sale rule – From May 2012, burners that are non-complying must be removed or replaced by the vendor, before a house is sold.

 Indoor Open Fires – From May 2015, indoor open fires cannot be used. Due to the nature of indoor open fires being an integral part of the house, this rule targeted the discharges, rather than requiring removal of the fire.

For the last six years the Bylaw has been steadily ensuring the replacement or removal of burners in houses that are sold. About 505 conversions can be attributed to this rule. In addition, since 2015, 850 indoor open fires may no longer be used.

As well as the Bylaw, rules to target Rotorua burners (known as the Rotorua Burner Rules) have been drafted and will be included in Plan Change 13 to the Regional Water and Land Plan (to be re-released as the Regional Natural Resources Plan). The draft Rotorua Burner Rules were presented to this Committee during a workshop on 8 February 2017 and are, in summary:

 New Burners – Pellet burners are permitted in new houses or houses that do not have an existing burner.

 Existing Burners – Any existing coal burner, multifuel burner, or woodburner installed before 2005 cannot be used after 2018.

 Replacement Burners – Existing burners may be replaced only by burners with a design standard of 0.5g/kg and efficiency of 65% and must only replace space heaters.

3 Options for Bylaw

The Bylaw is due for review by September 2017. While the Bylaw has been successful, it would benefit from updating and improvement. The review is an opportunity to amend the regulations and definitions in the Bylaw. At the February workshop this Committee expressed a preference for the Bylaw to be as similar as possible to the draft Rotorua Burner Rules.

Three options were presented to the Working Party and to a Rotorua Lakes Council workshop for discussion and consideration:

1. Retain the Bylaw unchanged – the main advantage to this option is that the Bylaw is already accepted by the community and no changes would be needed in implementation.

The disadvantage is that the Bylaw will be in conflict with the Rotorua Burner Rules. The regional rules manage new burners differently to replacement burners, while the Bylaw treats both situations the same. Replacement burners in the regional rules must have a design standard of 0.5g/kg, while the Bylaw

3 Page 199 of 274 Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw

allows burners discharging 1.5g/kg. These conflicts would create a situation where a homeowner could legally install a burner that is illegal to use

2. Mirror Bylaw and regional rules – this option would match each rule in the regional rules with a corresponding rule in the Bylaw. This would make the Bylaw substantially more stringent by requiring the removal of any non- complying burner (about 3,500) within the next two years, even when the house is not sold.

This was not recommended for two key reasons. The Rotorua Burner Rules may take several years to become operative. There may be significant changes to the rules in this time. Also, feedback on the draft regional rules showed concern with the requirement to remove burners. This type of controversial issue is better discussed through a full public process (under the RMA) rather than the reduced process with no appeal rights under the LGA.

3. Amend for implementation and consistency – this option was to amend the Bylaw to ensure consistency with the Rotorua Burner Rules, but did not include a rule to require removal of non-complying burners except for those affected by the Point of Sale rule.

This option was recommended as it resolved the inconsistency between Bylaw and regional rules, but did not significantly change the existing Bylaw.

Option 3 was endorsed by the Working Party on 6 March 2017. Rotorua Lakes Council also endorsed this option at a workshop on 16 March 2017. Staff drafted changes to the Bylaw based on this option and on further discussions with stakeholders. 4 Special Consultative Process

Making, revoking or amending a bylaw under the LGA must follow the special consultative process. This process must prepare and adopt a statement of proposal and the statement must meet the requirements of the LGA by:

 providing a draft of the bylaw

 setting out reasons for the proposal

 determining the appropriateness of the bylaw

 summarising the review process including the submission period

 providing information on how submissions can be made and where further information can be obtained.

The Statement of Proposal, including the draft Bylaw, is included as Appendix 1. The draft bylaw was endorsed by the Working Party on 19 April 2017.

Staff prepared a report for the 11 May 2017 meeting of the Strategy, Policy and Finance (SP&F) Committee of the Rotorua Lakes Council. The recommendation is for the Rotorua Lakes Council to approve the amended Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw and Statement of Proposal for special consultative procedure.

If the Rotorua Lakes Council adopt the Bylaw, it will follow the process in Table 1.

4 Page 200 of 274 Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw

Process Date

Adoption of Bylaw and Statement of 25 May 2017 Proposal for public release

Submissions 26 May – 30 June 2017

Hearings 3 – 7 July 2017

Rotorua Lakes Council approval of Bylaw 27 September 2017 Table 1 – Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw special consultative procedure

5 Key Changes to the Bylaw

The Bylaw contains a number of changes to its regulations that differ from the original 2010 Bylaw. Many of these changes are minor, included for additional clarity, and to ensure consistency with the regional rules. However, some changes will affect what types of burners can be installed in houses within the Rotorua Airshed.

5.1 Interpretation

The interpretation section contains a number of definitions of terms that are used in the Bylaw. The biggest change to these definitions is the inclusion of definitions for each different type of solid fuel burner (coal burner, indoor open fire, multifuel burner, pellet burner, woodburner). There is also some clarification of the definitions for “replace or replaced”, “remove or removed”, and “operable” (changed to “inoperable”).

Other minor changes have been made to assist interpretation.

5.2 Point of Sale Rule

The Point of Sale rule previously required any non-complying solid fuel burner to be removed or replaced from a dwelling house before it was sold. Consideration was given to reversing the presumption to require the purchaser to undertake the removal or replacement however this was discounted following the RLC workshop and subsequent discussions.

The biggest change to this rule is that indoor open fires must now be rendered inoperable and may no longer be replaced with another type of solid fuel burner. Indoor open fires were phased out in May 2015 by the 2010 Bylaw. Discharges of particulates from this source are now considered to have been removed. Replacement of an indoor open fire with another type of solid fuel burner is therefore introducing a new source of discharges to the Rotorua Airshed, which will not achieve the outcome sought. It has been two years since the phase-out, sufficient time for homeowners to have installed a replacement solid fuel burner.

A new clause has been added that requires written/photographic evidence of the removal or replacement to be provided to either the Council or the Regional Council. While this was usually provided by those affected by this rule, this clause makes the requirement explicit, and it is clear to the public what is required.

5 Page 201 of 274 Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw

5.3 New Burner Rule

The “Restriction on Installation of Solid Fuel Burners in New and Existing Houses” rule, known as the new burner rule, has changed.

Previously the rule permitted the installation of a solid fuel burner provided they complied with the design standard (1.5 grams particulates discharges per kilogram of dry wood burnt) and thermal efficiency standard (the ratio of useable heat energy output to energy input not less than 65%) of the NESAQ.

There are three substantial changes to this rule:

1. The installation of new burners where there is currently no solid fuel burner installed is limited to pellet burners. Pellet burners are the only solid fuel burner proven to have low emissions in real-life and are not as significantly affected by operator errors (such as burning rubbish) that increase emissions.

2. Woodburners may be permitted provided that they replace a woodburner, coal burner, or multifuel burner. They may not replace indoor open fires nor any type of solid fuel burner that is designed for a purpose besides space heating (e.g. coal ranges, chip heaters).

3. Woodburners must meet a design standard of 0.5 grams particulates discharges per kilogram of dry wood burnt. This is stricter than the NESAQ requirement. Research shows that woodburners discharge significantly more particulates in real life, due to operator error. However, the better the design standard (the lower the discharge) the better the woodburners performs in real life. Ensuring that the best possible woodburners are installed will help achieve the outcome sought.

The design standard and thermal efficiency regulations from the NESAQ have been included as additional clauses to this rule for clarity.

5.4 Minor Changes

Other minor changes include amending or removing redundant dates throughout the document, and some grammatical corrections.

6 Responsibility for Enforcement

The responsibility for enforcement and administration of the 2010 Bylaw has been transferred from Rotorua Lakes Council to the Regional Council as part of the collaborative approach that underpins this Bylaw. This was an agreement made in relation to the implementation of this Bylaw and the arrangement has operated for six years. It is proposed that this arrangement continues. While responsibility rests with the Regional Council, Rotorua Lakes Council assists by providing data and information. Dispensations under the bylaw are administered by the Regional Council.

The responsibility for enforcement and administration is passed from the Rotorua Lakes Council to the Regional Council through a contracting agreement. Local Government Act 2002 local authorities may contract the enforcement of bylaws to other local authorities under the following section:

6 Page 202 of 274 Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw

Section 179 Contracting out administration of enforcement

(1) A local authority may contract out to any other local authority or other person the administration of its regulatory functions, including, without limitation, the operational aspects of enforcement, inspection, licensing, and other administrative matters.

The delegations that support any contracted role are likewise provided for in Clause 32(5) of Schedule 7:

Clause 32, Schedule 7 Delegations

(5) A local authority may delegate to any other local authority, organisation, or person the enforcement, inspection, licensing, and administration related to bylaws and other regulatory matters

It is recommended that the enforcement and administration arrangements are continued on the same basis. The 17 November 2010 Contracting Agreement has therefore been updated for the new Bylaw and is included as Appendix 2. No significant changes have been made to its content and it is recommended for signing. 7 Implications for Māori

A number of households may be adversely affected by the requirements of the Bylaw. In particular low-income houses in the event that homes are not adequately heated, or not heated at all due to a burner being removed to comply with the Bylaw. Maori make up a greater proportion of these households and may be adversely affected.

To mitigate this risk, the Regional Council will continue their incentives which include:

 Hot Swap Scheme – interest free or low interest loan to upgrade heating and insulation, paid back over ten years.

 Rates Rebate – households that qualify for rates rebate have their loan repayments under the Hot Swap Scheme waived.

 Low-income Heating Grant – grants for low income homes for heating and insulation.

Clause 5.1.1 of the Bylaw has been retained, that allows dispensations for the use of non-complying solid fuel burners or indoor open fires in exceptional cases. 8 Next Steps

Staff will liaise with Rotorua Lakes Council staff throughout the process and keep this Committee updated with the progress of the Bylaw through the special consultative procedure.

7 Page 203 of 274 Update on Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw

9 Council’s Accountability Framework

9.1 Community Outcomes

This project/proposal directly contributes to the Environmental Protection Community Outcome in the council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025 by reducing emissions of particulates to the Rotorua Airshed.

9.2 Long Term Plan Alignment

This work is planned under the Rotorua Air Quality Activity in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Current Budget Implications

Although the Rotorua Lakes Council is responsible for progressing the Bylaw through the special consultative procedure, the Regional Council provides resources for developing the Bylaw, and its administration and enforcement.

This work is being undertaken within the current budget for the Rotorua Air Quality Activity in the Long Term Plan 2015/25.

Future Budget Implications

Future work on this project is provided for in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Karen Parcell Senior Policy Analyst (Natural Resources Policy) for Natural Resources Policy Manager

11 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

8 Page 204 of 274

APPENDIX 1

Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw - Statement of Proposal pdf

Page 205 of 274

Page 206 of 274 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035

Statement of Proposal Review of the Rotorua District Council Air Quality Control Bylaw

1 Introduction

The Rotorua District Council Air Quality Control Bylaw 2010 (the Bylaw) was adopted by the Rotorua Lakes Council (the Council) and came into effect in December 2010. In accordance with Section 158 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), bylaws need to be reviewed after five years using the special consultative procedure set out in the LGA. The special consultative procedure must prepare and adopt a statement of proposal. The statement of proposal must meet the requirements of the LGA by: • providing a draft of the bylaw • setting out reasons for the proposal • determining the appropriateness of the bylaw • summarising the review process including the submission period • providing information on how submissions can be made and where further information can be obtained. This Statement of Proposal (the Proposal) addresses each of these requirements. The Council adopted this Statement of Proposal, on 11 May 2017.

2 Consultation Process - How can I have my say?

Submissions are welcomed on the proposed Rotorua District Council Air Quality Control Bylaw 2017. The Council must use the special consultative procedure when replacing a Bylaw. Section 83(1) (a) of Local Government Act 2002 (‘LGA 2002’) requires the Council to prepare a Statement of Proposal. The Statement of Proposal is available from our website:http://letstalk.rotorualakescouncil.nz/ or in hard copy from the Rotorua District Library or Rotorua Lakes Council Customer Services Centre, Haupapa Street. You can submit your opinions online via an electronic submission form on the Council’s online engagement hub http://letstalkrotorualakescouncil.nz/ You may also post or fax submissions to the Council. You will need to indicate whether you wish to appear in person before the Council to speak in support of your submission. Email to: [email protected]

Fax: 07 346 3143

Objective ID: A2590341 Page 207 of 274 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035

Visit our website: http://letstalk.rotorualakescouncil.nz/

Post to: Rotorua Lakes Council, Private Bag 3029, Rotorua Mail Centre, Rotorua 3046

The submission period runs from 26 May to 30 June 2017 and will be followed by hearings. Submissions must be received by Council no later than 5pm on 30 June 2017. Submissions on the proposed Bylaw are available to the public and the media. This includes your personal information. All submissions will be acknowledged. Submitters who wish to speak to their submission will be advised of the Council meeting date following the closure of submissions.

For further information on the Bylaw, please phone the Council on 07 348 4199 or email us at [email protected]

3 Reasons for Proposal

This Statement of Proposal has been prepared to fulfil Council’s obligations under the LGA and to provide sufficient information to the community for well-informed discussion on the amended Bylaw.

3.1 Problem definition

The National Environmental Standards for Air Quality (NESAQ) set a limit of 50µg/m 3 for fine particulates (or PM 10 ). This limit is not a “safe” concentration for fine particulates, but provides an acceptable level of protection for human health while still allowing for normal activities. The current deadline for compliance is no more than three exceedances per year by September 2016, and one per year by 2020.

Currently, the Rotorua Airshed (the airshed) regularly exceeds this standard. During the 2015 calendar year, the airshed exceeded the standard 13 times (Figure 1).

Edmund Road - Rotorua - 2015 175 150 ) 3 125 g/m µ µ µ µ

( 100

10 75 50 NESAQ limit

DailyPM 25 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Year

Figure 1: PM10 (24 hour) values measured at Edmund Road, Rotorua 2015

Page 208 of 274 2 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 The people who are most likely to suffer harm or ill health as a result of poor air quality are the very young, elderly and those with respiratory problems such as asthma and other chronic illnesses such as heart disease. A summary of adverse consequences which result from compromised air pollution include: • Poor health • Reduced amenity value where the city looks unpleasant (see Figure 2) • Restricted economic development • Poor public perception (if Rotorua air quality is not improved, it will rise in the ranks of cities with poor air quality, discouraging visitors and economic development).

Figure 2: Rotorua Airshed in 2008

An emissions inventory prepared in 2006 determined the contribution of PM 10 emissions from specific sources or groups of sources. Monitoring and research carried out (including a home heating survey 1, an emissions inventory 2 and airshed modelling 3) shows that although industry contributes to poor air quality, the main source of fine particulates in the airshed in winter, is domestic burners(Figure 2). At the time the inventory was prepared, most of the burners were older, inefficient burners that discharged more particulates.

The modelling showed that emissions from domestic sources needed to be reduced by 60 tonnes per year to meet the standard. That is, around 7,650 (of a total 8,550) domestic burners must be converted to cleaner heating. Cleaner heating includes modern burners.

1 Environment Bay of Plenty (2006). Rotorua Domestic Heating Survey. Environmental Publication 2006/14. September 2006, Whakat āne. 2 Environment Bay of Plenty (2007). Rotorua Air Emissions Inventory 2005. Environmental Publication 2007/02. 3 Fisher. G., Thornton. D., Godfrey. J. (2007) Rotorua Airshed Modelling Investigation Final Report . Prepared by Endpoint Consulting Partners. September 2007

Page 209 of 274 3 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035

Commercial, 4%

Industry, 24%

Transport, 12%

Domestic, 61%

Figure 2: PM 10 winter percentage by source

The Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Regional Council) is responsible for ensuring the region’s air quality meets the standards by 2020. The Regional Council prepared the Rotorua Air Quality Action Plan (the action plan) in December 2008. Actions include education, research, rules and incentives 4.

The Rotorua Lakes Council collaborated with the Regional Council to introduce the 2010 Bylaw. The Bylaw’s purpose was to assist the Regional Council by restricting burners where possible.

The Bylaw contains three rules which have successfully reduced emissions in the Rotorua Airshed:

1. New Burner Rule – From December 2010, new burners installed in houses must be modern burners that complied with emissions standard of 1.5 grams per kilogram (g/kg) in the NESAQ. This essentially banned the installation of new coal burners, multifuel burners and indoor open fires. These three types of burners have the highest emissions. Although this does not reduce emissions, it prevents new sources from being introduced and making the problem worse

2. Point of Sale Rule – From May 2012, burners that are non-complying must be removed or replaced by the vendor before a house is sold. This has resulted in the conversion of 500 old burners.

3. Indoor Open Fire Rule – From May 2015, indoor open fires cannot be used. This phased out 850 indoor open fires.

Later in 2017 the Regional Council will introduce regional rules that will place further restrictions on both new burners and existing burners in the Rotorua Airshed. Some aspects of these rules are in conflict with the current Bylaw, and will create a situation where a burner may be permitted under the Bylaw, but not under the regional rules.

4 Environment Bay of Plenty (2008) Rotorua Air Quality Action Plan. Adopted by Regional Council committee on 16 December 2008

Page 210 of 274 4 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 3.2 Outcome sought

The proposal seeks to retain the Bylaw to ensure it continues to successfully convert burners, reduce emissions, and improve air quality. Improving air quality leads to better health and a better quality of life for people in the community. The review is an opportunity to ensure the Bylaw is consistent with the upcoming regional rules, and to resolve any issues identified during implementation. 4 Determination of appropriateness

Several assessments are required to determine whether the Bylaw is appropriate. The Bylaw: • must be the most appropriate way of addressing the problem • must be the most appropriate form of bylaw • must not give rise to any implications under the Bill of Rights Act 1990 4.1 Appropriate way

The following options have been considered to achieve the outcome sought and address the problem: 1. Revoke the Bylaw – rely on regional rules and incentives 2. Retain the current Bylaw 3. Amend the Bylaw – enhance implementation and ensure consistent with regional rules

4.1.1 Revoke the Bylaw

There is an option to revoke the Bylaw and rely on the regional rules to reduce discharges. The Bylaw has been successful at both preventing the problem from getting worse (New burner rule) and reducing emissions (Point of Sale rule, Indoor open fire rule). Although the intention of the regional rules is to eventually target these same burners, the process of introducing the rules could take some time. Without the Bylaw in place throughout this process, there would be a legislative gap where any type of burner could be installed in the Rotorua Airshed, and no requirement to remove any of the old, inefficient burners. Under this option, the air quality problem would not be addressed and the adverse impacts from air pollution will continue to cause harmful effects and reduce enjoyment of our environment. This option is not considered appropriate. 4.1.2 Retain the current Bylaw

Under this option the current Bylaw would be retained with no changes. The main advantage of this option is that the rules in the Bylaw are already accepted by the community and no changes would be needed in implementation. However the current Bylaw makes no distinction between new burners (burners installed in new houses or houses without an existing burner) and replacement burners (where burners replace an existing burner). At the time the Bylaw was developed, no such distinction was necessary and the new burner rule in the Bylaw allowed both new and replacement burners with a design standard of 1.5g/kg. The regional rules will manage new burners differently to replacement burners. New burners are limited to pellet burners only, and replacement burners must have a design

Page 211 of 274 5 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 standard of 0.5g/kg. The Regional Council incentives package also uses the criteria of 0.5g/kg, only providing financial support for burners that comply with this design standard. The current Bylaw will be in direct conflict with the likely direction of the regional rules, with homeowners able to install burners, but not legally able to use them. Therefore this option is not recommended as it will be in conflict with the regional rules and not address the problem. 4.1.3 Amend the Bylaw

This option would amend the Bylaw to enhance consistency and improve implementation. The main advantage of this option is that it will ensure consistency with the soon to be proposed regional rules. It will also assist with implementation of both the Bylaw and regional rules (once introduced) as compliance of new and replacement burners can be checked at the building permit stage, rather than when discharges are occurring (after installation). This option will address the problem and achieve the outcome sought. 4.2 Community views

Section 78 of the LGA 2002 requires the Council to consider community views in the course of making its bylaws. Community views are therefore relevant to the preparation of bylaws and the consideration of whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing a problem. The Rotorua Air Quality Working Party (the Working Party) is a group made up of representatives from Rotorua Lakes Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Regional Council), Toi te Ora Public Health, Ministry for the Environment and Housing New Zealand. The Working Party considered options for amendments to the Bylaw and endorsed the draft on 19 April 2017. The draft regional rules targeting Rotorua burners are included in the draft Regional Air Plan (the draft air plan) prepared by Regional Council. The draft air plan was released for public comment in April 2016. This was followed up with a sub-regional hui with iwi and hap ū in the Rotorua sub-region. The intended regional rules contain the same restrictions on indoor open fires and new burners as the draft Bylaw. There was very little feedback on these restrictions. Although this does not mean that there are no issues with these requirements, it indicates a lower level of concern. There was considerable concern over an additional rule in the draft air plan that targets all pre-2005 burners (about 4,000). This restriction has not been included in the Bylaw. Public views on the draft Bylaw will be sought further through the special consultative procedure. 4.3 Appropriate form

It is considered that the proposed draft bylaw is the most appropriate form of bylaw for the purposes of public consultation. Matters considered when assessing appropriate form include clarity, reasonableness, use of plain English, consistency with the general law of New Zealand, consistency with the Council’s strategic and policy directions. The bylaw making process has identified that the Bylaw is consistent with Council’s Long- term Plan. 5 The draft bylaw has not been identified as being inconsistent with any other plans or policies of the Council.

5 As required by section 80, LGA 2002.

Page 212 of 274 6 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 It is considered that the Draft Air Quality Control Bylaw 2017 which is set out in Appendix 1 is the most appropriate form of bylaw. This is because: 1. The bylaw contains clear rules which are enforceable 2. The proposed bylaw is binding on all persons within the Rotorua Airshed 3. Without clear rules, which are enforceable, there is little incentive for people to take action to replace or remove inefficient methods of heating.

4.4 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

In addition to the requirements considered above, the proposed bylaw must be consistent with New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. No inconsistencies with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 have been identified. The controls imposed are considered reasonable and justifiable in the circumstances as allowed for in section 5 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. On this basis, it is considered the proposed bylaw is consistent with New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, including freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, freedom of movement and freedom of expression. 5 Community Support

Council understands that there are many community members who may be adversely affected by the Bylaw and require additional support. In 2009 the Regional Council introduced financial incentives to encourage the conversion of older burners to modern heating methods. These include: • Hot Swap Scheme – interest free or low interest loan to upgrade heating and insulation paid back over ten years • Rates Rebate – households that qualify for rates rebate have their loan repayments under the Hot Swap Scheme waived • Low-income Heating Grant – grants for low income homes for heating and insulation. The Council may grant a dispensation to allow the use of non-complying solid fuel burners or indoor open fires in exceptional cases.

Page 213 of 274 7 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 6 Key changes to the Bylaw

The full draft Bylaw is included as Appendix 1. The regulations within the Bylaw apply to the Rotorua Airshed which is shown in Appendix 2. The Bylaw contains a number of changes to its regulations that differ from the original 2010 Bylaw. Many of these changes are minor, included for additional clarity, and to ensure consistency with the regional rules. However, some changes will affect what types of burners can be installed in houses within the Rotorua Airshed. 6.1 Interpretation

The core requirement of the Point of Sale has been retained. This rule previously required any non-complying solid fuel burner to be removed or replaced from a dwelling house before it was sold. There are two key changes to this. 1. Indoor open fires must now be rendered inoperable and may no longer be replaced with another type of solid fuel burner. Indoor open fires were phased out in May 2015 by the 2010 Bylaw. Discharges of particulates from this source are now considered to have been removed. Replacement of an indoor open fire with another type of solid fuel burner is therefore introducing a new source of discharges to the Rotorua Airshed, which will not achieve the outcome sought. It has been two years since the phase-out, sufficient time for homeowners to have installed a replacement solid fuel burner. 2. The rule now applies to all buildings in the Rotorua Airshed. Previously the rule applied only to dwelling houses. Dwelling houses have a specific definition (taken directly from the RMA) that made it unclear whether it applied to buildings used for other purposes, such as businesses and accommodation. A new clause has been added that requires written/photographic evidence of the removal or replacement to be provided to Council. While this was usually provided by those affected by this rule, this clause makes the requirement explicit, and it is clear to the public what is required. 6.3 New Burner Rule

The “Restriction on Installation of Solid Fuel Burners in New and Existing Houses” rule, known as the new burner rule, has changed. Previously the rule permitted the installation of a solid fuel burner provided they complied with the design standard (1.5 grams particulates discharges per kilogram of dry wood burnt) and thermal efficiency standard (the ratio of useable heat energy output to energy input not less than 65%) of the NESAQ. There are three substantial changes to this rule: 1. The installation of new burners where there is currently no solid fuel burner installed is limited to pellet burners. Pellet burners are the only solid fuel burner proven to have low emissions in real-life and are not as significantly affected by operator errors (such as burning rubbish) that increase emissions.

Page 214 of 274 8 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 2. Woodburners may be permitted provided that they replace a woodburner, coal burner, or multifuel burner. They may not replace indoor open fires nor any type of solid fuel burner that is designed for a purpose besides space heating (coal ranges, chip heaters). 3. Woodburners must meet a design standard of 0.5 grams particulates discharges per kilogram of dry wood burnt. This is stricter than the NESAQ requirement. Research shows that woodburners discharge significantly more particulates in real life, due to operator error. However, the better the design standard (the lower the discharge) the better the woodburners performs in real life. Ensuring that the best possible woodburners are installed will help achieve the outcome sought. Once again this rule now applies to all buildings, not just dwelling houses. The design standard and thermal efficiency regulations from the NESAQ have been included as additional clauses to this rule for clarity. 6.4 Minor changes

Other minor changes include amending or removing redundant dates throughout the document, and some grammatical corrections. 7 Administration and Enforcement

The Bay of Plenty Regional Council has carried out the responsibility for enforcement and administration of the current Bylaw since its adoption in 2010. This agreement will continue for the 2017 Bylaw. The Regional Council will therefore be carrying out such roles as monitoring compliance with the Bylaw, assessing dispensations, setting fees and reporting on the Bylaw’s achievements.

Page 215 of 274 9 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 Appendix 1 – Draft Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw 2017

AIR QUALITY CONTROL BYLAW 2017

Page 216 of 274 10 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 CONTENTS

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 SCOPE AND GENERAL 1.2 TITLE OF BYLAW 1.3 COMMENCEMENT

PART TWO: INTERPRETATION

PART THREE: RESTRICTIONS ON SOLID FUEL BURNERS

3.1 SOLID FUEL BURNER UPGRADE REQUIRED AT POINT OF SALE 3.2 RESTRICTION ON INSTALLATION OF SOLID FUEL BURNERS IN NEW AND EXISTING HOMES

PART FOUR: BAN ON OPEN FIRES

4.1 INDOOR OPEN FIRES

PART FIVE: DISPENSATIONS, FEES AND CHARGES

5.1 DISPENSATIONS 5.2 FEES AND CHARGES

PART SIX: ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

6.1 OFFENCES AND BREACHES 6.2 CONTINUING OFFENCES 6.3 REMOVAL OF WORKS 6.4 POWER OF ENTRY FOR ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES 6.5 PENALTIES FOR BREACH OF BYLAWS

SCHEDULE 1 – MAP OF ROTORUA AIRSHED

Page 217 of 274 11 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 SCOPE AND GENERAL

PURSUANT to the powers contained in the Local Government Act 2002, and any other authority enabling it in that behalf, the Rotorua District Council HEREBY RESOLVES to make the following Bylaw:

1.2 SHORT TITLE

This Bylaw shall be known as the “Rotorua District Council Air Quality Control Bylaw 2017”.

1.3 This Bylaw applies within the area defined as the "Rotorua Airshed", gazetted by the Ministry for the Environment.

1.4 COMMENCEMENT

The provisions of this Bylaw shall come into force on [date of adoption].

1.5 PURPOSE

The purpose of this Bylaw is to protect, promote and maintain public health and safety by regulating solid fuel burners and indoor open fires.

PART TWO: INTERPRETATION

In this Bylaw, unless the context otherwise requires:

“Authorised Officer” means any person appointed or authorised by either the Rotorua District Council or the Bay of Plenty Regional Council to act on their respective behalf’s and with their authority.

“Contaminant” includes any substance (including gases, odorous compounds, liquids, solids, and micro-organisms) or energy (excluding noise) or heat, that either by itself or in combination with the same, similar, or other substances, energy, or heat:

(a) when discharged into water, changes or is likely to change the physical, chemical, or biological condition of water, or (b) when discharges on to or into land or into air, changes or is likely to change the physical, chemical, or biological condition of the land or air on to or into which it is discharged.

“Coal burner:” means a solid fuel burner designed to burn coal, which has the following design features: (a) under fuel combustion air supplies with separate controls (b) grate in the base of the firebox (c) ash pan under the grate.

“Council” means the Rotorua District Council or the Bay of Plenty Regional Council and any authorised officer.

Page 218 of 274 12 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 “Discharge” includes emit, deposit, and allow to escape.

“Dwelling house” means any building, whether permanent or temporary, that is occupied, or is intended to be occupied, in whole or in part, as a residence; and includes any structure or outdoor living area that is accessory to, and used wholly or principally for the purposes of, the residence, but does not include the land upon which the residence is sited.

“Emission rate” means the amount of particles (in grams) discharged from a solid fuel burner for each kilogram of dry wood burnt. The discharge must be measured in accordance with: (a) the method specified in Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 4013:2014, Domestic solid fuel burning appliances – Method for determination of flue gas emission; or (b) for a woodburner excluded from that method, another method that is functionally equivalent.

“Indoor open fire” means an appliance or a structure in a dwelling house or building that can burn solid fuel but cannot effectively control the rate of air supply to the combustion zone. It includes a fireplace that has a cover or doors that cannot effectively control the rate of air supply to the combustion chamber, but excludes any solid fuel burner where the firebox is enclosed with a regulated supply of air to the fire.

“Inoperable” in relation to an indoor open fire means an indoor open fire where at least one of the following actions has rendered the indoor open fire permanently incapable of use: (a) the firebricks and masonry have been removed, (b) the chimney has been permanently blocked off, (c) the indoor open fire has been permanently boarded over, (d) an alternative heating appliance (not including solid fuel burners) has been installed into the fireplace

“Multifuel burner” means a solid fuel burner designed to burn wood and/or coal, which has the following design features: (a) fuel combustion air supplies with separate controls (b) grate in the base of the firebox (c) ash pan under the grate.

“Non-complying solid fuel burner” means:

(a) any woodburner installed before 1 September 2005 OR

(b) any coal burner, or multifuel burner, OR

“Pellet burner” means any solid fuel burning appliance that burns manufactured pellets of compressed wood sawdust, and where the pellets and air are mechanically delivered to an enclosed combustion chamber at a controlled rate. Excludes woodburners, coal burners and multifuel burners.

“Replace or Replaced” in relation to solid fuel burners means the complete physical removal (taking out, taking away or cause to be no longer present) of the solid fuel burner from the dwelling house or building and installation of a new solid fuel burner that complies with this Bylaw.

“Remove or Removed” in relation to the removal of solid fuel burners means the complete physical removal (taking out, taking away or cause to be no longer present) of the solid fuel burner

Page 219 of 274 13 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 from the dwelling house or building..

"Rotorua Airshed" means the area of Rotorua specified by the Minister for the Environment as a separate airshed, by notice in the New Zealand Gazette ,

“Solid Fuel” means a solid substance that releases useable energy when burnt and includes wood, coal and its derivatives, and manufactured fuel pellets.

“Solid Fuel Burner” means a small-scale solid fuel burning appliance, where combustion of the solid fuel occurs within a firebox, and where there may be a regulated supply of air to the fire. It includes (but is not limited to) indoor open fires, freestanding or built in woodburners, pellet burners, potbelly stoves and coal ranges, chip heaters, water heaters or central heating units, multi-fuel burners, and similar appliances. It excludes small-scale domestic devices for smoking food, any portable unflued heaters fueled by gas, alcohol or other liquid fuels, gas hobs or gas ranges used for cooking, and any fuel burning appliance installed in a boat, caravan or motor home.

“Space Heater” means a domestic appliance designed for use within a building to generate warmth for human comfort. It includes solid fuel burners with water heating capabilities as a secondary purpose and appliances designed to heat water for space heating (for example via radiators). It excludes cooking fires, ranges, and chip heaters where the primary purpose of the fire is to cook or heat water.

“Thermal efficiency” means the ratio of useable heat energy output to energy input. The thermal efficiency must be calculated in accordance with: (d) the method specified in Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 4012:2014, Domestic solid fuel burning appliances – Method for determination of power output and efficiency; or (e) for a woodburner excluded from that method, another method that is functionally equivalent.

“Transfer of ownership” does not include:

(a) a transaction in which a person who was a registered proprietor of the dwelling house at the date this Bylaw comes into force who remains or becomes a registered proprietor (whether or not the only registered proprietor) of that dwelling house after the transfer; or

(b) a transaction in which the transferee is a trustee of a trust and one or more of the transferors are a beneficiary of that same trust.

“Woodburner” means a type of domestic solid fuel burner that burns wood, where combustion of wood occurs within a firebox, and where there is a regulated supply of air to the fire. It excludes indoor open fires, pellet burners, coal burners, multifuel burners, and also excludes cooking fires, ranges, and chip heaters where the primary purpose of the fire is to cook or heat water

Page 220 of 274 14 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 PART THREE: RESTRICTIONS ON SOLID FUEL BURNERS

3.1 SOLID FUEL BURNER CHANGE REQUIRED AT POINT OF SALE 3.1.1 Any indoor open fire must be rendered inoperable and any other non-complying solid fuel burner situated in a dwelling house or building must be replaced or removed by the vendor, before a registered transfer of ownership of the dwelling house in which the non-complying solid fuel burner is located takes place except where an indoor open fire is located within a building which is classified by the Historic Places Trust as a Heritage building.

3.1.2 Vendors affected by 3.1.1 must provide the Council with written/photographic evidence of compliance with 3.1.1, within 3 days following the registered transfer of ownership of the dwelling house or building in which the non-complying solid fuel burner was located.

3.2 RESTRICTION ON INSTALLATION OF SOLID FUEL BURNERS

3.2.1 No person shall permit, allow or carry out the installation of any solid fuel burner in any dwelling house or building after the date of commencement of this Bylaw except: (a) where the installation is of a pellet burner, or (b) where the installation is of a woodburner that: (i) replaced a woodburner, coal burner or multifuel burner that was used primarily as a space heater in the dwelling house or building, and (ii) has an emission rate equal to or less than 0.5g/kg and a thermal efficiency of no less than 65%.

PART FOUR: BAN ON DISCHARGES FROM INDOOR OPEN FIRES

4.1 INDOOR OPEN FIRES

4.1.1 No person shall discharge contaminants into the air from any indoor open fire except:

(a) from industrial or trade premises where the open fire is used exclusively for the smoking and cooking of food for wholesale or retail sale, or

(b) where the indoor open fire is located within a building which is classified by the Historic Places Trust as a Heritage building.

Page 221 of 274 15 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 PART FIVE: DISPENSATIONS, FEES AND CHARGES

5.1 DISPENSATIONS

5.1.1 Where, in the opinion of the Council, full compliance with any of the provisions of this Bylaw would needlessly or injuriously affect any person, or the course or operation of the business of, or bring loss or inconvenience to, any person without any corresponding benefit to the community, the Council may, on the special application of such person so affected or on the recommendation of any authorised officer, by delegated authority, dispense with the full compliance or relax the full compliance of any clause of the Bylaw, or otherwise modify the same with or without added conditions.

5.2 FEES AND CHARGES

5.2.1 The Council may prescribe fees to be charged for any dispensation, certificate, authority, approval, permit, or consent from, or inspection by, the Council in respect of matters provided for in this Bylaw.

5.2.2 The setting of fees or charges shall be in accordance with section 150 of the Local Government Act 2002.

5.2.3 Where a fee has been paid under clause 5.2.1 for a service which has not been given, the Council may provide a refund of such fee or portion of it as the Council may determine.

PART SIX: ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

6.1 OFFENCES AND BREACHES

6.1.1 Every person commits a breach of this Bylaw who:

(a) Does or permits anything contrary to this Bylaw;

(b) Omits, or neglects to do, or knowingly permits or suffers to remain undone, anything which ought to be done at the time and in the manner provided by this Bylaw; or

(d) Knowingly permits or allows any condition of or things to exist or continue to exist contrary to any provision contained in this Bylaw; or

(e) Refuses or neglects to comply with any notice given under this Bylaw; or

(f) Obstructs or hinders any authorised officer of the Council in the performance of any duty or power conferred by this Bylaw; or

(g) Fails to comply with any notice or direction given under this Bylaw.

6.1.2 Where is it suspected that any person has committed a breach of this Bylaw, that person shall, at the direction of an authorised officer, provide their full name, address and date of birth.

Page 222 of 274 16 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 6.2 CONTINUING OFFENCES

6.2.1 The continued existence of any work or building, land or premises or thing in such a state or form as to be in contravention of any clause of this Bylaw shall be deemed to be a continuing offence under this Bylaw.

6.2.2 Where any person is required by a notice under clause 6.1.1(e) to do anything, or refrain from doing anything, then they shall commit a separate or continuing offence on each day that person fails to comply with the notice.

6.2.3 The Council may, after a conviction for the continuing breach of this Bylaw, apply to any court of competent jurisdiction for an injunction to restrain the further continuance of the breach by the person so convicted.

6.3 REMOVAL OF WORKS

6.3.1 Where a notice served under clause 6.1.1(e) has not been complied with, the Council or any authorised officer or agent of the Council, may pull down, remove or alter, or cause to be pulled down, remove or alter any work, material or thing erected or being in contravention of this Bylaw.

6.3.2 The Council may recover from any person responsible for the breach of any part of this Bylaw, all expenses incurred by it in connection with such pulling down, removal or alteration. This includes the cost of debt collecting and legal fees.

6.3.3 The exercise of this authority does not relieve any such person from liability for any penalty for erecting or permitting the continued existence of any such work, material or thing.

6.3.4 If however the breach is such that public health, or safety considerations, or risk of consequential damage to Council assets is such that would create unacceptable results, the Council may take immediate action to rectify the defect and recover all reasonable costs.

6.3.5 On payment of all Council’s costs, including storage where applicable, the lawful owner may claim any object, material or thing removed under clause 6.3.1.

6.3.6 If not claimed within a reasonable time the Council may dispose of any object, material or thing as it sees fit and apply the proceeds to meet any outstanding costs. The lawful owner shall be entitled to claim any residual sum.

6.4 POWER OF ENTRY FOR ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES

6.4.1 A warranted enforcement officer may enter land or a dwelling house, for the purpose of detecting any breach of this Bylaw if the officer has reasonable grounds for suspecting that a breach of the Bylaw has occurred or is occurring on the land.

6.4.2 Before exercising the power in clause 6.4.1 the officer must, if practicable, give reasonable notice to the occupier of the land of the intention to exercise the power, unless the giving of notice would defeat the purpose of entry.

6.4.3 The power in clause 6.4.1 to enter a dwelling house must not be exercised unless:

(a) the entry is authorised by a warrant given by a District Court Judge on written application on oath; and

(b) when exercising the power, the enforcement officer is accompanied by a constable.

6.4.4 Before exercising the power in clause 6.4.1 the officer must produce evidence of his or her identity and authority to exercise the power:

(a) if practicable, before entering the land or premises; and

(b) whenever subsequently reasonably requested to do so.

Page 223 of 274 17 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 6.5 PENALTIES FOR BREACH OF BYLAWS

6.5.1 Any person who breaches this Bylaw commits an offence under section 239 of the Local Government Act 2002, and is liable on summary conviction to a fine under section 242(4) of the Act not exceeding $20,000.00:

6.5.2 In accordance with section 162 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Council may apply to the District Court for an injunction to restrain a person from committing a breach of this Bylaw.

6.5.3 In accordance with section 245 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Council may issue an infringement notice to any person who commits an offence against this Bylaw.

THIS BYLAW was duly made by the Rotorua District Council by a resolution passed on the [insert resolution date].

The Common Seal of the ROTORUA DISTRICT COUNCIL was hereunto affixed in the presence of:

______Mayor

______Chief Executive

Page 224 of 274 18 TRIM 01-63-107-21 RDC-718035 Appendix 2 – Rotorua Airshed

Objective ID: A2590341 Page 225 of 274

Page 226 of 274

APPENDIX 2

Draft Agreement - Enforcement and Administration of Air Quality Control Bylaw pdf

Page 227 of 274

Page 228 of 274

BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL

AND

ROTORUA DISTRICT COUNCIL

AGREEMENT REGARDING ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF AIR QUALITY CONTROL BYLAW

Dated 2017

Page 229 of 274 2

AGREEMENT REGARDING ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF AIR QUALITY CONTROL BYLAW

PARTIES:

BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL , together with its successors and assigns (“BOPRC”) A N D ROTORUA DISTRICT COUNCIL , together with its successors and assigns (“RDC”)

INTRODUCTION

A. RDC has made a bylaw known as the “Rotorua District Council Air Quality Control Bylaw 2010” (“the Bylaw”) pursuant to its powers under the Local Government Act 2002 (“LGA 2002”), which applies within that area defined as the “Rotorua Airshed”

B. The Bylaw was made at the request of BOPRC to assist BOPRC in fulfilling its statutory function of regulating air quality and in particular issues associated with the use of solid fuel burners and fires in the Rotorua district. The purpose of the Bylaw is to protect, promote and maintain public health and safety by regulating solid fuel burners and open fires.

C. RDC and BOPRC have agreed that BOPRC will undertake RDC’s functions relating to the administration and enforcement of the Bylaw on the terms and conditions set out in this Agreement.

AGREEMENT

The Parties hereby acknowledge and agree as follows:

1. Enforcement and Administration of Bylaw

1.1 RDC hereby contracts out to BOPRC the administration and enforcement of the Bylaw pursuant to s179 of the LGA 2002 and to delegate any functions and powers necessary for such administration and enforcement pursuant to Clause 32(5) of Schedule 7 to the LGA 2002, on the specific terms and conditions of this Agreement, which include the Schedule to this Agreement as may be varied from time to time as contemplated by clause 5.1.

1.2 BOPRC hereby accepts the contracting out and delegation made by RDC pursuant to clause 1.1.

1.3 The particular administration and enforcement functions which are to be undertaken, and powers which are to be exercised, by BOPRC pursuant to

Page 230 of 274 3

this Agreement include, but are not limited to, those matters set out in the Schedule to this Agreement.

1.4 In addition to the particular functions and powers of BOPRC pursuant to this Agreement, the Parties agree that BOPRC will have such additional incidental functions and powers prescribed by law as are reasonably necessary to enable it to undertake, exercise and perform this Agreement, including the power to sub-contract or sub-delegate its functions and powers under this Agreement to the extent allowed by law and in a manner consistent with its delegation policies.

1.5 Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, BOPRC will exclusively administer and enforce the Bylaw pursuant to this Agreement. This means that RDC will not carry out any administrative or enforcement action in relation to the Bylaw contemplated under this Agreement without first seeking the written consent of BOPRC’s Chief Executive.

1.6 References in this Agreement including the Schedule to BOPRC include any enforcement officer or other person validly appointed by BOPRC to carry out BOPRC’s functions under this Agreement, acting within the scope of the relevant delegation or other authority given by BOPRC.

1.7 BOPRC will ensure that all persons performing functions pursuant to this Agreement are validly appointed including, where required, pursuant to specific delegation, and are issued with all warrants and such other authorities as may be necessary to enable them to carry out the functions under this Agreement.

1.8 None of the provisions of this Agreement will be deemed to constitute any relationship of employer and employee, partnership or joint venture between the Parties and neither Party has any authority to bind the other in any way except as expressly provided for in this Agreement.

2. Term

2.1 This Agreement will commence and take effect from [to be inserted] and will continue for so long as the Bylaw remains in full force and effect unless terminated earlier pursuant to this Agreement.

3. Termination of Agreement

3.1 The Parties may agree in writing to terminate this Agreement at any time.

3.2 Either Party may terminate this Agreement by giving not less than three months’ advance written notice to the other Party.

3.3 Any termination of this Agreement shall be without prejudice to rights and obligations that have accrued at the date of termination. This includes the right of BOPRC, at its discretion, to continue with any enforcement or administrative action commenced under this Agreement prior to termination until completion of that matter on the terms and conditions of this Agreement which will be treated for that purpose as surviving termination. Should BOPRC decide not to continue with any such action, it shall do all things necessary at the request of RDC to enable RDC to take over such action in which case the provisions of this Agreement will not apply, except to the extent of any accrued rights and obligations up until the time RDC takes over, and RDC will be acting pursuant to its usual statutory functions and powers.

Page 231 of 274 4

3.4 Upon expiry or earlier termination of this Agreement, BOPRC must immediately return to RDC all information and any other property or equipment of RDC which BOPRC has come into possession or control of through performance of this Agreement.

4. Co-operation

4.1 The Parties agree to co-operate with each other and do whatever is necessary to achieve the requirements and objectives of this Agreement and in particular:

(a) Where a further consent of either Party is required for performance of this Agreement, that consent will not be unreasonably withheld;

(b) RDC will share with BOPRC all information available to RDC which would assist BOPRC in the effective and efficient administration and enforcement of the Bylaw;

(c) BOPRC will, in like manner, share with RDC all information available to BOPRC which would assist RDC in the future effective and efficient administration and enforcement of the Bylaw;

(d) RDC will provide all necessary assistance in any legal proceedings commenced by BOPRC contemplated under this Agreement, including making available relevant officers to prepare and present evidence in Court on behalf of BOPRC as required. BOPRC agrees to meet RDC’s reasonable costs associated with preparation and presentation of such evidence.

5. Variation

5.1 This Agreement including any matter contained in the Schedule may be varied at any time by written agreement between the Parties.

6. Indemnity

6.1 BOPRC will indemnify and will keep indemnified at all times (including any period after termination of this Agreement) RDC against all actions, suits, claims, debts, obligations and other liabilities whatsoever (together “the Claim”) arising out BOPRC’s obligations or performance under this Agreement, except to the extent that RDC has caused or contributed to the particular matter giving rise to the Claim including, without limitation, the failure to pass on any information required by BOPRC as contemplated by clause 9.2.

6.2 For the avoidance of doubt, the Parties acknowledge that the indemnity from BOPRC under clause 6.1 has full legal force and effect as between the Parties notwithstanding that under section 179(2) of the Local Government Act 2002 RDC retains responsibility for the manner in which BOPRC performs its functions and exercises its powers under this Agreement, and further notwithstanding that under clause 32(7) of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002 no delegation by RDC of its enforcement and administration functions arising from the Bylaw relieves RDC of its legal responsibility to perform or ensure performance of any function or duty.

Page 232 of 274 5

7. Insurance

7.1 BOPRC will maintain at all times policies of insurance in relation to its functions and powers under this Agreement and against such risks as are normally insured by prudent organisations carrying out similar duties and obligations.

8. Funding and Cost Recovery

8.1 BOPRC will fund the performance of its functions under this Agreement and will be entitled to recover and retain any fines, fees, charges and costs which RDC would have been lawfully entitled to recover in connection with administration and enforcement of the Bylaw had those functions been undertaken by RDC.

8.2 Where necessary, on behalf of BOPRC, RDC will promptly recover and remit to BOPRC any fines, fees, charges and costs paid or owing to RDC which BOPRC is entitled to pursuant to clause 8.1.

9. Reporting and Information

9.1 RDC’s Manager Regulatory and Support Services will be available (in person or by telephone) to assist BOPRC officers as required in undertaking their functions under this Agreement.

9.2 RDC will promptly refer to BOPRC any matters or correspondence available to RDC which BOPRC requires knowledge of in order to carry out its functions under this Agreement.

9.3 BOPRC will regularly report to RDC on the administration and enforcement of the Bylaw via a biannual report summarising:

(a) Investigation and enforcement activity; (b) Court action; (c) Costs incurred; (d) Fines / amounts received; and (e) Any other matters of interest, including such matters as RDC may reasonably stipulate in writing.

10. Dispute Resolution

10.1 If any difference or dispute arises between the Parties in relation to this Agreement, the following provisions will apply:

(a) As soon as a Party becomes aware of any difference or dispute, that Party must give notice in writing of the dispute or difference to the other Party;

(b) The Parties will use their best endeavours to promptly resolve any difference or dispute through good faith negotiations;

(c) Where a difference or dispute remains unresolved for more than [seven days ], either Party may require that the difference or dispute be referred to mediation with an agreed mediator. If the parties do not agree on a mediator, then the mediator will be appointed by the

Page 233 of 274 6

President of the Arbitrators & Mediators Institute of New Zealand. All discussions during and related to the mediation will be confidential and without prejudice. The Parties will bear their own costs of the mediation and will share equally the mediator’s costs.

(d) If the Parties do not resolve the difference or dispute by mediation within either [three months ] from the date of referral to mediation or any other period agreed by the Parties, then the difference or dispute is to be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Act 1996. Unless otherwise agreed, the following rules apply in relation to any arbitration:

i. the difference or dispute is to be arbitrated by a single arbitrator to be agreed on by the Parties or, if agreement is not reached, to be appointed by the President of the Arbitrators & Mediators Institute of New Zealand; ii. the arbitration is to be heard in Rotorua. iii. the parties may appeal to the High Court on any question of law arising out of the arbitrator’s award.]

10.2 Despite the existence of a difference or dispute, each Party must continue to perform its obligations under this Agreement.

10.3 This clause 10 does not restrict or limit the right of either Party to obtain interlocutory relief, or to terminate this Agreement in accordance with its terms.

11. Miscellaneous

11.1 Costs: Each Party will bear its own costs of and incidental to the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement and any subsequent variation to it. Each Party will bear its own costs associated with carrying out its obligations under this Agreement except as expressly provided otherwise in this Agreement.

11.2 Assignment: Neither Party may directly or indirectly (including through change in ownership or control) assign or transfer any of its rights or benefits under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other Party, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld.

11.3 Publication: RDC will not release public or media statements or publish material related to BOPRC’s performance of the services under this Agreement without the prior written approval of BOPRC, which must not be unreasonably withheld.

11.4 LGOIMA: The Parties acknowledge that each other is subject to the Local Government Official Information & Meetings Act 1987 (“LGOIMA”) and that under LGOIMA they may be required to release information relating to this Agreement and the functions carried out by BOPRC pursuant to it. RDC will refer all requests for such information to BOPRC to respond to and will provide all reasonable assistance to allow that response to be completed within the statutory timeframe.

12. Notices

12.1 Any notice given under this Agreement must be in writing.

Page 234 of 274 7

12.2 Notices may be served on the Parties personally or by facsimile or post to the addresses set out below:

For Bay of Plenty Regional Council PO Box 364, Whakatane 3158 Facsimile: 07 368 329

Bay of Plenty Regional Council nominated contact: Regulatory Compliance Manager

For Rotorua District Council Private Bag 3029, Rotorua Mail Centre, Rotorua 3046 Facsimile: 07 346 3143

Rotorua District Council nominated contact: Manager Regulatory and Support Services

12.3 The Parties must notify the other in writing of any change of contact details or nominated contact persons.

SIGNED BY THE PARTIES

SIGNED by BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL

………………………….. Chief Executive

SIGNED by ROTORUA DISTRICT COUNCIL

………………………….. Chief Executive

Page 235 of 274 8

SCHEDULE

Functions and Powers of BOPRC pursuant to this Agreement

1. BOPRC’s functions and powers in relation to the administration and enforcement of the Bylaw pursuant to this Agreement include, but are not limited to:

(a) Consideration and determination of applications for dispensations from full compliance with the Bylaw, as contemplated by clause 5.1.1 of the Bylaw;

(b) Prescription of fees or charges payable for any certificate, authority, approval, permit or consent from, or inspection by BOPRC in respect of any matter provided for in the Bylaw pursuant to s.150, LGA 2002 and determination of any refund of any such fees or charges as contemplated by clause 5.2 of the Bylaw;

(c) Commencement and conduct of proceedings for injunctions to restrain breaches (including continuing breaches) of the Bylaw as contemplated by clauses 6.2.3 and 6.5.2 of the Bylaw and s.162, LGA 2002;

(d) Removal or alteration of works in breach of the Bylaw and recovery of expenses as contemplated by clause 6.3 of the Bylaw and s.163, LGA 2002;

(e) Rectification of damage to BOPRC and RDC assets in connection with the Bylaw and recovery of costs as contemplated by clause 6.3.4 of the Bylaw and ss.175-176 and s.187, LGA 2002;

(f) Seizure and disposal of property involved in breach of the Bylaw as contemplated by clause 6.3 of the Bylaw including the power to apply for a warrant as contemplated by ss.164-168, LGA 2002;

(g) Powers of entry in connection with the Bylaw including the power to apply for a warrant as contemplated by clause 6.4 of the Bylaw and ss. 171-174, LGA 2002;

(h) Appointment of enforcement officers in relation to offences against the Bylaw (including infringement offences) including the power to issue warrants to such officers as contemplated by s.177, LGA 2002;

(i) Power to require certain information required for enforcement of the Bylaw as contemplated by clauses 3.1.2 and 6.1.2 of the Bylaw and s.178 LGA 2002;

(j) Issue of infringement notices and entitlement to infringement fees as contemplated by clause 6.5.3 of the Bylaw and ss.245-246, LGA 2002;

(k) Commencement and conduct of proceedings for breaches of the Bylaw including in respect of infringement offences as contemplated by s.239 LGA 2002 and the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 and regulations made under that Act;

Page 236 of 274 9

(l) Commencement and conduct of other legal proceedings in relation to the Bylaw including but not limited to declaration proceedings or appeal proceedings.

2. Particular provisions of the Bylaw or the LGA 2002 referred to in this Schedule do not limit BOPRC’s powers under this Agreement, which shall be to the fullest extent prescribed by law.

Page 237 of 274

Page 238 of 274

Receives Only – No Decisions

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Stephen Lamb, Natural Resources Policy Manager

Climate change information update

Executive Summary

New information is now available on the effects of climate change in the Bay of Plenty catchments. This includes:  A climate change implications case study based on the Kaituna catchment  Rainfall and temperature predictions in geospatial layers based on Ministry for the Environment’s 2006 Climate Change report.

Climate change has a major bearing on Council’s work. How Council will respond to climate change is dependent on Council’s Long Term Plan decisions. Council is set to consider the Council’s future role in relation to responding to the challenge of climate change through its Long Term Plan (LTP) process. Preparation for supporting that discussion is in progress. This paper provides a brief update on work to date.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, “Climate Change Information Update”.

2 Notes Council will be considering its strategy and actions for climate change as part of the Long-Term Plan process.

1 Purpose

This paper provides the Committee with an update on information that has become available on climate change implications in the Bay of Plenty. In preparation for Council’s Long Term Plan discussion on climate change staff have been collating background information and the stocktake part of this is also presented in this report.

Page 239 of 274 Climate change information update

2 Context

2.1 New information available for preparing climate change implications in the Bay of Plenty communities

2.1.1 Kaituna case study

Climate Change Impacts and Implications (CCII) released its Kaituna lowland case study synthesis report in late March this year. The summary of that report is in Appendix One.

Between 2012 and 2016, research institutes joined forces to commence the Climate Change Impacts and Implications (CCII) project, which focused on providing some responses to the question: “What are the predicted climatic conditions and assessed/potential impacts and implications of climate variability and trends on New Zealand and its regional biophysical environment, the economy and society, at projected critical temporal steps up to 2100?”

The project team included Landcare Research, NIWA, Plant & Food Research, GNS Science, Motu, Scion New Zealand, University of Waikato, AgResearch, New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre.

Kaituna catchment was selected to be the lowland case study for understanding the pressure points, critical steps and potential responses. CCII had some community members, iwi members, Councillors and staff to participate in their research workshops. The synthesis report of that work is now available on-line.

It is expected Council staff will use this information as a resource to inform their work, including engaging with the Kaituna catchment communities which occurs on a regular basis. However, the projected information has to be used with caution, due to its modelling assumptions and limitations.

Council is promoting the Kaituna lowland case study report by making it more accessible through links from Council webpages - Kaituna ‘What’s new?’, and the Sustainable Communities ‘Climate Change’.

2.1.2 Bay of Plenty’s climate change geospatial information layers being updated

In June 2016, the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) released Climate Change Projections for New Zealand. This 2016 report is based on a new set of scenarios of ‘representative concentration pathways’ (RCPs) and projected changes for the 2040s and 2090s compared to 1995 (1986 – 2005 average).

Staff are currently working on making the updated layers available in the internal geospatial information system, making it accessible for staff use for analysis and in carrying out their various functions. This is the third update since 2003, aligning with the international and Central Government updates. These layers include annual and seasonal average temperatures and rainfalls under two RCPs scenarios for the 2040s (2031-2050) and 2090s (2081-2100) time period.

Council’s existing climate change information on Council’s ‘Climate Change’ webpage still provides useful climate science predictions for some Bay of Plenty areas, including:

2 Page 240 of 274 Climate change information update

 Tauranga - number of hot days a year; frequency of heavy rainfall events  Katikati - frequency of frost days  Te Puke - frequency of frost days  Rotorua - number of hot days a year; frequency of frost days  Whakarewarewa - frequency of heavy rainfall events  Kawerau - frequency of frost days  Whakatāne - number of hot days a year; frequency of heavy rainfall events  Ōpōtiki - number of hot days a year; frequency of frost days. These factors were estimated for the chosen areas because the current activities in those areas are expected to be more sensitive to those factors. For example, frost is important consideration for kiwifruit growers in Te Puke, more populated centres are more sensitive to hot days, and flood protection engineers identified Whakarewarewa as a site of interest.

2.2 Council activities related to climate change

Preparing for Council’s Long Term Plan discussions on Council’s future direction and role in climate change, staff have been undertaking a stocktake of Council’s climate change related activities. Those activities are related to either:  adaptation (ie preparing towards the changing climate pattern) and  climate change mitigation (ie reducing greenhouse gas).

During this process, staff found that in general that the effects of climate change are being considered in many Council functions. However, information-sharing and co- ordinating responses occurred on an ad-hoc, case-by-case basis. Staff identified opportunities to:  build stronger synergy through more established and regular information exchange sessions specifically focused on climate change  advocate for resilience and climate change risk information externally  explore partnership with district councils and other parties in reducing risks caused by the impacts of climate change.

On the greenhouse gas reduction front, Council’s responses can be described as being a co-benefit or by-product of Council carrying out its main functions. Examples of this include supporting planting, restoring water/soil/wetland/habitats, managing and improving water quality, public transport, minimising waste, supporting and pursuing sustainable business and environmental responsibility. Only limited activities are purposefully directed towards greenhouse gas reduction.

It is recognised that currently the legislation framework limits Council’s ability to use regulatory tools to manage greenhouse gas. A strategic action plan could also provide an opportunity for focusing and sharing Council’s responses to climate change.

A draft copy of the stocktake can be found in Appendix 2. Due to many of the staff reviewing the stocktake being busy responding to the recent flooding and cyclone events the stocktake is presented here as a draft. A completed stocktake and staff recommendations will be made available for Council discussion on its future role in climate change.

3 Page 241 of 274 Climate change information update

3 Council’s Accountability Framework

3.1 Community Outcomes

The climate change information can potentially contribute to all Community Outcomes in the Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

3.2 Long Term Plan Alignment

This work is planned under the Regional Planning and Engagement Group of Activities in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Current Budget Implications

This work had been undertaken within the 2016/2017 budget for the Integrated Catchment Group Activity in the Annual Plan 2015/25 or Year 2 of the Long Term Plan 2015-2025. Budget expenses have been approved by senior management through the Water Board.

Future Budget Implications

Future budget implications will be estimated and discussed as a part of the upcoming Long Term Plan discussion about Council’s role in climate change.

Michelle Lee Planner (Water Policy) for Natural Resources Policy Manager

11 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

4 Page 242 of 274

APPENDIX 1

Climate change and land use dynamics in lowland CCII Kaituna case study

Page 243 of 274

Page 244 of 274 CCII Climate Changes, Impacts & Implications for New Zealand

Home About CCII Research Aims Case Studies Scenarios Synthesis Reports Workshop Presentations Lowlands

Case Study: Climate-land use dynamics in lowland environments: implications for conservation, primary production, urbanisation and ecosystem services

General Context (from MBIE contract) Climate change will impact important primary sectors such as dairy, horticulture, and arable cropping, as well as ecological functioning of native ecosystem remnants. Expected increases in land-use competition and intensification will compound these impacts. This modelling will explore the potential implications of the dynamics among conservation, primary production and urban land uses. It will also explore the associated implications for native biodiversity in fragmented landscapes, long-term availability of high quality soil resources for agricultural production and effects of land use intensification on water resource management.

Study Area Selected After evaluation against preselected criteria and engagement with Bay of Plenty Regional Council, the Lower Kaituna (including part of Papamoa) has been selected for this case study. This area is likely to be affected by both drought and flood related climate issues, contained all ten of the evaluated land uses (conservation, urbanisation, intensification, freshwater wetland, native forest, dairy, forestry, cropping, horticulture/viticulture, urban), and connections with Iwi and Regional Council were already established.

Potential Impacts of Climate Change The following factors are potential impacts of climate change in the lowland environments:

Droughts: drier conditions in eastern New Zealand can lead to water shortage in rivers with increased pressure on water resources.

Page 245 of 274

http://ccii.org.nz/research -aims/ra2/lowlands/ Floods: the increased frequency of storms can lead to flooding, landslides, mudslides, increased soil erosion, increased pressure on government and flood insurance, and increased pest and disease. Change in average temperature: lead to change in suitability for certain land-use types.

Change in CO2 concentration: increase or decrease in annual pasture yields. This may also favour certain native plants or weeds and instigate a change in species composition or abundance. Moisture stress: decline in milk production, reduction in stock numbers, sun-damage on fruits, reduction in aquatic environments Increased pressure and decreased resilience mean both native ecosystems and production environments may be more susceptible to pests and diseases. Social and financial limitations may constrain changes (or rate of change) in land use in response to environmental changes (i.e. current land uses may not be fitting post climate change but people may be unwilling or unable to afford to alter how they use the land).

Potential Implications of Climate Change Potential changes to water flows are likely to have implications for irrigation demand and associated costs of water management, while any changes in water quality due to changed landuse will have implications for environmental regulation, associated costs, and freshwater ecosystem services. Further implications of changes in landuse or land-based productivity may include changes in economic return for some farming systems, leading to the potential for landuse change with associated societal implications. Future flooding frequency and sea level rise impacts are likely to have significant implications for protective infrastructure upgrades, requiring continuing assessments of hazard lines, and the potential for setbacks from hazardous locations.

Highlights of the Synthesis Report: RA2 Coastal Case Study In the Bay of Plenty, there will be a likely increase in mean air temperature and number of hot days and dry days, increasing the risk of drought. There is likely to be more rain in summer and less in winter and spring. Sea level rise will affect the coastal zone around the Kaituna catchment, with 5,500 ha likely to be regularly inundated every couple of weeks during high tide (1.8 m above mean sea level) affecting the dairy industry and maize cropping. Change in pasture production is positive under all scenarios for both sheep and dairy pasture. The magnitude of the change is larger for dairy than for sheep. Total annual pasture growth increases by 1 –5 % around mid-century and by 2–7.5% by 2100. Seasonal average growth rates show consistent, large increases in winter and spring, as expected under warmer conditions and an extended growing season.

For forestry, simulations with constant CO2 , there were reductions in productivity of 4–20% for both 2055 and 2085 depending on the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenario. For

simulations with increasing CO2 , growth increased by about 10–15% by 2055. The between-site

variability was higher for the simulations with constant CO2 than for those with increasing CO2 , with

standard deviations by 2085 ranging from 3 to 7% for simulations under constant CO2 , which reduced

to 2–3% under increasing CO2 . It is consistent with the general tendency for increasing CO2 to have greater beneficial effects for plants growing under otherwise more stressful conditions. For maize silage, the impact of climate change yields was assessed considering model runs with or without adaptation of crop genotype and sowing dates. Model results indicate a higher risk of yield losses when sowing dates are not adapted. For these conditions, yield loss estimates increase from

Page 246 of 274

http://ccii.org.nz/research -aims/ra2/lowlands/ mid-century (5%) to the end of the century (12%). In contrast, by adapting sowing dates to a warmer climate (i.e. sowing early), yield losses were minimised and yield gains occurred for specific locations. Climate change impacts on silage yield were uneven across the catchment. More negative impacts were estimated in the northern lowlands, currently the most suitable area for arable cropping. Hayward kiwifruit production viability for the Te Puke area is projected to decrease steadily over time and becomes consistently marginal by the 2050s and non-viable by the end of the century. The key reason for this is the loss of sufficient winter chilling as the climate warms. However, other inland North Island regions and many parts of the South Island (particularly Canterbury) show an increase in viability (based purely on temperature) for this crop variety over the century. Land-use change in the catchment could be significant over the next century, and is projected to be affected by both the socioeconomic pathways and climate change. The Shared Socio-Economic Pathway scenario chosen (SSP3) is projecting high log and sheep & beef prices compared with dairy prices. By comparing two land-use change models, we found that there is generally a shift from sheep & beef farming to forestry by the end of the century. High log prices cause forestry to increase beyond baseline levels in both models. However, discrepancies in model assumptions and structure meant that there were differences in dairy changes (opposite directions) and magnitude. Regardless, the consistent result of an increase in afforestation in the Kaituna by 2100 across all scenarios suggests environmental outputs such as GHG emissions and freshwater contaminant loads could be reduced over the next century, even if there is some intensification in the catchment. For the remaining swamps in the Kaituna, increased precipitation may induce a change in wetland type to a permanently wet state (e.g. ephemeral to swamp); a higher nutrient system (e.g. fen to swamp), or a more aquatic system (shallow water, pond or lake). Lower rainfall would increase pressure on obligate wetland plants and therefore vegetation types dominated by these species. Changes in rainfall periodicity or intensity will also have an impact, as it may increase the extent of wetland margins and thus favour facultative dryland species, many of which are alien weeds. An integrated assessment provided an overview of potential future impacts of both climate change and socio-economic changes. In the scenario that was investigated (high Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP), fragmented world), there is almost no attempt to curtail climate change on a global scale and only very limited, reactive local efforts. Costs of production would generally increase due to a need for increased environmental management for pest control and water shortages, with a higher risk for a decline in commodity prices due to increased global competition.

Leadership of case study: Anne-Gaelle Ausseil, Landcare Research

Click here to download the RA2 Lowlands Case Study Synthesis Report.

CCII | Powered by Mantra & WordPress.

Page 247 of 274

http://ccii.org.nz/research -aims/ra2/lowlands/

Page 248 of 274

APPENDIX 2

DRAFT Stocktake of Council activities related climate change

Page 249 of 274

Page 250 of 274 DRAFT – waiting for feedback/confirmation

A stocktake of activities Council undertake relating to the issue of climate change March 2017 draft – waiting for feedback/confirmation

The climate change area is complex and requires a depth of understanding to enable useful engagement. This stocktake process has been useful as it shows the wide range of activities that Council is already engaged in as responses to the climate change issue.

Council had undertaken many activities that are relate to climate change, but not all are undertaken expressly for the purpose of climate change adaptation or greenhouse gas mitigation.

Activity over the years may be linked to: 1. Adapting to the foreseeable physical impact of changing climate 2. Reducing greenhouse gas emission (mitigation) 3. Raising awareness and strategic engagement.

1. Adapting to climate change Preparing for future extreme climate events Activities When, led by whom Flood assets: design and management Ongoing Climate change is factored in to the design of flood protection Rivers and Drainage assets when calculating capacity and risk. Engineering AMPs for catchment management assets contain reference to sea level rise and extreme events. Climate Effects Consolidated Report 2015 Rivers and Drainage Asset Management Plan 2015-2045 identified significant Climate Change issues, and proposes $8.4m for Climate Change works across four flood control river schemes over the next 30 years. 100-year catchment-wide focus to steer decision making. Floodplain mapping (includes allowance for CC driven rainfall and sea level rise), used for flood scheme design and the minimum floor level advice. Advice to third parties (flooding, drainage, stormwater Ongoing systems, coastal hazards) Advising on proposals relating to areas prone to river and sea Rivers and Drainage flooding related to sea-level rise and extreme weather Engineering flooding events in our advice to building and planning. Regional Integrated planning Minimise the heightened flood risk to people, property and industries by providing flood protection services, including installing infrastructure, clearing vegetation, and providing engineering advice. Minimise the risk of coastal hazards to coastal communities, by providing engineering and planning advice and measures. Council’s Hydrological and Hydraulic Guidelines used in design and advice. RMA planning Ongoing New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS) requires Regional Integrated Planning coastal hazard assessment to consider a timeframe of at 2010-current least 100 years. This requirement is reflected in the RPS and

NZCPS.

The Regional Policy Statement (RPS) requires the effects of climate change to be taken account in natural hazard risk 2014-current assessment. Also provides minimum sea-level rise

Page 251 of 274 DRAFT – waiting for feedback/confirmation projections of: • 0.6m for relocatable activities/development; • 0.9m where future adaptation options are limited; and

• an additional sea-level rise of 10mm/annum for activities with life spans beyond 2112. The Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan (PRCEP) uses the sea-level rise projections included in the RPS. The RCEP influences landuse planning in coastal 2014-current environments. The PRCEP also includes direction on use of hard protection structures – any new development should avoid reliance on hard protection structures over the next 100 years (some exception for infrastructure); priority to soft protection; cost-benefit analysis required.

Implementing regional policies, plans, strategies and rules that contributed to adapting to the changing climate. Natural hazard programme Ongoing Impacts of climate change incorporated in natural hazard Integrated Planning (sea level rise and potential for extreme weather events) advice. Commissioning natural hazard researches some particularly Current three years (2016 – on coastal flooding and inundation over the next three years. 2019) Civil Defence and Emergency Management Ongoing (general operations, reduction and response planning) CDEM Group

Sea level rise (exacerbation of flooding and storm surge) and potential for extreme weather events are considered within CDEM activities.

Preparing for and response to gradual changes in climate conditions Activities When, led by whom Partake /support research on scoping the likely impact s When opportunity arise Look for opportunities to adapt to the effects of climate change as soon as new information comes to hand, and relate it specifically to activities affected. Building and improving the knowledge on climate change CLIMPACTS Whakatane impacts in the Bay of Plenty through participating joint funded flood management: 2005 research and modelling work. Farm adaptation: 2005, 2008 Commissioning or acquiring climate change geospatial CCII Kaituna case 2012-2016 projections. NIWA: 2005, 2012, 2017 PRCEP – support and facilitate research to identify areas where ecosystems and biodiversity values most likely to be Need to build into PRCEP impacted by climate change; and capacity/options to manage implementation plan such changes. This also links in well with Objective 4 of the national Coastal Special Interest Group research strategy, Water resource planning Considering future soil moisture deficit scenario in the 2015 – current preparation for the changing the Regional Water and Land Plan. Developed water sustainability strategy for Western Bay, 2009-2012 which considered future water availability due to rainfall changes. That strategy provides a useful base document, as it will be superseded by National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management implementation. Integrated catchment management Enhance the resilience of ecosystems by protecting Ongoing significant natural habitats and ecosystems (including the elevated risk of pest plant and animal incursions) in the

Page 252 of 274 DRAFT – waiting for feedback/confirmation region, though integrated catchment management. So the environment is more resilient to the changing climatic conditions. Ongoing

Assist the region’s land-use practices to adapt to suit the land’s capability and help the land cope with climate change impacts (research and information provision) Coastcare sand dune restoration and maintenance Catchment Management Support the work of Coast Care and Estuary Care to strengthen and fortify dune which also provides some buffer protection from sea-level rise and storming events. The planning framework (NZCPS, RPS and PRCEP) also supports protection and restoration of natural defences and buffers from coastal hazards; and future inland migration of such features (for example, as a result of climate change). Land care groups Ongoing Implementation of works to strengthen and fortify waterside Catchment management areas as buffer zones against erosion damage caused by intense rainfall and stormy events. Environmental Programmes Ongoing Climate change and sustainable management systems can Catchment management be considered in tandem. The effects of climate change can be incorporated into land management advice. Good soil and ecosystem conservation practices, smart planning and future proofing will help building resilience toward the effect of climate change, such as droughts and extreme weather events. Pest management Ongoing Climate change may bring challenges due to fewer frosts and Catchment management warmer winters. More rapid spread of existing pest species may occur and new species may establish themselves.

The pest management database includes a capacity to monitor different species according to their locations. This can be used by staff to factor climate change into the data system if required. Biosecurity programme Ongoing Implementation of works to mitigate invasive bio-organism Catchment management incursions, and infestation of plants that is encouraged by warmer climate and lessened frost events. Mangrove management (Ohiwa, Tauranga). 2008 – 2014 Mangroves may be responding to a shift in the frost line and Catchment management expanding their range. They could be a climate change indicator. The increase of storminess is also likely to contribute to more sediment in the harbour, which encourages more mangroves growth. Forestry opportunity advice Ongoing Linkages to Government forestry packages, to provide a link Catchment management between land owners and forestry managers and the Government ETS or PFSI packages. This had not been a proactive role. Engaging with kiwifruit industry 2006-2008 A project of engaging with the kiwifruit sector about the Resource Policy impacts of climate change, designed to initiate thinking (but not leading) the sector in developing industry-led responses. Engaging with low lying dairying farmers 2008/2009 Initiate thinking (but not leading) with the industry about the Resource Policy risks, due to sea-level rise, related to the relatively high costs of drainage/pumping and seawater intrusion for farms located in low lying areas.

Page 253 of 274 DRAFT – waiting for feedback/confirmation

2. Reducing greenhouse gas emission (mitigation) Secondary linkages to mitigation Activities When, led by whom ETS Forestry (interpreting of schemes and frameworks for 2008-2012 industry)

Information provision and identification of opportunities. Particularly relevant to AGS participation. Geothermal resource planning and management On-going Potentially replacing carbon emitting energy sources. Feedback on Energy policy (submissions, renewable energy 2005-2007 research). For example, seek improve security of supply and renewable energy development Cleaner production - support for territorial authorities 2006-2009 This project is focussed on reducing waste, linked to reducing gas emissions from landfills. SmartGrowth Ongoing Recognition of linkage between urban form and energy use. Public Transport (including commuter/community services, Ongoing modal shifts) Linked through a more efficient transport system with reduced use of fossil fuels. Air quality (Clean heat programme, Healthy Homes package) Ongoing Linked through energy use, although clean heat (electricity) could increases risk of generation with carbon emissions. Climate change greenhouse gases research 2005 Regional Parks Planting 2004 Regional Council owns two regional parks, where permanent planting of vegetation in the park also act as a carbon sink/storage. Afforestation - Rotorua 2016 – on-going The Lake Rotorua Incentive Scheme will in some cases incentivise land use change. This may result in conversion of pastoral land to forest – or in the lowering of pastoral farming intensity. These outcomes will reduces emission from agriculture activities and increase carbon sinks. Managing nutrient loss - Rotorua 2017 – on-going Council’s effort in reducing nitrogen inputs into Lake Rotorua is likely to result in reduced stock number in the groundwater catchment. This will also result in reductions of GHG from animals and from the amount of fertiliser needed for supporting larger animal numbers.

Corporate Responses Activities When, led by whom Adapting to climate change project staff workshops 2006, 2012 (provided as training opportunity) CEO, Resource Policy

These workshops were designed to give staff an overview and understanding of climate change. 16 staff attended the in-depth workshop. About 50 to 60 staff were involved through mini workshops or attended climate change presentation on 26 October 2006. Green procurement Ongoing Incorporating carbon impacts consideration into purchasing Property and Procurement decisions.

Page 254 of 274 DRAFT – waiting for feedback/confirmation

In -house recycling, waste audits 2005, ongoing recycling Reduction in resource use with associated reduction in Property and Procurement carbon footprint. Corporate energy management: fuel Ongoing (Green fleet, fuel efficiency reporting, carpooling initiatives, Property and Procurement trailing electric fleet) Vehicle assessment prioritises efficiency. Corporate energy management: electricity 2006 (Energy efficiency monitoring, membership of Energywise Property and Procurement Councils partnership). Like Council’s Whakatane building in 1995, energy smart building design could be implemented for any new building development. Office design 2017 - 2018 Incorporating environmentally sustainable design features (LED lighting, solar power, a wind turbine, rainwater harvesting) into office refurbishments plans, which is expected to halve energy consumption with a resulting savings of 50 tonnes of carbon emissions per annum across the region. Public will be able to see the energy savings being made on a performance monitoring panel, demonstrating environmental sustainability leadership.

3. Raising awareness and strategic engagement

Activities When, led by whom Climate change is included within regional planning As opportunity arises documents (statutory and non-statutory) and advice. Strategy & Science Planning documents (such as the Regional Policy Statement, Regional Pest Management Strategy) contain references to climate change and such documents are updated through reviews and plan changes. Where submissions are made on other policies and plans climate change is an area of comment.

Organisation leadership Regional politicians as leaders in climate change As opportunity arises, eg. Chairperson represented local government and Council on Climate Change Position RAC, Leadership Forum and LGNZ National Council Climate Statement 2009, and Change Subcommittee in relation climate change. Provides submission to draft local important opportunities to understand and influence wider government position national agendas. Requires technical support. statement 2016 Chair/Councillors Staff as leaders in climate change Local authority forums (such as RMG).Internal direction and As opportunity arises, eg. CE support for climate change technical. Provides important input to SOLGM report on opportunities to understand and influence wider national climate change. agendas. Chief Executive, Group Feedback to MfE, LGNZ, SOLGM and research institutes on Managers, staff climate change issues, initiatives and policy directions. Information sharing with Climate applied research work As opportunity arises. CCII lowland Kaituna case study 2014-2016 Contribution to IGCI CLIMPACTS model 2004 - 2006 Ability to factor in effects of climate change into maps . 2005, 2012, 2017 Based on MfE and NIWA information for the Bay of Plenty. GIS Team GIS layers can be used in spatial analysis for climate change impacts. Staff presentation attendance at courses, workshops, Ad hoc consultations and meetings about climate change e.g. staff presentation to

Page 255 of 274 DRAFT – waiting for feedback/confirmation

conference Te Arawa FOMA. Coastcare or discussions on hydrological modelling and design. Educational material about climate change provided to the Ad hoc. community Community Engagement Material is provided to the community on an ad hoc basis. Sustainable Development Current material includes the factsheet. Educational material is periodically developed alongside projects. Information interpreted from technical information for the Ad hoc. eg, website. regional communities about climate change. Resource Policy Communicate and share information on climate change implications for the region. Such as the Council webpage Coastal event - 2017 Climate Change, and developing further information on sea- Interactive sea-level App – level rise risks. 2016-2017 Build community understanding, preparedness, and civil Sea level display – 2017 defence readiness to the changing climate. Regional Integrated Planning Adapting to climate change project staff workshops 2006, 2012 Resource Policy These workshops were designed to give staff an overview and understanding of climate change, and updates. Enviroschools (energy efficiency, resource use) Ongoing Avenue to incorporate climate change in school curriculum. Community engagement Sustainable Living Programme Ongoing Supporting adult education agencies like EnviroHub. Community engagement

Page 256 of 274

Receives Only – No Decisions

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Namouta Poutasi, Water Policy Manager

Environment Court Decision on Implementation of the Horizons One Plan

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to update the RDD Committee regarding the recent Environment Court decision involving the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council (Horizons) and Wellington Forest and Bird, Environmental Defence Society (EDS). The concern of Fish and Game and the EDS was that Horizons was not implementing the intensive farming provisions of the regional plan lawfully when making decisions on resource consent applications.

A key issue with the Horizons One Plan provisions is a lack of OVERSEER version management within the provisions resulting in numbers being locked into a plan that became outdated with updates to OVERSEER.

The decision was issued on 21 March 2017. Key points from the decision [2017] NZEnvC 37 ENV-2016-WLG-000038 include:

 Having regard to a Council resolution when making decisions on resource consents is unlawful, invalid and contravenes the Resource Management Act (RMA).

 Best practice must be followed when processing resource consents.

 Advice notes proposing to restrain enforcement are unlawful and advice notes are an unsuitable approach to dealing with a nutrient budget.

The decision is particularly relevant to Rotorua Lakes provisions (Rule 11) in the Regional Water and Land Plan and Proposed Plan Change 10 (Lake Rotorua Nutrient Management) which both set property based nitrogen leaching limits.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Environment Court Decision on Implementation of the Horizons One Plan;

Page 257 of 274 Environment Court Decision on Implementation of the Horizons One Plan

1 Introduction

Wellington Fish and Game and the Environmental Defence Society (EDS) took the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council (Horizons) to the Environment Court in February 2017 regarding Council’s implementation of the Horizons One Plan. Their concern was that Horizons was not implementing the intensive farming provisions of the regional plan lawfully when making decisions on resource consent applications.

The intensive farming provisions of the One Plan require existing and new intensive farming land use activities (including dairy, vegetable growing, cropping and sheep and beef) in water management sub-zones to get controlled activity consent where the activities meet nitrogen leaching provisions based on land use capability class and a nutrient management plan is provided. Existing and new intensive farming land use activities which do not comply with the controlled activity standards require restricted discretionary activity consent.

The nitrogen leaching table (Table 1 below) in the One Plan seeks reductions in nitrogen leaching from intensive farming land use activities over a 20 year time period and vary based on the land use capability class of the land. OVERSEER version 5.4 was the current version when the nitrogen leaching levels in Table 1 were set. Since OVERSEER version 5.4 there have been significant changes in the estimates of nitrogen losses to water. OVERSEER version changes from 5 to 6 meant that the percentage of farmers that would be able to comply with Table 1 would be reduced from around 80% to around 20%. This resulted in a Council resolution in 2013 relating to consent approval and duration for applications under Rule 14.2 (existing intensive farming land use activities not complying with Rule 14.1).

Table 1 Cumulative nitrogen leaching maximum* by Land Use Capability Class* Period (from the year that the rule has LUC*I1 LUC*II LUC*III LUC*IV LUC*V LUC*VI LUC*VII LUC*VIII legal effect) Year 1 30 27 24 18 16 15 8 2 Year 5 27 25 21 16 13 10 6 2 Year 10 26 22 19 14 13 10 6 2 Year 20 25 21 18 13 12 10 6 2

2 Environment Court Decision

The purpose of the proceedings was to ensure lawful and transparent processing of consents going forward not to see every future consent application declined or to overturn those already granted. The decision was issued on 21 March 2017. Key points from the decision [2017] NZEnvC 37 ENV-2016-WLG-000038 include:

 Having regard to a Council resolution when making decisions on resource consents is unlawful. This reiterates the importance of separating governance and regulatory/operational roles.

 Economic consequences for private individuals are an inevitable part of regulation in the public interest, economic consequences should not undermine plan implementation. Consent applications must have a detailed assessment of effects including cumulative effects and incomplete applications should be returned under S88 of the Act. Horizons staff suggest this is likely to impact the consent costs from around $5,000 currently to upwards of $50,000.

2 Page 258 of 274 Environment Court Decision on Implementation of the Horizons One Plan

 If a Council has second thoughts about its policy or rules framework, the appropriate response is a plan change rather than an implementation approach that does not accord with the RMA or its Plan.

 Precautionary approach may be justified in certain circumstances.

 Proper consideration of all matters of discretion, relevant objectives and policies RMA provisions, National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management, the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Sources of Human Drinking Water) Regulations 2007 must be undertaken. Reasons should be given for the resource consent decisions.

 The scope of the activity authorised must be defined through the consent and consent conditions. This includes setting a maximum nitrogen leaching limit over the term of the consent and requiring the activity is operated in compliance with a Nutrient Management Plan and performance standards for phosphorus or sediment loss where applicable.

 Advice notes or conditions that:

o suggest enforcement is not intended;

o allow updates to nitrogen leaching targets, Sustainable Management Plans or associated OVERSEER files to be approved by the Regulatory Manager; or

o only require annual records if there are discrepancies with the Nutrient Budget

are unlawful.

3 Relevance to BOPRC

A key issue with the intensive farming provisions of the One Plan was the lack of OVERSEER version management.

Proposed Plan Change 10 (Lake Rotorua Nutrient Management) (PC10) uses OVERSEER version 6.2.0 within the plan change but provides for the use of subsequent versions to determine nitrogen loss from land. Reference files are used in Schedule LR 5 of PC10 to enable the latest version of OVERSEER to be used and to take advantage of the best available science.

How Horizons was managing Sustainable Milk Plans (SMP) or Nutrient Management Plans (NMP) was also covered in the case. Horizons had already improved its practices prior to the case and current practice now involves a condition requiring compliance with a SMP, the SMP will be included with the consent at the time it is granted, the SMP will be updated to reflect new versions of OVERSEER. A key point was that a maximum leaching level must be set in the consent conditions and it would be inappropriate to leave that matter to a management plan.

Under proposed PC 10 applicants will provide an NMP with their resource consent application and compliance with their NMP will be required as a condition of consent. In addition to this a provisional nitrogen discharge allocation limit or maximum leaching rate will be included as a separate condition of consent.

3 Page 259 of 274 Environment Court Decision on Implementation of the Horizons One Plan

Another key issue was the use of a Council resolution from 2013 to determine whether resource consents should be granted and the duration of those consents for restricted discretionary intensive farming land use activities.

BOPRC has previously had regard to Council resolutions when considering On Site Effluent Treatment (OSET) consent applications. However this is no longer done as Council recognised it was not best practice.

Gemma Moleta Policy Analyst (Water Policy) for Water Policy Manager

9 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

4 Page 260 of 274

Report To: Regional Direction and Delivery Committee

Meeting Date: 18 May 2017

Report From: Eddie Grogan, General Manager, Regulatory Services

Maritime Update

Executive Summary

This report will provide a summary of recent activities and a look ahead at upcoming initiatives in the maritime area.

The Bylaw review is complete and the 2017 bylaw comes into force in July. As a result our signage will be refreshed and new Boating in the Bay books will be published as well as the bylaw itself. Educating the public about changes will be a focus of this summer.

The new multi-purpose vessel is scheduled to arrive in July it will be a great increase in our ability in terms of oil spill response and navigation aid maintenance.

In November last year we went live with Accela. We still have citizen access and mobile office to be launched this year.

In December last year we had our second audit of the Port and Harbour Safety Code which was successful completed.

Recommendations

That the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee under its delegated authority:

1 Receives the report, Maritime Update;

1 Background

There are two significant pieces of legislation that empower and direct the work done by the Maritime section, the Local Government Act 1974 and the Maritime Transport Act 1994.

Additionally Councils, Ports and Maritime New Zealand have formed a partnership to implement the Port and Harbour Safety Code as best practices in that environment.

Page 261 of 274 Maritime Update

2 Navigation Safety Bylaw Review

The review of the navigation bylaw is complete and has been passed through Maritime New Zealand. It currently rests with the Minister of Transport for signing of the minor changes to the infringements. It will be effective 1 July.

The focus the next year will be updating and installing signage, and communicating and educating the changes through public meetings, the Boating in the Bay book, and on the water as well with additional patrols scheduled.

We will continue our strong messaging on lifejackets. There have been four boating related deaths this season in our region which involved lifejackets not being worn. 3 New Multi Role Vessel

Work is progressing well on our new multi-purpose vessel with its scheduled arrival end July. Using the lessons from the Auckland build we’ve been able to maximise its potential through minor adjustments such as a 200mm widening of the hull, jackplates for the engines and centralising the wheelhouse.

In addition to a great increase in our spill response capability through the Lamor skimmer we will be able to take on much of the secondary channel navigation aid maintenance and support other departments such as biosecurity, compliance and EMBOP.

Photos of the progress are attached. It is intended to conduct a blessing after the vessel arrives and has completed trials, likely in the August/September period.

4 Accela

Maritime went live with the first portion of Accela in November. It’s been a steep learning curve for all but as our confidence in our abilities to use the system grows so do we see more of the benefit.

A big part of the improvements at this point for us is our capturing data and reporting of it. Attached are a number of examples of graphs that can be produced easily at any time. Information and statistics can be provided as required for reporting more quickly and with a higher level of confidence in the accuracy of the information.

The arrival of Mobile office, shortly, and Citizen Access, in June, will take us to the next level in improved reporting and will also then see opportunities for some time savings in data entry that will assist staff in focusing even more on our operational tasks. 5 Port and Harbour Safety Code

The initial review of the Tauranga code in 2015 went well, but there were a few reservations around the staff being almost all new and a number of documents in the process of being updated. As a result while we were deemed complaint a second audit was planned. This was conducted in December 2016. In this audit we were found to be fully complaint.

We will continue to review and improve working closely with Port of Tauranga to ensure the harbour is operated as safely as possible.

2 Page 262 of 274 Maritime Update

6 Council’s Accountability Framework

6.1 Community Outcomes

This project/proposal directly contributes to the Resilience and Safety Community Outcome/s in the council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

This work is planned under the Maritime Operations in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Current Budget Implications

This work is being undertaken within the current budget for the Maritime Operations Activity in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Future Budget Implications

Future work in the Maritime area is provided for in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015- 2025.

Peter Buell BOP Harbourmaster/Manager for General Manager, Regulatory Services

10 May 2017 Click here to enter text.

3 Page 263 of 274

Page 264 of 274

APPENDIX 1

Accela Smart Charts

Page 265 of 274

Page 266 of 274 Accela Smart Charts Service Requests These show all calls received from our call centre by subgroup (total received since Accela was launched) and the current open request with the team. We are able to track service requests by status, assigned team member and subgroups.

Aquatic Events These show the number of events held since January 2017 and the types of events approved to temporarily suspend the Bay of Plenty Navigation Safety Bylaw, or reserve an area for the purpose of that activity by the Harbour Master.

Moorings These smart charts show the status of our moorings.

Page 267 of 274 Navigational Aids and Signage These show the types of navigational aids and signage we maintain.

Infringements and Breach of Bylaw Smart Charts These will be valuable while planning the 2018 Summer Safety Campaign.

Navigation Safety Licences Shows the number of Navigation Safety licences approved by the Harbourmaster for each area.

Page 268 of 274

APPENDIX 2

Oil Spill Response Vessel

Page 269 of 274

Page 270 of 274 Oil Spill Response Vessel

The new multi-purpose vessel is taking shape and will be ready for use in July. This vessel is designed to be use for oil spill response and carry out maintenance work currently undertaken by third party contractors.

The image on the left the frames and bulkheads erected. The Hull stringer installation is now underway. These stringers provide the extra strength needed for the vessel hull in the water, like ribs for us. The hull bottom plates are now fitted with the aft hull weld seams completed. 12mm thick aluminium wear strips, that will protect the hull plating when the vessel is grounded on concrete boat ramps, are dry fitted.

The picture on the right shows the wheelhouse assembly is well underway. The wheelhouse sides are welded together ready for the internal toilet bulkhead to be installed.

Page 271 of 274

The hull plate seams have been welded and the hull has been rolled over is now upright. Aft bulward stanchions have been set up on both port an starboard sides.

The image below is looking from the bow showing the bulwark construction progressing.

Page 272 of 274 APPENDIX 1

Bay of Plenty Regional Council Forward Plan for Regional Direction and Delivery 2017

February March May June July August September October November December

23 29 18 22 2 13 26 30 TBA

Operating Environment Operating Environment Operating Environment Operating Environment Operating Environment Operating Environment Operating Environment Operating Environment Operating Environment 1 Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation

Operations and Monitoring News Operations and Monitoring News Operations and Monitoring News Operations and Monitoring News Operations and Monitoring News Operations and Monitoring News Operations and Monitoring News Operations and Monitoring News Pest Management discussion document 2 Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation Presentation

Towards Objectives for the Rangitāiki National Policy Statement on Urban and Kaituna/Maketū, RDD Work Programme RDD Work Programme RDD Work Programme RDD Work Programme RDD Work Programme RDD Work Programme RDD Work Programme 3 Development Capacity Pongakawa/Waitahanui Water Management Areas Freshwater Futures - National Scene, SmartGrowth Strategic Direction Plan Change 9 Submissions Update Freshwater Futures Update Freshwater Futures Update Freshwater Futures Update Freshwater Futures Update Freshwater Futures Update Freshwater Futures Update 4 Regional Approach and next steps

Proposed Change 3 (Rangitāiki River) to Kaituna & Rangitāiki WMA Plan Change Draft Plan Change 14 (On-site effluent District Consent Applications Annual Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme the Regional Policy Statement: Update on Regional Plan Amalgamation Freshwater Futures Update 12 (In development) - potential future treatment) to Regional Water and Land 5 Report 2016/17 Annual Report Appointment of Hearing Committee scenarios Plan)

Designating Special Management Areas Forestry NES Update on changes and Te Awanui Tauranga Harbour Proposed Regional Pest Management National Policy Statement on Urban Freshwater Futures Update Streamlining Regional Plans for addressing localised water quality 6 RWLP implications Programme Annual Plan Plan Development Capacity issues

National Policy Statement for Consented Air Discharges in the Mount Kaituna - Pongakawa - Waitahanui Freshwater Management Regional Pest Management Plan Tauriko West RPS Change Industrial Area – Methyl Bromide, Maritime annual update Integrated Catchment Activity - Natural Hazards Region wide approach 7 Implementation - Progress update for Annual report for 2016/17 Hydrogen Sulphide and Sulphur Dioxide. 2017/18 Annual Work Programme 2016 Lake Rotorua Nutrient Management - Progress report on Regional Coastal Rangitāiki River Catchment Programme Te Awanui Tauranga Harbour RDD related working parties Resource Legislation Amendment Act Proposed Plan Change 10 - hearing 8 Environment Plan Appeals Annual Work plan for 2016/17 Programme Annual Report panel decisions - TBC

Kaituna - Pongakawa - Waitahanui Operations and Monitoring News Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme 6 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe/Iwi National Policy Statement on Urban Eastern Catchments Annual Work plan Integrated Catchment Activity - 9 Presentation Month Report Participation Agreements Development Capacity for 2016/17 2016/17 Annual Report

Update of Te Maru Process, including to Further appointment to Hearing Environmental Court Decision on receive the proposed river document Te Awanui Tauranga Harbour Committee for Proposed Change 3 Regional Water & Land Plan/Resource Biosecurity 2015/16 Annual Report and Implementation of the Horizons One (hopefully the version for notification 10 Programme 6 month report (Rangitaiki River) to the Regional Policy Management Plan Rolling Review 2016/17 Operational Plan Plan depending on Te maru decisions on 16- Statement 2-17)

Environmental Code of Practice for Update on Marine and Coastal Area Act Regional Air Plan Change (Adopt for District Plan Submissions Update Resource Legislation Amendment Bill Rivers & Drainage Works - Progress 11 applications notification. Plan Change 13 Report

Urban Development Authorities Rangitāiki River Catchment Programme Annual Compliance Report 2015-2016 Consents annual report Bay of Connections Update 12 Discussion Document Submission Annual Report for 2015/16

Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme Make Regional Coastal Environment RDD Work Programme Rotorua Air Quality Control Bylaw 13 Annual Work Programme 2016/17 Plan Operative No Meetings No Supporting a Regional Enviornmental Eastern Catchments Annual Report for Climate change information update Network - Presentation by Envirohub on 14 2015/16 achievements.

Environment Court Decision on Post consultation on Regional Pest Implementation of the Horizons One 15 Management Plan Plan

16 Maritime update 2016 Dust Audit, Port of Tauranga

Proposed Partnership Agreement with RDD Work Programme 17 Ngāi Te Rangi

18 Science Strategy Review

Goethermal Kawerau System 19 Management Plan approval

Workshops Workshops

Draft Plan Change 14 Regional Air Plan Change Workshop Freshwater Futures Workshop (On-Site Effluent Treatment) Workshop

Geothermal workshop - programme wide Workshop Page 273 of 274

Page 274 of 274