DOCSLIB.ORG

Regional Overview Wellington

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Regional Overview Wellington Regional overview Wellington Purchasing intentions - additional income-related rent subsidy (IRRS) places Number of bedrooms Area 1 2 3 4+ TOTAL Wellington (Wgtn City, Upper and Lower Hutt, Porirua City) 315 55 60 5 435 Kapiti Coast District 10 5 5 0 20 Masterton District 0 0 0 0 0 Carterton district 0 0 0 0 0 South Wairarapa District 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wellington total 325 60 65 5 455 7 8 9 10 11 Purchasing intentions - change within the base of existing IRRS places IRRS places Change within the base, by number of bedrooms Area as at 30 Sept 2016 1 2 3 4+ Wellington (Wgtn City, Upper and Lower Hutt, Porirua City) 7,546 Increase Increase Maintain Maintain Kapiti Coast District 203 Increase Increase Increase Decrease Masterton District - Maintain Maintain Maintain Maintain Carterton district Maintain Maintain Maintain Maintain South Wairarapa District - Maintain Maintain Maintain Maintain 0 0 0 0 0 Wellington total 7,749 2 3 4 5 Social housing register - trend over the last two years by TLA 300 Dec-2014 259 Mar-2015 250 Jun-2015 199 Sep-2015 200 Dec-2015 154 Mar-2016 150 Jun-2016 100 Sep-2016 39 50 30 0 0 0 0 Porirua City Porirua Wellington City Wellington Upper Hutt City Hutt Upper Lower Hutt City Hutt Lower Carterton district Carterton Masterton District Masterton Kapiti Coast District Coast Kapiti South Wairarapa District Wairarapa South * The number shown is the number on the register as at 30 September 2016. * Where there are 5 people or fewer on the register in a TLA, this will be appear as zero in the graph. * Source: Ministry of Social Development. (2016). Social housing register. Retrieved from: http://housing.msd.govt.nz/information-for-housing- providers/register/index.html Demand in Wellington 800 Social housing register 681 Priority suppressed 700 Priority B by priority level - trend 600 527 for the region 445 500 410 383 376 398 * Source: Ministry of Social 400 349 343 347 Development. (2016). Social housing 300 register. Retrieved from: http://housing.msd.govt.nz/informati 200 on-for-housing- providers/register/index.html 100 - Number of people on the register the on people of Number Jun-14 Jun-15 Jun-16 Mar-16 Mar-15 Dec-15 Dec-14 Sep-15 Sep-14 Sep-16 Social housing register as at end of month Percentage change on 100% total number of people on the register in 50% 29% previous quarter - trend 18% 15% 12% for the region 7% 1% 0% -2% * Source: Ministry of Social -8% -7% Development. (2016). Social housing register. Retrieved from: -50% http://housing.msd.govt.nz/informati previous quarter previous on-for-housing- providers/register/index.html -100% of people on the register on the on register the on people of Percentage change of total number number totalof change Percentage Jun-15 Jun-16 Mar-15 Mar-16 Dec-15 Dec-14 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Social housing register as at end of month Types of houses 350 Dec-14 Mar-15 required by people on 293 300 Jun-15 the register - trend for Sep-15 Dec-15 234 the region 250 Mar-16 * Where there are 5 people or fewer Jun-16 Sep-16 on the register in a TLA, this will be 200 appear as zero in the graph. * Source: Ministry of Social 150 Development. (2016). Social housing 105 register. Retrieved from: 100 http://housing.msd.govt.nz/informati on-for-housing- providers/register/index.html 50 Number of people on the register the on of people Number 11 6 0 1 2 3 4 5+ Number of bedrooms required 100% 2018 Population projections - 80% 2023 percentage increase on 60% 2028 2033 40% 2013 base, by TLA 2038 20% 2043 * Projected percentage increase 0% in total population on 2013 base -20% (medium projection), for TLAs in projection) -40% the region. * Source: Statistics New Zealand. medium population, (total Percentage change on 2013 base 2013on change Percentage Porirua City Porirua Wellington City Wellington Upper Hutt City Hutt Upper Lower HuttCity Lower Carterton district Masterton District Masterton Kapiti Coast Coast KapitiDistrict TLA South Wairarapa District Wairarapa South Private market supply in Wellington $600 Weekly rental - trend of Lower quartile Geometric mean absolute values $500 Upper quartile * Weekly rent, based on new bonds $400 lodged each month. * Data relates to all rentals, not just social housing. $300 * Source: Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. (2016). rent Weekly $200 Rental bond data. Retrieved from: http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info- $100 services/housing-property/sector- information-and-statistics/rental- $0 bond-data Jul-15 Jul-16 Jan-15 Jan-16 Oct-14 Oct-15 Oct-16 Jun-15 Jun-16 Apr-16 Apr-15 Feb-15 Feb-16 Mar-15 Mar-16 Dec-15 Dec-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Aug-16 Aug-15 Nov-14 Nov-15 May-15 May-16 Month 9% Weekly rental - Lower quartile percentage change on 8% Geometric mean Upper quartile same month in previous 7% year 6% 5% * Graph shows percentage change on 4% same month in previous year. * Weekly rent, based on new bonds 3% lodged each month. 2% * Data relates to all rentals, not just social housing. year previous in 1% * Source: Ministry of Business, 0% Innovation and Employment. (2016). Rental bond data. Retrieved from: http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info- month same on change Percentage Jul-2015 Jul-2016 Jan-2015 Jan-2016 Oct-2014 Oct-2015 Oct-2016 Jun-2015 Jun-2016 Apr-2015 Apr-2016 Feb-2015 Feb-2016 Mar-2015 Mar-2016 Dec-2014 Dec-2015 Sep-2015 Sep-2016 Aug-2015 Aug-2016 Nov-2015 services/housing-property/sector- Nov-2014 May-2016 May-2015 information-and-statistics/rental- Month bond-data Bonds lodged in 70% previous 12 months as 65% percentage of active bonds 60% * Data relates to all rentals, not just 55% social housing. * Source: Ministry of Business, bonds 50% Innovation and Employment. (2016). Rental bond data. Retrieved from: 45% http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info- services/housing-property/sector- information-and-statistics/rental- 12 in previouslodged Bonds 40% months as percentage of active active of percentage as months bond-data Jul-2014 Jul-2016 Jul-2015 Jan-2014 Jan-2016 Jan-2015 Oct-2013 Oct-2014 Oct-2015 Oct-2016 Jun-2014 Jun-2015 Jun-2016 Apr-2014 Apr-2015 Apr-2016 Feb-2014 Feb-2015 Feb-2016 Mar-2014 Mar-2015 Mar-2016 Dec-2013 Dec-2014 Dec-2015 Sep-2014 Sep-2015 Sep-2016 Aug-2014 Aug-2015 Aug-2016 Nov-2013 Nov-2014 Nov-2015 May-2014 May-2015 May-2016 Month 2,500 Sep-2014 QV Quarterly House Dec-2014 Price Index for TLAs in 2,000 Mar-2015 Jun-2015 this region 1,500 Sep-2015 Dec-2015 Mar-2016 1,000 * Data relates to all dwellings Jun-2016 (houses, flats, apartments etc). * Data for Auckland is reported by 500 QV for the TLA, and then broken down under the former council 0 structure. * Source: Quotable Value. (2016). Residential House Price Index. Retrieved from: Porirua City Porirua https://www.qv.co.nz/resources/re District sidential-house-price-index City Wellington Upper Hutt City Hutt Upper Lower Hutt City Hutt Lower South Wairarapa South Carterton district Carterton Masterton District Masterton Kapiti Coast District Coast Kapiti Social market supply in Wellington 3,500 Current IRRS places by 3,114 TLA 3,000 2,500 2,342 * Data covers IRRS places provided by CHPs and HNZ, as at 30 2,000 1,719 September 2016. 1,500 * Data provided by MSD. IRRS places IRRS 1,000 371 500 203 0 0 0 0 Porirua City Porirua Wellington Wellington City Upper Hutt City Hutt Upper Lower Hutt City Hutt Lower Carterton district Carterton Masterton District Masterton Kapiti Coast District Coast Kapiti SouthDistrictWairarapa TLA 3,500 Current IRRS places in 3,162 3,171 Wellington - by number 3,000 of bedrooms 2,500 * Data covers IRRS places provided 2,000 by CHPs and HNZ, as at 30 September 2016. 1,500 * Where there are 5 or fewer tenancies, this will appear as 0 in the 1,000 794 graph. 501 * Data provided by MSD. 500 97 0 1 2 3 4 5+ Number of bedrooms Current IRRS places by TLA and number of Number of bedrooms bedrooms 1 2 3 4 5+ * Data covers IRRS places provided Wellington City 300 859 500 51 9 by CHPs and HNZ, as at 30 Lower Hutt City September 2016. 384 1,593 962 143 32 * Where there are 5 or fewer Upper Hutt City - 113 205 35 - tenancies, this will appear as an Porirua City 98 487 1,429 272 56 empty cell in the table. Kapiti Coast District * Data provided by MSD. 12 110 75 - - Masterton District - - - - - Carterton district South Wairarapa District - - - - - 0 0 Overview of base, pipeline, and purchasing intentions for IRRS places for Wellington * Base - refers to current number of Wellington 7,749 0 455 IRRS places as at 30 Sept 2016. * CHP pipeline - refers to places that are either contracted or that MSD Housing Contracts team believes has a high certainty of eventuating. * Purchasing intentions - refers to the total number of additional IRRS places signalled in the 2016 update to the Purchasing Strategy for IRRS - 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 places. Base Pipeline Purchasing intentions * Data covers IRRS covers provided Data places * (IRRS) paid by MSD. subsidy income-related rent - the and paid tenant; by the (IRR) income-related rent - the sum of: the - is this rent total the to refers Data * bond-data information-and-statistics/rental- services/housing-property/sector- http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info- bondRetrieved from:Rental data.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kapiti Coast District / [email protected] / P
    APRIL 2019 KAPITI COAST DISTRICT WWW.INTEREST.CO.NZ / [email protected] / P. 09 3609670 KAPITI COAST DISTRICT HOME LOAN AFFORDABILITY REPORT April 2019 Home loan affordability is a measure of the proportion of take-home pay that is needed to make the mortgage payment for a typical household. If that is less than 40%, then a mortgage is considered ‘affordable’. The following are typical assessments for households at three stages of home ownership. FIRST HOME BUYERS 25-29 YOUNG FAMILY 30-34 OLDER FAMILY 35-39 First home buyers earn a medi- Young family buyers earn medi- Older family buyers earn medi- an income for their age group, an incomes in their age bracket, an incomes in their age brack- and buy a first quartile house and buy a median house in et, and buy a median house in in their area. Both parties work their area. One partner works their area. Both partners work full-time. half-time. full-time. Mortgage payment as a Mortgage payment as a Mortgage payment as a percentage of the take home pay percentage of the take home pay percentage of the take home pay Take Home April 19 29.7% Take Home April 19 29.2% Take Home Pay Pay Pay April 19 17.6% April 18 30.3% April 18 26.8% $1,517.11 $1,334.99 $1,856.59 April 18 17.1% per Week April 17 26.9% per Week April 17 29.2% per Week April 17 19.4% April 14 - April 14 26.0% April 14 33.3% This report estimates how affordable it would be for a couple This report estimates how affordable it would be for a couple This report estimates how affordable it would be for a couple where both are aged 25–29 and are working full time, to buy a with a young family to move up the property ladder and buy their who are both aged 35-39 and working full time, to move up the home at the lower quartile price in Kapiti Coast District.
    [Show full text]
  • Making a Community: Filipinos in Wellington
    Making a Community: Filipinos in Wellington September 2017 ISBN 978-0-9941409-4-4 (PDF) Making a Community: Filipinos in Wellington About the Author As an American living in New Zealand, I’ve been observing the debate here on immigration and multiculturalism. I arrived in Wellington last year with my Kiwi husband and three-year old son – and while settling in we’ve spent a lot of time discovering the delights of the city and its people. The experience also gave me some perspective on being a migrant far from home. I have a professional interest in South East Asian history, languages and culture - I just completed a PhD on the subject. I speak some Filipino, and am fascinated by the Philippines’ complex history. One of the major phenomena in the Philippines since the 1970s has been the growth of the global Filipino diaspora. That story has often been full of sadness. So I was intrigued by anecdotes of positivity and success from Wellington. Writing about how the migrant Filipino community has settled in New Zealand has been more than just a research project. It has highlighted how migration plays a role in community building. It also has meaning for me and my family’s future here. I really wanted to share some of the stories that I think reflect successful outcomes from immigration over the past thirty years. By Dr Rebecca Townsend 1 Key Points 1. 2. 3. Filipinos comprise 1 percent of Filipinos are a vital part of Most Filipinos in New Zealand are New Zealand’s population – the New Zealand’s dairy, healthcare, not Overseas Filipino Workers third largest Asian ethnic group construction, nursing, aged care, (OFW).
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum of Understanding Between
    Attachment 1 to Report 06.583 Page 1 of 5 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN CAPITAL AND COAST DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD AND KAPITI COAST DISTRICT COUNCIL, PORIRUA CITY COUNCIL, WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL, AND WELLINGTON REGIONAL COUNCIL PURPOSE The parties to this Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) share a common obligation to enhance the well being and health of people in Kapiti, Porirua and Wellington, and to work with them in building strong, vibrant and healthy communities. This MoU will assist in achieving the Regional Community Outcome: "Healthy Community" as outlined in the Wellington Regional Strategy. This MoU sets out a process to assist co-operation between the above organisations. It is intended that this MoU will: • ensure that resources (people, funding and materials) are used to improve the well being of the communities in Kapiti, Porirua and Wellington • ensure communication between the organisations is open and timely. PROTOCOLS AND PRINCIPLES • the parties will work together on issues where it is agreed that the population of Kapiti, Porirua and Wellington will benefit from a collaborative approach • the MoU acknowledges each organisation's unique accountability and contribution to shared processes • the parties agree to act in good faith on issues of information and disclosure • the parties agree to work collaboratively in an open and transparent manner • the parties agree to build on work currently undertaken within Kapiti, Porirua and Wellington. • the parties acknowledge the role of Regional Public Health (RPH) in delivering regional public health services, and that this MoU will not preclude the development of such relationships by each party with RPH As signatories of this MoU each party will ensure: • early notification to affected parties through the distribution of draft documentation, of major policy discussions, which may have implications beyond the boundaries of the decision-making party.
    [Show full text]
  • Kapiti Coast District Council and Other Councils, Including Population Forecasts
    Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment Kāpiti Coast District Council November 2019 Housing and Business Land Capacity Assessment 229 230 Housing and Business Land Capacity Assessment Contents Executive Summary 232 5.0 Infrastructure 270 Background 233 5.1 Three Waters 270 Residential demand 233 5.2 Local Road Network 271 Residential capacity 233 5.3 State Highway Network 272 Business demand 234 5.4 Public Transport 272 Business capacity 234 5.5 Open Space 273 Infrastructure capacity 234 5.6 Education 273 1.0 Introduction 237 6.0 Relationship between Housing and Business Land 274 2.0 Existing Policy Context 238 7.0 Monitoring 275 2.1 Kāpiti Coast District Plan 238 7.1 Historic Development Activity 275 2.2 Development Management Strategy 2007 238 7.2 Market Indicators 278 2.3 Infrastructure Strategy 2018-2048 238 7.3 Price Efficiency Indicators 285 2.4 Roads of National Significance and Town Centres Transformation 239 8.0 Conclusion 293 3.0 Residential Demand and Capacity 240 9.0 Next Actions 294 3.1 Historic urban growth and settlement 240 3.2 Current growth and settlement trends 240 3.3 Future Housing Demand 241 3.4 Housing Development Capacity 248 3.5 Housing Feasibility, Realisation and Sufficiency 251 4.0 Business Demand and Capacity 258 4.1 Business Development Context 258 4.2 Current Economic and Business Drivers 259 4.3 Future Business Demand 260 4.4 Business Development Capacity 264 4.5 Business Feasibility, Realisation and Sufficiency 266 Housing and Business Land Capacity Assessment 231 Executive Summary This report presents the results from the Wellington Region Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment (HBA) for the Kāpiti Coast District Council.
    [Show full text]
  • 13 Spring Creek
    Marlboroughtown Marshlands Rapaura Ravenscliff Spring Creek Tuamarina Waikakaho Wairau Bar Wairau Pa Marlboroughtown (1878- 1923) Spring Creek (1923-) Pre 1878 1873 4th June 1873 Marlborough Provincial Council meeting included: This morning petitions were presented by Mr Dodson in favour of a vote for. Marlboroughtown School; from 15 ratepayers, against the annexation of a portion of the County of Wairau to the Borough of Blenheim another vote of £100 for a Library and Public Room in Havelock was carried. Mr Dodson moved for a vote of £50 for the School in Marlboroughtown, but a vigorous discussion arose upon it regarding Educational finance, in which Mr Seymour announced that Government would not consent to the various items for school buildings, and upon the particular subject being put to the vote it was lost. 11th June 1873 The following petition, signed by fourteen persons, was presented .to the Provincial Council by Mr George Dodson; To his Honor the Superintendent and Provincial Council of Marlborough, in Council assembled We, the undersigned residents of Spring Creek and Marlboroughtown, do humbly beg that your Honorable Council will take into consideration this our humble petition. That we have for some years felt the necessity of establishing a school in our district, and having done so we now find a great difficulty in providing the necessary funds for its maintenance, and we do humbly pray that your Honorable Council will grant such assistance as will enable us to carry on the school successfully, as without your assistance the school must lapse, We have a Teacher engaged at a salary of Fifty (50) Pounds per annum, and since the commencement of the school the attendance has been steadily increasing showing at the present time a daily average of twenty (20) children.
    [Show full text]
  • District Plan Definition of Minimum Yard Requirements
    DISTRICT PLAN DEFINITION OF MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS This information sheet explains the District Plan Rules in relation to yard requirements, and how these should be measured to ensure that they comply with the City of Lower Hutt District Plan, or with an approved Resource Consent. Yard requirements should be measured from the property boundary to the closest part of the building, to include any cladding. It is therefore necessary to site the building slab and frame to ensure that cladding does not encroach upon the yard requirement. District Plan Interpretation Reason for yard rule in the City of Lower What this means is that no building, inclusive of Hutt District Plan its cladding, can be closer than 1.0 metre from The reason quoted in the District Plan for the yard the side and rear property boundaries, or 3.0 rule is as follows: metres from the front property boundary. This The yard spaces provide space around dwellings means that no part of a building (except those and accessory buildings to ensure the visual listed in the exceptions above in the definition of amenity values of the residential environment are building, or in the exceptions listed in the yard rule maintained or enhanced, to allow for maintenance above) can be closer. of the exterior of buildings, and provide a break Architectural drawings sometimes show between building frontages. measurements from the slab edge or building The front yard space is to ensure a setback is frame. However, in the case of resource consent provided to enhance the amenity values of the drawings the dimensions need to be shown from streetscape, and to provide a reasonable degree the cladding, if they are not, the yard requirements of privacy for residents.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of Kapiti Coast District Council
    THE NEW ZEALAND MEDICAL JOURNAL Journal of the New Zealand Medical Association Getting an outdoor smokefree policy: the case of Kapiti Coast District Council Leigh Halkett, George Thomson Abstract Aim To explore how a smokefree parks policy was conceived, accepted and developed by and for Kapiti Coast District Council (KCDC). Method Thirteen people involved in the smokefree parks policy process for KCDC were interviewed in person during November–December 2008. Supporting documentation and websites were accessed and reviewed. Results In September 2008 the KCDC agreed to adopt a smokefree parks and playground policy, following an initiative from a smokefree coalition of several public health organisations. The policy was developed collaboratively by this coalition with input from the council, and was supported by key local organisations. The KCDC appears to have adopted a smokefree outdoor areas (SFOA) policy because of demonstrated public support, the relative simplicity and low cost of the policy, the success of similar policies elsewhere, and because of the alignment with desired community outcomes. The challenges included finding funding and allocating staff time for this project. There were also concerns with how the policy would be enforced. Conclusions A collaborative approach amongst health and community groups for achieving SFOA policies works well. The experience with council SFOA policies has considerable impact on the adoption of similar policies by other councils. To maximise this influence, information about the policies needs to be spread nationally by the health and local government sectors. Legislative efforts to reduce smoking and the exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) in New Zealand have included the Smoke-free Environments Act 1990 (SEA) and the Smoke-free Environments Amendment Act 2003 (SEAA).
    [Show full text]
  • Part C.10 Landscapes for List of Outstanding Landscapes and the Planning Maps)
    APPENDIX 3 Operative Kāpiti Coast District Plan Objectives and Policies Proposed Kāpiti Coast District Plan Objectives and Policies S149(G)3 Key Issues Report – Kāpiti Coast District Council C.1: RESIDENTIAL ZONE C.1 RESIDENTIAL ZONE Over 90% of the district's population live on less than 4% of the land. This land comprises the residential environment. To accommodate this population there has been considerable investment made in buildings, services (water, gas, wastewater disposal) roading and amenity facilities (shops and schools). This represents a significant physical resource which needs to be managed to enable people and communities to meet their needs and to minimise any adverse effects of activities on both the natural and physical environment. The management of this resource can be achieved within the District Plan through controls in the design of subdivision, use and development. The objectives and policies set out below in C.1.1 are intended to address the significant resource management issues identified in B.2. The related subdivision and development issues in B.8 are addressed in C.7. C.1.1 Objectives & Policies OBJECTIVE 1.0 - GENERAL ENSURE THAT THE LOW DENSITY, QUIET CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT’S RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTS IS MAINTAINED AND THAT ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE AMENITY VALUES THAT CONSTITUTE THIS CHARACTER AND MAKE THE RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTS SAFE, PLEASANT AND HEALTHY PLACES FOR RESIDENTS ARE AVOIDED, REMEDIED OR MITIGATED. The residential environments within the Kapiti Coast District generally have a low density character, typified by low building heights and density and a high proportion of public and private open space.
    [Show full text]
  • EPA Board of Enquiry Hon Sir John Hanley David Bunting, Environment
    EPA Board of Enquiry Hon Sir John Hanley David Bunting, Environment Commissioner Glenice Paine Mark Appledoorn Intro My name is Ruben Blok and I live at 79 Belvedere Ave, Waikanae. I am a Business Intelligence consultant with a private local firm and I create analytic reporting solutions for major private and public sector organisations throughout the Australasia. I am usually not too worried about government decisions but given my field of expertise and what I have witnessed with this project something very wrong is happening here and the information does simply not add up. I oppose the NZTA Makays to Peka Peka proposal and would like to tell you my experience and explain my findings. Lead Up We moved from Auckland to Kapiti (originally to Raumati South) in 2007 to start a family and fell in love with the community and surroundings. The combination of bush, beach, and lifestyle was an easy decision. We heard about KCDCs initial proposal to create a new alternate road and bridge to Waikanae I quite liked the idea. It seems a little crazy that you can almost walk to Waikanae from Paraparaumu Beach faster than you can drive (we tested it the other day). A year or two later we received the notification from NZTA that as part of the Roads of National Significance project they were planning to upgrade the existing SH1 to future proof the national grid. We again quite optimistic when we saw the proposals (WO and EO only) and chose option EO, upgrade the existing SH1, as it had minimal impact on the existing community leaving SH1 as close to its original location as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • MONDAY 17 May TIME Individual/ Orgainisation Speaker for Organisation Submission Number 9:30 A.M
    MONDAY 17 May TIME Individual/ Orgainisation Speaker for Organisation Submission Number 9:30 a.m. - 9:45 a.m. 9:45 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. KCA Lyn Sleath 21LTP -12 + 21 10:00 a.m. - 10:15 a.m. Raumati Village Business Association Bede Laracy 21 LTP - 08 10:15 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. John Robinson EHQ - 01 10:30 a.m. - 10:45 a.m. Marco Zeeman EHQ - 10 10:45 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Georgia Choveaux EHQ - 16 11:00 a.m. - 11:15 a.m. MORNING TEA BREAK 11:15 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. E Tu Otaki Shelley Warwick/someone else 21LTP - 22 11:30 a.m. - 11:45 a.m. KEAG Shelley Warwick/ Ruth Halliday 21 LTP - 23 & 21 LTP - 26 11:45 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Kapiti College Tony Kane 21LTP74 12:00 p.m. - 12:15 p.m. Waik Community Board James Westbury EHQ - 29 12:15 p.m. - 12:30 p.m. Adrian Gregory EHQ-58 12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. LUNCH BREAK 1:30 p.m. - 1:45 p.m. John Le Harivel EHQ - 13 1:45 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. Peter Ryan EHQ - 09 2:00 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. Nga Manu Matu Booth 21LTP - 11 2:15 p.m. - 2:30 p.m. Kapiti Climate Change Action Dawn Brook 21LTP - 56 2:30 p.m. - 2:45 p.m. Rachel Barwell 21LTP - 54 2:45 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Shaun Johnson EHQ - 06 3:00 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • HRE05002-038.Pdf(PDF, 152
    Appendix S: Parties Notified List of tables Table S1: Government departments and Crown agencies notified ........................... 837 Table S2: Interested parties notified .......................................................................... 840 Table S3: Interested Māori parties ............................................................................ 847 Table S1: Government departments and Crown agencies notified Job Title Organisation City Manager Biosecurity Greater Wellington - The Regional Council Masterton 5915 Environment Health Officer Wairoa District Council Wairoa 4192 Ministry of Research, Science & Wellington 6015 Technology (MoRST) Manager, Animal Containment AgResearch Limited Hamilton 2001 Facility Group Manager, Legal AgResearch Limited Hamilton Policy Analyst Human Rights Commission Auckland 1036 Management, Monitoring & Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs Wellington 6015 Governance Fish & Game Council of New Zealand Wellington 6032 Engineer Land Transport Safety Authority Wellington 6015 Senior Fisheries Officer Fish & Game Eastern Region Rotorua 3220 Adviser Ministry of Research, Science & Wellington 6015 Technology (MoRST) Programme Manager Environment Waikato Hamilton 2032 Biosecurity Manager Environment Southland Invercargill 9520 Dean of Science and University of Waikato Hamilton 3240 Technology Director National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Wellington 6041 Research Limited (NIWA) Chief Executive Officer Horticulture and Food Research Institute Auckland 1020 (HortResearch Auckland) Team Leader Regulatory
    [Show full text]
  • Final Client Report
    Final Client Report Prepared for Kapiti Coast District Council September 2005 A Study of the Rural Productive Potential in the Northern Part of the Kapiti Coast District Alec Mackay, AgResearch, Palmerston North Brent Clothier, Hort Research, Palmerston North Tessa Mills, Hort Research, Palmerston North Murray Jessen, Landcare Research, Palmerston North Peter Newsome, Landcare Research, Palmerston North Janice Willoughby, Landcare Research, Palmerston North Jeff Reid, Crop and Food Research, Palmerston North Jeremy Neild, PGG Wrightson Consulting, Feilding A Study of the Rural Productive Potential in the Northern Part of the Kapiti Coast District Prepared for Kapiti Coast District Council September 2005 Alec Mackay, AgResearch, Palmerston North Brent Clothier, Hort Research, Palmerston North Tessa Mills, Hort Research, Palmerston North Murray Jessen, Landcare Research, Palmerston North Peter Newsome, Landcare Research, Palmerston North Janice Willoughby, Landcare Research, Palmerston North Jeff Reid, Crop and Food Research, Palmerston North Jeremy Neild, PGG Wrightson Consulting, Feilding DISCLAIMER: While all reasonable endeavour has been made to ensure the accuracy of the investigations and the information contained in this report, AgResearch expressly disclaims any and all liabilities contingent or otherwise that may arise from the use of the information. COPYRIGHT : All rights are reserved worldwide. No part of this publication may be copied, photocopied, reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form
    [Show full text]