Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Agenda
AGENDA Te Rārangi Take
INGLEWOOD COMMUNITY BOARD Te Rūnanga Hapori o Kohanga Moa
Tuesday 22 September 2020 at 1.30pm Rātapu 22 Mahuru 2020 hei te 1.30pm
Inglewood Library & Service Centre Wharepukapuka me te Ratonga Ratonga o Te Moa
Chairperson (Tiamana): Mr Mel Cook Members (Mema): Mr Phill Hird Mr Jono Burrows Mr Graeme Sykes Cr Marie Pearce
1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Agenda
Community Boards
Role of community boards (s52 Local Government Act 2002) a) represent, and act as an advocate for, the interests of its community; and b) consider and report on matters referred by the council and other matters of interest c) maintain an overview of services provided by the council within the community; and d) prepare an annual submission to the council for expenditure within the community; e) communicate with community organisations and special interest groups within the community; and f) undertake any other responsibilities that are delegated to it by the territorial authority.
Addressing the community board Requests for public forum and deputations need to be made at least one day prior to the meeting. The Chairperson has authority to approve or decline public comments and deputations in line with the standing order requirements.
Public Forum Public Forums enable members of the public to bring matters to the attention of the committee which are not contained on the meeting agenda. The matters must relate to the meeting’s terms of reference. Speakers can speak for up to 5 minutes, with no more than two speakers on behalf of one organisation.
Deputations Deputations enable a person, group or organisation to speak to the meeting on matters contained on the agenda. An individual speaker can speak for up to 10 minutes. Where there are multiple speakers for one organisation, a total time limit of 15 minutes, for the entire deputation, applies.
Purpose of Local Government The reports contained in this agenda address the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to decision making. Unless otherwise stated, the recommended option outlined in each report meets the purpose of local government and:
Promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future.
Would not alter significantly the intended level of service provision for any significant activity undertaken by or on behalf of the Council, or transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset to or from the Council.
END
2 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Table of Contents
HEALTH & SAFETY
APOLOGIES Phill Hird
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
PUBLIC COMMENT Cr Stacey Hitchcock regarding Taranaki Trails Trust
DEPUTATIONS None advised
COMMUNITY BOARD MINUTES Recommendation That the minutes of the Inglewood Community Board dated 11 August 2020 (ECM8345978) and the proceedings of the said meetings, as previously circulated, be taken as read and confirmed as a true and correct record.
REPORTS
ITEMS FOR DECISION BY INGLEWOOD COMMUNITY BOARD
1 Community Board Plan Review 2020-2023
2 Members Activity Report – Mel Cook
3 Members Activity Report – Graeme Sykes
4 Members Activity Report – Jono Burrows
ITEMS FOR RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
5 Naming of Roads
6 Three Waters Network Maintenance Service Review & Term Extension
7 Innovating Streets – Kelly Street Cycleway
8 Infrastructure Term Services Contract – Year 1
END
3 1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
COMMUNITY BOARD PLANS REVIEW
PURPOSE
1. The purpose of this report is to advise of the outcomes of the review of the Inglewood Community Board Plan that was originally developed in 2017.
RECOMMENDATION That, having considered all matters raised, the Inglewood Community Board Plan be adopted and presented to the next Council meeting.
SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT
2. This report is provided for information purposes only, and has been assessed as being of some importance.
DISCUSSION
3. The purpose of the community board plans is to build on the New Plymouth District’s Blueprint and facilitate a more integrated approach to planning, infrastructure development and community development in the District’s community board areas. To date, development of the Community Board Plans has been successful in encouraging grass roots engagement in our statutory planning and governance processes. Ultimately this is good for democracy and community participation in decision making.
4. Between elections, or as a result of elections, priorities can change within communities and surrounding areas, for example:
a) What seemed very important three years ago may no longer be as important to the community today;
b) New issues have arisen or have been resolved within the community;
c) Projects or aspirations identified have been achieved;
d) Local Government legislation changes have occurred. 5. It is therefore necessary for the community boards to review their plans to ensure that is the best representation of the current issues and aspirations within their community.
6. As the community boards began the review of their plans, COVID-19 Level 4 lockdown occurred. This prevented the ability for face-to-face community meetings. The community boards did, however, continue with their review
4 1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
through on-line surveys during Level 3 and 4 lockdown, and hard copy surveys once Level 2 had been introduced.
7. The online surveys generated substantial information about the issues and aspirations of each community.
8. There are a number of issues that the community board can take to the Council for their consideration – issues where Council has the potential to effect a change through its investment and policy decisions.
9. Having considered the results of the online surveys and feedback, each Board has prioritised their subsequent understanding of the issues and aspirations that require attention in the community. These have been included in preparatory work for the Council’s Long-Term Plan.
10. The community boards have endeavoured to respond to the priorities indicated by those who have participated in this process; however it has not been possible to reflect all of the aspirations. The hope of the community board is that over the life of the Long-Term Plan many more of the community’s identified priorities can be addressed.
NEXT STEPS
11. The community boards have prioritised the aspirational projects they will put forward for funding in the Long-Term Plan, taking into account what the community has told them through their surveys and discussions. Each community board will further support their prioritisations through submission to the Long-term Plan statutory consultation process to be held in March 2021.
12. With the adoption of the Community Board Plans, the next step is to develop community investment plans that will capture the extent and timing of projects planned for each community within the board area.
FINANCIAL AND RESOURCING IMPLICATIONS
13. Achieving the issues and aspirations in the community board plans will require financial and non-financial resourcing. The allocation of funding ultimately rests with the Council through the Long-Term Plan.
14. In conversations with the focus groups and during community consultation the community boards have stressed that resourcing limitations will mean not all priorities, issues or aspirations may be resolved or achieved. Some of the issues and aspirations identified are beyond the scope of Council activity, thus a partnership with community and social services organisations, iwi and business will be required to further consider the action required in these areas.
5 1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
15. Review of a Community Board Plans will mean that the community boards can focus on those matters of greatest importance to the communities that they are tasked with advocating for.
IMPLICATIONS ASSESSMENT
16. This report confirms that the matter concerned has no particular implications and has been dealt with in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002. Specifically: Council staff have delegated authority for any decisions made; Council staff have identified and assessed all reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter and considered the views and preferences of any interested or affected persons (including Māori), in proportion to the significance of the matter; Council staff have considered how the matter will promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present and the future. Unless stated above, any decisions made can be addressed through current funding under the Long-Term Plan and Annual Plan; Any decisions made are consistent with the Council's plans and policies; and No decisions have been made that would alter significantly the intended level of service provision for any significant activity undertaken by or on behalf of the Council, or would transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset to or from the Council.
APPENDICES Appendix 1 Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023 (ECM8353359)
Report Details Prepared By: Jayne Tidbury-Beer (Community Relations Officer) Team: Governance Approved By: Julie Straka (Governance Lead) Ward/Community: South-West/Inglewood Date: 12 August 2020 File Reference: ECM8345496
------End of Report ------
6 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
September 2020 Te Mahere o Te Rūnanga Hapori o Kohanga Moa 2020 -2023
The Inglewood Community Board Plan sets out the visions and aspirations of the Inglewood Community Board. This Plan has been reviewed with input from the community via a survey and discussions. The Plan provides the New Plymouth District Council with an insight about the matters that are important to the Inglewood community board area, and where investment and action is needed.
Whakataukī Manaaki whenua, manaaki tangata, haere whakamua
Care for the land, care for people, go forward.
7 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Acknowledgements The Inglewood Community Board would like to thank the members of the community who volunteered their time and to participate in this process, as time permitted, by attending a community board meeting or completing the online survey.
How to submit a Service Request or Report an Issue Many of the comments received through the Inglewood Community Board Plan Review Survey were issues that could have been dealt with via a service request direct to New Plymouth District Council.
To report any issues relating to Council facilities and assets, Service Requests can be submitted by the following means stating the issue, location and, if possible, a photo.
06 759 6060 [email protected] Available 24/7
Council website Correspondence www.newplymouthnz.com New Plymouth District Council Report and Issue Private Bag 2025, New Plymouth, 4342
New Plymouth in Your Pocket App (Download for free)
Reporting State Highway Issues For all issues relating to the State Highway call Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency (available 24/7) on
0800 4 HIGHWAYS (0800 44 44 49)
Version Action Prepared by Approval Authority Date 1.0 Inglewood Community Board Plan Jayne Tidbury-Beer Approved by Inglewood 30 June 2017 2016-2019. Community Relations Community Board; Document drafted following Officer, NPDC Adopted by Council extensive community engagement. Draft V2.3 Inglewood Community Board Plan Jayne Tidbury-Beer Approved by Inglewood 2020-2023 Community Relations Community Board; Community Board Plan 2016-2019 Officer, NPDC Adopted by Council reviewed. Key focus areas updated following community survey.
File Reference: ECM8353359
Page 1
8 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Message from the Chair
It is a pleasure to present this 2020 Community Board Plan on behalf of the Board.
A lot of work has gone into preparing the Plan and it was amidst the turmoil of COVID19 and providing input into the Long-Term Plan, that this work was undertaken.
A comprehensive survey was completed by a record number of responders, some 466 took time to consider those thoughts and ideas raised by the Community and the Board, which has given a very useful insight into what is important to us as a community. And what is less so.
The increased interest by the community at large is tangible evidence that we have an engaged community, interested and passionate about what happens and what is planned for the Inglewood district. Aspirations were wide and varied with a majority focused on road, walking and cycling safety, with the sense of community and lifestyle also being important aspects of living in Inglewood.
This plan is the result of building on the 2017 Community Plan and marking those projects that have been completed, while updating projects that are relevant and contemporary. It is not and was never intended to be, a complete rewrite of the 2017 Plan, rather a fine tuning of what was already established and building on the success of previous undertakings. Inglewood continues to achieve and hold its own even in difficult times, as the year 2020 is proving to be. Much of the success we enjoy comes from the community engagement in commerce, volunteering time and resources through cultural and charitable endeavours and enthusiasm in the sporting arena.
I imagine all Community Boards strive to make their town a better place to live, play and work and, this Board is no different, we want the best for our community and it is with this thought in mind, that I present this 2020 Community Board Plan to you, our District Councillors and the Council staff, who I thank for their effort and commitment in assisting us in its preparation and delivery, especially my fellow Community Board members.
E āku iti, e āku rahi, kahore he kore ko ngā Poari Hāpori katoa e wawatatia ko a tātou taone he wahi pai rawa kia whakatipu whānau, kia whai mahi, kia whai oranga ngākau hoki. E āku rangatira, korekau rerekētanga o ngā whakaaro o tēnei Poari hoki. Na reira, i runga anō i ēnei kupu rangatira e tono atu ahau te Mahere Hapori 2020 ki a koutou. Otira koutou ngā ringa raupa o te Kaunihera o kōnei e kore e mutu ngā mihi ki a koutou, ko koutou tēnā e hapaitia te whakarite tika te mahere nei. Ko te whakaaro mutunga maku ki mihi atu ki ngā mema Poari kia angitu tātou.
MS Cook Chair Inglewood Community Board
Page 2
9 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Meet the Inglewood Community Board Members 2019-2022
Mel Cook Chair Phone: 027 442 6943
Email: [email protected]
86 Dudley Road Inglewood 4386
Phill Hird Phone: 021 873 149 Deputy Chair Email: [email protected]
50 Matai Street Inglewood 4330
Jono Burrows Phone: 06 756 7410
Email: [email protected]
Graeme Sykes Phone: 021 393 151
Email: [email protected]
Councillor Marie Pearce Phone: 06 756 7977
Email: [email protected]
450 Bedford Road Inglewood
Page 3
10 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Contents Acknowledgements ...... 1 How to submit a Service Request or Report an Issue ...... 1 Reporting State Highway Issues ...... 1
MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR...... 2
MEET THE INGLEWOOD COMMUNITY BOARD MEMBERS 2019-2022 ...... 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 5 Why review Community Board Plan? ...... 5 How we got the feedback ...... 5 Indicative Budget and Funding Sources ...... 6 Council’s Response to COVID-19 ...... 6
NEW PLYMOUTH DISTRICT COUNCIL’S STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK ...... 7
INGLEWOOD COMMUNITY BOARD VISION ...... 8 Our Key Focus Areas ...... 8
OUR PRIORITIES ...... 9 Years 1 - 3 ...... 9 Years 4-10 ...... 10 Years 10+ ...... 10 Advocacy Years 1-3 ...... 10 Advocacy Ongoing as required...... 11
INGLEWOOD COMMUNITY BOARD AREA...... 13
CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMUNITY ...... 14 Community Survey...... 14
JUNCTION ROAD ENDOWMENT FUNDS – WORKS PROGRAMME ...... 21
CONNECTING TO RELEVANT PLANS AND STRATEGIES ...... 25 District Blueprint ...... 25 Long-Term Plan (LTP) ...... 25 Infrastructure Strategy ...... 26 District Plan ...... 26
CONCLUDING REMARKS ...... 27
APPENDIX 1 : BLUEPRINT EIGHT KEY DIRECTIONS ...... 28
APPENDIX 2: CENSUS 2018 QUICK STATS ...... 29
Page 4
11 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Executive Summary In 2017 the Inglewood Community Board facilitated a community engagement process that led to the development of its first Inglewood Community Board Plan (the Plan). The Plan was developed by the Inglewood Community Board and supported by a focus group of community members who were invited, by the community board, to participate. The Plan was developed in parallel to plans being developed in the Kaitake, Waitara and Clifton community board areas.
The Inglewood Community Board has endeavoured to respond to the priorities of all who have participated in this review process. However, it has not been possible to reflect all of the aspirations as community board recommendations. The hope of the community board is, that over the life of the Long-term Plan, many more of the community’s identified priorities can be addressed. Why review Community Board Plan? Three years is a long time in local government. Between elections, or as a result of elections, priorities can change within communities and surrounding areas, for example:
What seemed very important three years ago may no longer be important to the community today; New issues have arisen or have been resolved within the community; Projects or aspirations identified have been achieved; Local Government legislation changes may have occurred.
Due to these reasons alone, it is necessary for the community board to review their plan to ensure that is the best representation of the current issues and aspirations within their community.
The community board has prioritized the aspirational projects it will put forward for funding in the Long-Term Plan, taking into account what the community has told us. The prioritization is shown in this document and will be further supported by a submission to the Long-term Plan through the statutory consultation process to be held in March 2021. How we got the feedback It must be acknowledged that as the community board were due to begin the review of this Plan, COVID-19 Level 4 lockdown was introduced, which prevented planning of face-to-face community meetings. The community board did, however, continue with the review process through an on-line and hard-copy survey. The 2017 survey attracted 227 responses, while the 2020 survey received 466 responses.
The survey generated substantial information about the issues and aspirations of the community, however some of those identified are beyond the scope of Council activity, thus a partnership with iwi, community and social services organisations, government agencies and business will be required to further consider the action required in these areas.
This Inglewood Community Board has considered the results of the survey, and has prioritised the feedback from this process and understanding of the issues and aspirations that require attention in the community.
The community board has endeavoured to respond to the priorities indicated by those who have participated in this process; however it is not possible to reflect all of the aspirations. The hope of the community board is that over the life of the Long-Term Plan (LTP) many more of the community’s identified priorities can be addressed.
Page 5
12 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
The priorities that are recommended to the Council cover: Recreation and Events; Transportation; Growth; Tourism; Water and Waste Management; and Citizens and Community Engagement and acknowledgement of a partnership with iwi and hapū. Indicative Budget and Funding Sources There are a number of ways that community board initiatives can be funded:
Through general rate funding. The Council decides on the share of general rate funding provided to projects identified by community boards. All decisions on investment in new facilities and major upgrades of facilities are made by Council. By leveraging involvement of other partners such as the private sector, community and other public sector agencies. The community board has prioritized the aspirational projects they will put forward for funding in the Long-term Plan, taking into account what the community has told us. The prioritization is shown in this document and will be further supported by a submission to the Long-Term Plan through the statutory consultation process to be held in March 2021. Council’s Response to COVID-19 Our world was upended by Covid-19. After the national lockdown, New Zealand managed 102 straight days with no community transmissions. Now we're back in Level 2, showing how unpredictable the pandemic is. The shockwaves have knocked our economy badly and we want to make sure Taranaki is managing the turmoil and planning ahead.
Economic consultants Infometrics in July said that while the economic damage to the country will not be as bad as first thought, New Zealand's economy at the end of next year will still be almost 5 per cent smaller than it was pre-Covid-19.
The Government is leading the economic and social recovery and the regions have their bit to play. In Taranaki, NPDC will be a major player. Partnering with iwi and supported by Venture Taranaki Trust, the work we do in coming years will lay the foundations of our recovery and help determine how quickly our community and economy bounces back.
Over the next year, we're expecting a drop in revenue of about $5.4million. That sounds bad but our books were looking strong when we entered this unprecedented event. International ratings agency Standard and Poor's rated us AA/A-1+, the best possible rating for local government in New Zealand, and the Perpetual Investment Fund, our long-term nest egg valued at about $273 million, helps us to reduce the cost of rates on households and businesses.
This enabled us to set aside around $20 million for our Back on Our Feet initiative, including:
Rates holidays for struggling households and businesses. Zero-interest and cheap loans to make homes warmer and greener. Slashing licence and on-street dining fees for the hospitality sector. Grants for main street property-owners and businesses to spruce up buildings and shop frontages. Fees cuts for builders and developers. Rent relief for commercial and community tenants. Help for small and medium-sized businesses. An hour's free parking for shoppers.
We're also giving local firms a head-start when we go looking for suppliers and we're encouraging our residents to buy local too.
Page 6
13 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
During lockdown and Level 3 we worked hard to find out what you thought of our Covid response package. Almost a thousand people filled in our survey and many more shared their thoughts on our Zoominars.
But have we got the economic medicine about right? Or should we be looking to find more savings in our operations or be investing more in major work programmes to create jobs and stimulate the local economy? Or finding other ways to support ratepayers, industry and business?
Our long-term economic development strategy Tapuae Roa has now been joined by the Taranaki 2050 roadmap and both paint an exciting future. While the region and New Plymouth pivot to respond to the economic and social challenges of Covid 19, some might say that the ideas and innovations set down in these plans are more relevant than ever. New Plymouth District Council’s Strategic Framework
Page 7
14 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Inglewood Community Board Vision
To advocate for the Inglewood district residents and businesses and protect the environment and assets to ensure the community thrives for future generations
Our Key Focus Areas
Recreation and Events Our community, young and old and of all abilities, to have access to a wide range of recreation opportunities for health, well-being and enjoyment. Transportation Our communities are well connected to each other, and New Plymouth, via public transport and efficient and safe roads. Growth The Inglewood area, both urban and rural, is a great place to live so we need to plan for growth to create a sustainable and prosperous local and rural economy. Tourism We will work with the local residents and business owners to make Inglewood a vibrant destination for visitors to the region. Infrastructure We will strive to advocate for a healthy environment and good infrastructure so that future generations can enjoy Inglewood as much as we do. Citizens and Engagement We will work together for our community and future generations, and acknowledge a partnership with Iwi and Hapū of the Inglewood area.
Page 8
15 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Our Priorities The priorities that the Inglewood Community Board would like to see furthered as part of the Long-Term Plan commitments are detailed below.
Aspiration/Issue Key Initiative Key Focus Area
Years 1 - 3 Dog control in Inglewood Adopt a dog ban or allowed on a leach policy for the Inglewood Recreation and Cemetery Cemetery. This will provide an enhanced experience and Events increased safety for visitors, no mess and no dogs running loose. Develop and maintain The Windsor Walkway needs to be further developed and Recreation and safe walkways and cycle maintained to a safe level for walkers and cyclists of all ages and Events way trails for all users of abilities. This is a popular Inglewood walkway and has not been all ages and abilities well maintained. It has attracted TET funding in the past but improvements have been slow. Submissions by Inglewood Community were made in in AP 2011/12 to extend Windsor Walkway through to and up into Joe Gibbs reserve. Also 2013/14, 2015/25, 2016/17, 2018-28 Annual Plans. Develop and maintain Investigate development of a 5km walking/jogging/cycling loop Recreation and safe walkways and cycle connecting Joe Gibbs Reserve / Trimble Park / Jubilee Park. Events way trails for all users of Further community engagement to be undertaken to ascertain all ages and abilities community requirements for development of a safe walkway Development of the Inglewood township is separated in two by the railway line, and Tourism; Inglewood Railway pedestrian movement across the railway lines is disconnected, Destination Station land with 350m between the two pedestrian crossing points at either end of the block. Forgoing the opportunity to purchase the railway land and implement stronger pedestrian connections risk holding Inglewood’s development back. The land and buildings that make up the Inglewood Railway Station and yard is currently land banked as part of the Treaty of Waitangi Settlement process. Public Toilets Upgrade To provide modern, accessible, hygienic and fit for purpose Tourism; accessible toilets to reflect positively on the town. Destination; Infrastructure Safer Streets Address road crossing safety issues on Rata and Matai Streets Transportation with a view to installing crossing lights and other safety features. Implement a lower speed limit of 30KMPH in the CBD zone. Additional accessible car parking spaces needs to be investigated. Footpaths are needed in some areas of Egmont Village. Junction Road Works Complete the “Slippery Hill” project on Tarata Road using Transportation Programme accumulated interest from the Junction Road Endowment Fund. Motorhome Dump-station Develop an already identified area on Lincoln Road to install a Tourism dump station that is adjacent to the town oxidation ponds and Infrastructure pumping station. Allows Inglewood to be registered as motorhome friendly, to join Opunake, Stratford and New Plymouth in that designation. Local contractors and NZMCA have offered to invest in a partnership with NPDC to see this project come about before the end of 2020. Inglewood CBD Upgrade Improvements of the presentation and facilities within the Growth; Inglewood CBD zone. Such as tables and chairs, accessible access, Recreation and bikes racks, a safe and inviting environment for the community to Events; stop and enjoy. Tourism To bring a more socially connected commerce environment, supporting local businesses.
Page 9
16 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Aspiration/Issue Key Initiative Key Focus Area
Improved cleanliness of Maintenance of footpaths is good in Inglewood. Improvements Transportation; footpaths are required to improve the cleanliness of the footpaths to prevent Growth slipping by walkers. Improved drinking water Continue communication links between council and community to Infrastructure; quality for all residents keep community informed of work plan and timings. Growth and businesses Improved rubbish and Facilities are currently non-compliant with zero waste policy and Tourism; recycling facilities in the needs to be reviewed. Recreation and Inglewood CBD Area to Events; comply with zero waste Infrastructure policy
Improved recycling The Inglewood Transfer Station access road is in a state of Infrastructure; options for the disrepair and qualifies as 3rd World Standard. Growth Inglewood rural area. Greater use and better, safer access might encourage more people to use. Appropriate stormwater Address Miro, Maire and Brown Streets stormwater issues. Infrastructure; drainage be implemented Council to investigate upgrading stormwater facilities around the Growth and maintained. Egmont Village School and Egmont Village to cope with the high rainfall. Increase communication Communication updates through Moa Mail and regular updates on Citizens; Growth to improve awareness of Facebook page to keep the community updated on community issues and aspirations in board and council events. the Inglewood area Shading for Jubilee Park The community board would like to see the provision of shading Recreation and Playground over the playground at Jubilee Park. Events Years 4-10 Inglewood Swimming Installation of a shade structure over pool surrounds for all- Recreation and Pool shelter weather use through the season. Events Motorhome and Caravan The Inglewood Community Board would like to see consideration Tourism park given to planning for a motorhome and caravan park. There is Recreation and potential to bring motorhome owners (members of NZMCA) to Events Inglewood and support the local economy through providing accommodation for visitors to the TET Stadium events, Mt Taranaki (which is on the Inglewood doorstep) and the proposed Taranaki Traverse. In conjunction with the project to install a dump station in Inglewood, this promotes Inglewood as a motorhome friendly community. Inglewood presently lacks a supply for accommodation for tourists. Years 10+ Develop and maintain Investigate cycle way connections from Inglewood to Egmont Recreation and safe walkways and cycle Village, Bell Block and New Plymouth. Events; way trails for all users of Destination all ages and abilities. Advocacy Years 1-3 Safer pedestrian Safer street crossing amenities will reduce community and Transportation crossings in central parental anxiety, reduce the possibility of injury or worse to the Inglewood – Northern many school children that cross Rata St each day. Konini Street is end to have a 22 home development begin in the near future which will increase pedestrian traffic needing to cross Rata St. Centre- line refuge area and orange flashing lights activated by pedestrians should be considered. Lower speeds saves lives.
Page 10
17 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Aspiration/Issue Key Initiative Key Focus Area
Safer Roads Consult with Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency to improve safety Transportation at the intersections of: 1. Rata St/Matai St 2. Mountain/Dudley Roads 3. Matai Rd/Kelly St 4. Upland Road/SH3 5. SH3, Egmont Road, Egmont Village 6. Durham/Mountain Roads 7. Lepper Road/SH3 Submission to 2018-28 Annual Plan to support a submission to Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency to reconfigure Durham, Dudley and Lepper Roads intersection with SH3. Further measures are needed at intersections of Upland and Egmont Roads as well. Reduce rural road speed limit to 80KMPH. Durham and Dudley intersection zone has a history of fatalities and accidents. Turn right lanes have been planned for some years and they need the highest priority for implementation. Lower speeds saves lives. Elliott Street Precinct Work in partnership with community groups to develop the area Recreation and which has the TET Stadium as a central feature and include Rata Events; Street through Elliott St to Carrington St as a precinct that is Tourism; inclusive of all sports and recreational codes and facilities. Destination A common beneficial complex complimenting each activity, includes a café or restaurant and a destination area for community use. There are interested parties keen to establish a working party to pursue this proposal, to which Inglewood Community Board would be an interested party. Moa Project A community project supported by the community board and Tourism; seeking Council support for the Community Project Team to install Citizens and giant Moa Icon on Trimble Hill or other suitable site. Community Icon for the town and surrounding area. Emphasises the common Engagement; current logo, a desire to build on this connection and create a Recreation and 'heart' for the area and town to give Inglewood a point of Events. difference. Not fully funded by Council but support of the project by the NPDC is important to its success, as the work will sit on council land and financial supporters will be comforted by Council's backing and assistance in planning and consents. Community Centre Support the development of a community centre which could be a Growth; focus of the local Kohanga Moa Marae. Citizens and A groundswell of people in the community see the need to be able Community to meet and support each other and those that are at risk of Engagement becoming flotsam within the community. Social interaction is key to a lively, buoyant and supportive community and Inglewood sees this as a need which requires a place to call home. Advocacy Ongoing as required The community board will continue to advocate on behalf of the Inglewood Community on the following issues as and when required. Maintain public transport Consult with Taranaki Regional Council to establish better Growth; links. transport links for the Inglewood Community Transportation District Plan Review Advocate for requirements of: Growth; Industry and small business in the Inglewood Area Tourism; Land allocated for new industry / commercial use Recreation and Business, farming and industry when planning for future Events; population growth Community Engagement
Page 11
18 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Aspiration/Issue Key Initiative Key Focus Area
More specialty shops in Inglewood CBD and surrounding area. Make it attractive for Planning for future housing of our senior citizens Growth; people to live in Attract services such as medical, broadband Destination; Inglewood Promotion of Inglewood as a destination Infrastructure Support community Support community groups, ie Inglewood First, to continue to Tourism; Recreation events provide community events such as Americarna, Christmas Parade and Events Acknowledge and Support community projects and opportunities that promote our Citizens and celebrate the history of history and our heritage Community our place and our people Engagement Work in partnership with Develop mutual dialogue with mana whenua of the Inglewood Citizens and mana whenua with area. Community interests in our area, and Engagement advocate for representation for all. Protection of our rivers Ensure authorities are aware of problems areas and implement Citizens and and wetlands appropriate strategies to protect and maintain our rivers. Community Engagement
Page 12
19 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Inglewood Community Board Area The Inglewood Community Board helps make our community a better place to live by advocating on key issues on behalf of the community.
The iwi and hapū within this rohe are Te Atiawa, Manukorihi Hapū (Owae Marae), Otaraua Hapū (Mangaemiemi Marae) and Pukerangiora Hapū (Kairau Marae)
The Inglewood Community Board, supported by a focus group of local representative originally developed this Plan in 2017 to set a future direction (a 30 year vision) for the communities within the ward. Setting a long term direction helps to ensure that assets and resources are made available in the area of greatest need and want.
The Inglewood Community Board Plan sits alongside the Clifton, Waitara and Kaitake Community Board Plans setting out the vision, issues and aspirations of each community. This is the first review to be undertaken since the community board plans were originally approved and adopted in July 2017.
The Plan is a plan for the whole community – young and old, Māori and Pākehā, men and women, businesses and employees, families and more. The vision for our community can only come to life because it is innovative, forward looking, focused and cohesive.
The hope of the Inglewood Community Board is that the issues and aspirations of the community, as set out in this document, will be translated into action and investment by the New Plymouth District Council. This is a 30 year plan (reviewable every three years) and the community know that it will take this length of time for some of the investments into the community to be made. The community board recognizes that the community cannot expect to get everything that is wanted in the short term. However, it is important that the Council consider the views of the community and invest in the areas that have been identified as important.
Page 13
20 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Consultation with the Community In April 2020, the Inglewood Community Board began a series of workshops to review the Plan. Unfortunately planning for community meetings had to be abandoned due to lockdown for the COVID-19 pandemic. The community board continued to plan for a survey which was made available online and in hardcopy.
The survey provided proposed statements from the existing community board plan key focus areas and asked the respondents to indicate the extent to which they agreed with the statements. In addition to the questions, the survey provided opportunities for respondents to provide additional commentary about the issues or other matters that were not identified.
The survey was promoted by the community board and the New Plymouth District Council via their website, Facebook and Moa Mail.
The 2020 Plan Review survey had 466 completed responses. This compares to the 227 fully completed surveys in 2017. The feedback gathered from the people who offered their ideas and contributions via the survey and community conversations is reflected in this plan. Community Survey Which area of the Inglewood ward do you live or most associate with? (2017 v 2020)
Other/Unknown Kaimata/Ratapiko (Area F) Tarata/Purangi (Area E) Egmont Village/Tarurutangi/Waitui (Area D) Kaimiro/Korito/Mangorei/Hurworth (Area C) Norfolk and surrounding area (Area B) Inglewood urban township (Area A) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
2017 2020
Percentage of Responses by Age Group 65 years or over 56-65 years 46-55 years 36-45 years 26-35 years 16-25 years
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Page 14
21 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
1.30% 2.00% Ethnicity of Survey Respondents 4.20%
6.10% New Zealand European
Maori
English
Other European
Other 86.40%
Respondents who advised their ethnicity group was Māori were also asked which Iwi they were affiliated to.
NB: The survey did not provide an option to identify with more than one ethnicity group and therefore this data is indicative only. More accurate Census Statistics for 2018 can be found at Appendix 2.
Page 15
22 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
How do you rate the following in the Inglewood community board area?
Number of car parks available in Inglewood CBD
Improvements to Jubilee Park (skate park, playground)
Accessibility and maintenance of footpaths in Egmont Village
The following questions show comparisons from 2017 survey to 2020 survey
Accessibility of council facilities in the Inglewood area for all people (ie elderly, disabled, families etc) 2017
2020
Maintenance of footpaths in Inglewood CBD 2017
2020
Cleanliness of footpaths in Inglewood CBD 2017
2020
Drinking water quality 2017
2020
Ultra-fast fibre broadband internet in rural areas 2017
2020
User friendliness and accessibility of Windsor Walkway for all people (ie walkers, cyclists, wheelchairs etc) 2017
2020
The safety of users of the Windsor Walkway 2017
2020
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very Good Good Neutral Poor Very Poor
Community satisfaction regarding accessibility of Council facilities (in general), maintenance and cleanliness of footpaths has improved. Community satisfaction Windsor Walkway friendliness, accessibility and safety has decreased; Community satisfaction with regards to issues with Drinking Water quality remains effectively the same, with an increase in “very poor” compared to “poor”. This could be as a result of a substantial increase in number of surveys completed. It gives a better indication of the community satisfaction on these issues. Ultra-fast broadband has improved slightly in rural areas.
Page 16
23 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Thinking about the future, how much do you support the following community facilities and services for Inglewood Community Board area?
Provision of shading over the playground at Jubilee Park
The Connector Bus timetable
A Community Support Centre with community services found in one area. Events in the Town Hall, such as "Welcome to Inglewood" for all newcomers? Community ownership and development of the Inglewood Railway Station land?
A dog ban in the Inglewood cemetery
Provision of shading over pool surrounds at the Inglewood Swimming pool for all-weather use through the season 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Strongly support Support Neutral Against Strongly Against
For comparison, in 2017:
64% supported improvement to public transport. In 2020 65% have indicated that they support the Connector Bus timetable service. Thinking about the future, how much do you support the following tourism and CBD development ideas for Inglewood?
Reduction of the speed limit through the CBD
Installation of pedestrian traffic lights in the Inglewood CBD
A giant Moa sculpture placed on Trimble Hill lookout
CBD Upgrade
The Moa icon being used to promote Inglewood
A campground for motorhomes, caravans and cabins
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Strongly support Support Neutral Against Strongly Against
For comparison, in 2017:
75% indicated that safer pedestrian crossings were required within Inglewood CBD. 69% indicated that they would like to see Inglewood as a destination by attracting more speciality shops to Inglewood CBD and surrounding areas. 38% indicated that they would like to see provision for motorhomes and caravans/cabins for visitors to the area.
Page 17
24 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Thinking about the future, how much to you support the following roading infrastructure for Inglewood Community Board area?
Reduction of speed limits on rural roads
Improving the quality of rural roads around Inglewood
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Strongly support Support Neutral Against Strongly Against
For comparison, in 2017:
40% strongly support improvement for quality of rural roads was required compared to 43% in 2020, with 37.4% indicating support for improvement compared to 44% in 2020. This indicates a slight increase in community dissatisfaction with rural roads maintenance. There is a decrease in community satisfaction on rural road maintenance, there is less than 50% support for reduction of speed on the rural roads. NB: Speed reduction question was not asked in 2017 survey.
Thinking about the future, how much to you support the following walkways and cycle-ways ideas for Inglewood Community board area?
Improvement of connection between PG Nops, Joe Gibbs and Trimble Hill Reserves
Improve safety and accessibility of the Windsor Walkway
A 5km running/walking / cycling loop behind Joe Gibbs Reserve to Trimble Park / Jubilee Park
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Strongly support Support Neutral Against Strongly Against
For comparison, in 2017:
74% wanted to see improvements made to Windsor Walkway. 64% supported the development of a 5km running / walking /cycling loop behind Joe Gibbs Reserve to Trimble Park / Jubilee Park. Additional Comments As was to be expected all of the issues that were proposed were perceived as still being important for the Inglewood community board area. When considering the issues, 87% respondents supported and strongly supported, the three more important issues were:
1. Improve safety and accessibility of the Windsor Walkway 2. Improving the quality of rural roads around Inglewood
Page 18
25 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
3. Provision of shading over pool surrounds at the Inglewood Swimming pool for all-weather use through the season.
It is worth noting that these were closely followed by 80% or more of respondents support or strongly support for the following:
4. Community ownership and development of Inglewood Railway Station land; and 5. 1.5km running/walking/cycling loop behind Joe Gibbs Reserve to Trimble Park / Jubilee Park.
There were many comments received regarding Issues and Aspirations throughout the survey, too many to note in this Plan. Most of the comments largely aligned to the major issues already identified, however more detail and clarity was provided about the meaning of the particular issue. Issues Some notable comments on issues were:
There needs to be a pedestrian crossing across Rata Street (Main Street) somewhere along the New Plymouth end of town. The road is getting busier and busier and is getting too dangerous for children and people to cross. There are two crossings in the CBD and yet none located down towards the end of town where the main schools are located. Many school children cross the main road and there are many accidents just waiting to happen! Take the trees out in the CBD they are dangerous during leaf fall. Footpath edges tidy up in lot of street. Trees hanging over footpaths cut back from residents grounds. Windsor Walkway upgrade. The Water My Goodness Please Fix the Brown Water To be fair, it has been ok for a while now! Hoping it stays this way! Quality of water is still an issue. The Jubilee park playground is not suitable for children under 4, no decent playground in Inglewood for that age group. Windsor Walkway very unsafe for walkers There needs to be some form of crossing on the main road by the purple dairy. It's such a hazard for all school goers and the elderly in the community. Crossing for kids to cross safely. Lepper Road Upper, Durham Road, and Dudley Road all need turning bays off the main road before someone dies. Speed limit in Inglewood reduced (or enforced 50km/h) on town entry/exit points. Speed in Egmont Village. 50kph speed restriction sign, south end of Egmont road (towards the mountain) is situated on a bend in the road, and has limited visibility to traffic entering the 50k zone, and would greatly benefit being relocated 100m further up towards the mountain. Currently traffic is still travelling too fast 100m down the road at the school. Egmont Village Noxious weeds: Tobacco weed and Agapanthus should be better controlled, especially on road verges and water tables. Aspirations Additional comments received regarding aspirations for the Inglewood area were:
I would like to see a clear/strong network developed that connects our current social support providers together in a way that we can identify the gaps or overlaps that exist with the overall provision of social support across our community. ….Build on the work to date and make sure the things we do undertake are executed to the highest standard. Do it once, do it right.
Page 19
26 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Inglewood needs a point of difference to attract people to visit here, to live here, work here. Ideas contributing to this might be based on development of the Railway Land and CBD, using the Station for an Arts and or business incubator, or Gallery of some kind. The Railway parking area while functional is not attractive. This end of the Railway land from the Band Rotunda to the Station needs beautification….. The little fairy lights bordering the main CBD streets are an excellent idea. It is quite unique to Inglewood, and makes it neat to drive through whenever I return to Inglewood from Stratford at night. Dog park would be great. Somewhere dog owners can let their dogs off leash. Work is underway on a collaborative active recreation space on Elliot Street (Jubilee Park User Group) that is being led by the Taranaki Community Stadium Trust (TET Stadium). There has been discussion about collaborating on operations, funding, membership management, marketing and also the introduction of a 'family pass' for all clubs/sports. We have an incredible opportunity to shape the future of active recreation on Elliot Street and we see walkway and covered swimming pool as an important part of that project. Speed limit reduced for the Windsor Walkway. Tours to Purangi to see kiwi at night, easy walks suitable for all ages and mobility. Also day tours to see bird life easy walks - suitable for all ages and mobility. Could bring extra tourism to Taranaki. What makes Inglewood Community Board area a great place to live work and play? Ranking 9 = highest, 1 = lowest
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
2020 2017
*Mt Taranaki and Sporting facilities were not asked but appeared in comments under “other” in the 2017 survey. In 2017 the respondents were asked to select as many of the options as they liked to indicate what was important to them about Inglewood. In 2020, respondents were asked to rank from 1 to 9 what was important to them. Despite the different ways asked of respondents to answer the question, the results had very similar outcomes. This question did, however, cause confusion for some respondents completing a hard copy of the survey. 77% of respondents ranked the options correctly. A number of respondents who completed a hard copy survey marked most of the options as being in 1-3 rather than 1-9. These responses have not been included in the above graph as it would have skewed the outcomes.
Page 20
27 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Junction Road Endowment Funds – Works Programme Junction Road Endowment Funds were not included in the original Community Board Plan, however it is appropriate that the aspirations and issues related to this work are noted in the Inglewood Community Board Plan as there is still a requirement for the works programme to be reviewed and planned for every three years and noted in the Long-Term Plan.
Figure 1 : Map of Inglewood County and Inglewood Borough
Background On 23 July 2014, the Monitoring Committee resolved to commence Junction Road Works Programme project at a rate of $800,000 per annumFig or 1.a lesserMap of amount Inglewood and County consultation and Inglewood was to Borough be undertaken with residents of the former Taranaki and Inglewood county areas for the purposes of setting the priorities for the road works as identified in the Detailed Forward Works Programme for expending the proceeds from the sale of Junction Road Leasehold properties. Consultation A survey was undertaken inviting residents and road users; community meetings were held in Tarata and Inglewood. A further meeting was held at Kaimata Hall to provide feedback on the outcome of the survey (on 17 September 2014). All three meetings were publicly notified through the Moa Mail and Midweek.
Any projects that qualified for Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency funding assistance was removed and placed under general improvements and maintenance budgets.
At every meeting held, the issue of how the money was to be spent was raised by those in attendance. Those who were present were consistently advised that if they wish to make a change to how the funds were to be used, they would need to make this known to the elected members.
Page 21
28 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
An unexpected outcome of the community engagement was the desire of the community to invest the principal and only use the interest for the purpose of the works programme as prioritized by the community. This was reported back to Council with the survey results and the Monitoring Committee resolved the following on 3 February 2015
(a) This project is included within the Draft Long Term Plan for 2015-2025, commencing in 2015/16. (b) The forward works programme outlined in this report is endorsed. (c) That $1 million from the Endowment Trust Account and the interest accrued over one year is used in year one to “kick start” the forward work programme to generate some impetuous. Thereafter the interest only will be used each year to fund maintenance and improvement work in the former County of Inglewood. (d) A further review of the project priorities is undertaken for the 2018-28 LTP and thereafter at three yearly intervals, commensurate with the development of future Long Term Plans.
To date, most of the top 15 safety improvements on Tarata Road have been completed with the exception of the “Slippery Hill” project, identified as priority number 1, which requires significant spend.
The Long-Term Plan 2018-2028 identifies $220k1 per annum over the next ten years. The cost of completing the required safety improvements at Slippery Hill is estimated to be between $880k to $1m. To take a lump sum from the Junction Road Endowment Fund will take a Council resolution. The survey respondents have indicated that they would like to see funds accumulated over 3-4 years to complete this project. A report to the community board and Council will be required if there is money to be taken out of the Principal investment to undertaken this project.
It is worth noting that the fund is not only for maintenance and improvements on Tarata Road, it is also for use throughout the areas previously known as “Inglewood County” and “Taranaki County”. It cannot be used in the area known as the old “Inglewood Borough” (shown on map at Fig. 1)
The community board survey asked three questions seeking feedback on the following three questions:
Are you a regular user of Tarata Road?
Kaimata/Ratapiko (Area F)
Tarata/Purangi (Area E)
Egmont Village/Tarurutangi/Waitui (Area D)
Kaimiro/Korito/Mangorei/Hurworth (Area C)
Norfolk and surrounding area (Area B)
0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%
No Yes
1 NPDC Long-Term Plan 2018-2028 page 220
Page 22
29 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Q2. Would you support a major project to improve safety by the realignment of "Slippery Hill" on Tarata Road?
Kaimata/Ratapiko (Area F)
Tarata/Purangi (Area E)
Egmont Village/Tarurutangi/Waitui (Area D)
Kaimiro/Korito/Mangorei/Hurworth (Area C)
Norfolk and surrounding area (Area B)
0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%
No Yes
Q3. Do you agree that accumulation of income from the Junction Road Endowment Fund to apply to major safety improvement projects in the areas covered by the Endowment Fund, is a good use of the interest from the Funds?
Kaimata/Ratapiko (Area F)
Tarata/Purangi (Area E)
Egmont Village/Tarurutangi/Waitui (Area D)
Kaimiro/Korito/Mangorei/Hurworth (Area C)
Norfolk and surrounding area (Area B)
0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%
No Yes
444 responded to this section of the survey 21.8% of all respondents indicated they were regular users of Tarata Road. 32.4% of all respondents live in the areas previously known as “Taranaki and Inglewood Counties”. 86.6% of those who live in the areas previously known as “Taranaki and Inglewood Counties” agreed that accumulation of income from the Junction Road Endowment Fund (the Fund) to apply to major safety improvements projects was a good use of the interest from the Fund; 83% of all respondents agree that accumulation of income to apply to a major safety improvement project was a good use of the interest from the Fund. 79% of those who live in the areas previously known as “Taranaki and Inglewood Counties” supported a major project to improve safety by the realignment of “Slippery Hill” on Tarata Road; 87% of all respondents supported this project.
There is substantial support for improvement of safety by the realignment of “Slippery Hill” on Tarata Road and that the accumulation of income from the Fund to apply to major safety improvement projects, was a good use of the interest from the Funds.
Page 23
30 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
It should be noted that:
Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency funding for maintenance on Tarata Road does not attract Junction Road Endowment Fund (the Fund) support. All work funded by the Fund is “additional maintenance” and safety improvements within the area previously known as the “Taranaki and Inglewood Counties”. Use of the “principal” money invested in the Fund would require a Council resolution. The Fund does not only cover Tarata Road, and consideration will need to be given to other safety improvements in the old “Taranaki and Inglewood” County areas.
Page 24
31 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Connecting to Relevant Plans and Strategies District Blueprint The New Plymouth District Blueprint is a high-level spatial plan for the district that supports and implements the Shaping Our Future Together vision and outcomes. The Blueprint helps guide Council decision-making to deliver more integrated social, economic and environmental outcomes for the community and is supported by Eight Key Directions (Appendix 1) that are integrated and multidisciplinary and will be the Council’s focus for planning during the next 30 years. Within each key direction the actions required fall under different disciplines within the Council, and include infrastructure, strategy and policy, and district plan outcomes. The key directions also provide guidance to other government agencies, businesses, industries and the community on how the Council will focus its resources and deliver on the vision and community outcomes of Council.
For the Blueprint to remain relevant it needs to be weaved into local decision-making processes. This will allow it to be a highly relevant document with the intention of keeping the strategic planning of the district in front of mind when making decisions. To aid the Council with its decision making, the Inglewood Community Board’s five key focus areas align with the eight key directions, being:
1. Environment – Enhance the natural environment with biodiversity links and clean waterways. 2. Communities – Strengthen and connect local communities. 3. Citizens – Enable engaged and resilient citizens. 4. Growth – Direct a cohesive growth strategy that strengthens the city and townships. 5. Industry – Strengthen and manage rural economy, industry, the port and the airport. 6. Talent – Grow and diversify new economies that attract and retain entrepreneurs, talented workers and visitors. 7. Central City – Champion a thriving central city for all. 8. Destination – Become a world-class destination. Long-Term Plan (LTP) The current Council’s Long-Term Plan for 2018-2028 (LTP 2018-2028) is a 10 year investment programme. Council’s investment in new water infrastructure, for instance, will continue to allow the community to prosper and grow through the provision of clean, drinkable water to households and businesses. Council’s parks investments will provide for improvements to our environment, opportunities for people for recreation and fund, and continue to provide tourism opportunities to grow and prosper.
In implementing the vision and outcomes over the next 10 and 30 years, the Council needs to consider the future direction of the New Plymouth District. These are based on the trends seen in the community. Some of the forecasts act as the baseline compared to our aspirations for building a sustainable lifestyle capital, while others represent business-as-usual approaches or show the risks and challenge faced by our community.
The Council’s LTP is currently under review in preparation for adoption on 30 June 2021 for the period 2021- 2031. The community boards have been provided with an opportunity to have input into the Long-term Planning at the beginning of the process for the first time. The community board has presented its priorities for the next three years and ten years to the Long-term Planning team and will have another opportunity through its submission to the Long-Term Plan community consultation which will be held in March/April 2021.
Page 25
32 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Infrastructure Strategy The infrastructure Strategy identifies the significant infrastructure issues the New Plymouth District is likely to face over the next 30 years.
It takes a long-term view of the infrastructure and services the New Plymouth district will need over time, and how the Council might provide them. As well as identifying the key issues, the Infrastructure Strategy details the options the Council has for managing these issues and the implications of each of these options. It also outlines the Council’s preferred response and how much it is likely to cost. Sitting alongside the Financial Strategy, the Infrastructure Strategy helps the Council avoid any major surprises in the future.
In developing the Infrastructure Strategy, the Council considered:
The infrastructure required to implement the strategic vision; How much the district will grow and where and when that growth will occur; The current state of the district’s assets and the issues likely to arise over the next 30 years; The possible solutions to these issues and estimate of how much they are likely to cost; and The impact of any decisions on levels of service, rates and debt.
District Plan New Plymouth District Council is required to prepare a district plan for the district. The purpose of district plans is to assist territorial authorities in carrying out their functions in order to achieve the sustainable management purpose of the Resource Management Act. District plans must give effect to national policy statements and regional policy statements and must not be inconsistent with regional plans and any applicable water conservation orders.
District Plans cover issues related to the functions of territorial authorities. These include:
The effects of land use The control of land use for the purpose of: - Avoiding or mitigating natural hazards - The management of contaminate land - The maintenance of indigenous biological diversity - Noise - Activities on the surfaces of rivers and lakes Proposed District Plan The District Plan is being reviewed and updated and the Proposed District Plan was notified on 23 September 2019, with submission period open until 22 November 2019. The submission period is now closed. Staff are now working through the submission to summarise all the submission points received. Once this is completed, a summary of submissions report will be publicly notified and a call for further submissions made.
For updated details on where this process is, visit District Plan/Proposed-District-Plan on the council’s website.
Page 26
33 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Concluding Remarks Whilst the review of this Community Board Plan has been a relatively short process, the process has been positive and has sought to be an inclusive as possible given the time constraints and environment caused by COVID-19 lockdown.
The Inglewood Community Board recognise that this Plan is a journey; this is a living document and a living process.
In addition to the issues that have been highlighted in this plan which, in most cases, specifically relate to Council facilities, the community board are aware that their role extends far beyond advocating for infrastructure and service improvements.
There are many issues where the Council may not have direct control, but because the community board have been elected to represent their community, there is an expectation that we will be a voice for the community.
The Inglewood Community Board acknowledges that there is a State Highway (SH3) running through the centre of the Inglewood community, which causes major safety concerns for the community, both young and old. There is a community advocacy role for the community board to undertake on this issues and the community board are committed to working with the Council and Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency to find a safe solution to the issues and help reduce the risks to pedestrians who regularly cross the State Highway in the Inglewood Township.
We are also committed to advocating for the wider issues to improve the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of our community.
In working towards the vision, aspirations and issues that have emerged from this process, the community board are looking forward to the next stage of the journey; a journey that will afford us opportunities to work in close partnership with our fellow community board members in Kaitake, Clifton and Waitara, with iwi and hapū, with business and community organisations and groups across the Inglewood community board area and with the dedicated and committed individuals that call the Inglewood community board area their home.
Page 27
34 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Appendix 1 : Blueprint Eight Key Directions
Environment - Enhance the natural environment with biodiversity links and clean waterways. The district is home to a unique natural environment with significant areas of indigenous vegetation, and rivers and waterways that flow from the mountain to the sea. Enhanced biodiversity will not only be positive for the natural environment and clean water but will also have significant cultural and economic spin-offs. Biodiversity outcomes will be achieved through collaborating with landowners and agencies – a multi-agency approach is required to achieve the desired environmental outcomes. Communities - Strengthen and connect local communities New Plymouth District is made up of many communities and neighborhood centres. Strengthening and connecting local communities ensures that they become successful, safe and livable environments for residents. The Council’s role is to support community, business and industry initiatives by providing high-quality public infrastructure and a pragmatic regulatory response that helps our community achieve their goals.
Citizens – Enable engaged and resilient citizens Engaging and enabling citizens will help to build community resilience. Encouraging community participation in events that are run in our parks and places will promote community connectedness and overall well-being. It is the Council’s role to build strong strategic partnerships and encourage public and community sector collaboration, leading to more sustainable social, economic and environmental outcomes.
Growth – Direct a cohesive growth strategy that strengthens the city and townships Our district is growing and we need to consider how we provide for growth into the future. As a result of the anticipated population growth, new growth areas will be required in the city and towns to provide for additional dwellings during the next 30 years. Determining the appropriate locations for growth will contribute to all the community outcomes. The Council needs to be clear on how and where it will accommodate growth into the future, through providing adequate land supply and planning for network infrastructure in appropriate locations.
Industry – Strengthen and manage rural economy, industry, the port and the airport Our economy has a strong agricultural base and a nationally significant oil and gas sector. It also has a fast- growing poultry sector with significant expansion likely in the short term. Protecting and strengthening these industries will be important for ongoing economic growth and the subsequent benefits for the community. The Council’s role is through its funding of economic development initiatives (Venture Taranaki Trust) to help drive economic activity in the region. The Council can also support industry through appropriate infrastructure provision and a pragmatic solutions-focused District Plan and regulatory framework. Talent – Grow and diversity new economies that attract and retain entrepreneurs, talented workers and visitors The New Plymouth District economy is strong, supported by agricultural economies, oil and gas and small business. There is a need to focus on growing a more diverse economy based on our ability to attract and retain talented workers, entrepreneurs and visitors. The Council has a role in ensuring that the highly-regarded Taranaki lifestyle is maintained, supported by our unique landscape, recreation opportunities, rich culture and history. Central City – Champion a thriving central city for all The central city of New Plymouth is the social, cultural and business hub for the district and the wider region. However, retail in the central city is facing a challenging transition in the face of new format retail experiences and online retail sales. The central area will need to deliver a diversity of specialty retail, entertainment, cultural and social experiences. The Council has a role in working with business and other stakeholders to develop a strategic approach to drive the success of the central business area.
Destination – Become a world-class destination Our natural assets – our parks, rivers, coast and Maunga Taranaki – are what make the district a unique and special place to live and visit. A ’flagship’ initiative to lead this direction is the Taranaki Traverse – a world-class recreational, environmental and cultural tourism experience. This is a long-term initiative that will require time, focus and a collaborative, multi-agency approach.
Page 28
35 1.1 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Community Board Plan
Inglewood Community Board Plan 2020-2023
Appendix 2: Census 2018 Quick Stats In order to understand the Inglewood community board area, a brief demographic snapshot is provided. The data has been obtained from Statistics New Zealand.
(Source: StatsNZ (Census 2018)
Population Total Female Male Inglewood 8832 49% 51% New Plymouth District 80679 51% 49%
Age Median Age Over 65s Under 15s Inglewood 41 years 14% 22% New Plymouth District 38 years 18% 20%
2Ethnic Group NZ European Māori Other Inglewood 93% 12% 5% New Plymouth District 85% 18% 10%
Families in Occupied Couples without children Couples with One parent with Private Dwellings child(ren) child(ren) Inglewood 42% 46% 11% New Plymouth District 44% 40% 16%
Occupied Private Dwellings Internet No Internet with Internet Access Inglewood 81% 19% New Plymouth District 79% 21%
Top Five Industries Inglewood New Plymouth District 1. Agriculture, Forestry and 1. Manufacturing Fishing; 2. Health Care and Social 2. Manufacturing; Assistance 3. Constructions; 3. Construction 4. Health Care and Social 4. Retail Trade Assistance; 5. Professional, Scientific and 5. Retail trade. Technical Services
2 Ethnicity is the ethnic group or groups that people identify with or feel they belong to. Ethnicity is a measure of cultural affiliation, as opposed to race, ancestry, nationality or citizenship. Ethnicity is self-perceived and people can belong to more than one ethnic group.
Page 29
36 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Decision - Members Activity Report MC 2
COMMUNITY BOARD ACTIVITY REPORT – MEL COOK
PURPOSE 1. This report advises of the community board activities of Mel Cook in the period to 7 September 2020.
ACTIVITIES
Date Activity
12/08/2020 Inglewood Community Board meeting
19/08/2020 Inglewood Community Board workshop re Community Plan Meet with Let’s Go Team re Kelly St - Miro St intersection, 21/08/2020 Kelly St walking and cycling proposal 21/08/2020 Meet with Venture Taranaki team re Moa Project Visit Inglewood swimming pool re Long Term Plan project 26/08/2020 proposal for shade around the pool Meet Open Spaces Planning team to receive proposal for 26/08/2020 walking tracks through Joe Gibbs Reserve through to Trimble Hill and James Street 27/08/2020 Meet with Community Boards Liaison re Community Plan
31/08/2020 Community Board Chairs meeting with the Mayor
01/09/2020 Council meeting at Council Chambers
01/092020 ICB Workshop by Zoom re Freedom Camping Bylaw
07/09/2020 ICB Workshop re Kelly St Cycleway
08/09/2020 Strategy and Operations Committee meeting
09/09/2020 Working Together meeting with HWT Mayor
Report Details Prepared By: Mel Cook, Chair Team: Inglewood Community Board Ward/Community: South-West/Inglewood Date: 7 September 2020 File Reference: ECM8366146
------End of Report ------
37 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Decision - Members Activity Report GS
3
COMMUNITY BOARD ACTIVITY REPORT – GRAEME SYKES
PURPOSE 1. This report advises of the community board activities of Graeme Sykes in the period to 7 September 2020.
ACTIVITIES Long-Term Plan Workshops 4/5 August covering off the prioritisation process for projects and developing an understanding of the big picture and how the Community Board Plan will contribute into this. Council has 16 services and it is challenging for community board members to get accurate data on the performance of these services in our area. NRB polls are not representative of the area as the sample size is too small.
Inglewood Community Board Plan workshop on 19/8.
Attended four Waka Kotahi NZTA workshops. Their Vision is to create a “low carbon, safe and healthy transport system for NZ cities and towns.” This transition process is complex and consists of creating transport options that will encourage mode shifts that will lead to better transport networks, efficient use of resources, reduced emissions, more physical activity and fewer crashes. The system of change depends on the complexity with macro changes taking over 10 years, meso changes in the 3 to 10 year period and the micro changes occurring in the 1 to 3-year period. Modules covered in these webinars included, “shaping urban form” (12/8), “healthy streets” (19/8), “strategic approach to public transport” (26/8) and “system change & communication” (2/9). A fifth module will run on the 9/9 regarding “parking.”
The strategic development of transport systems and networks is an important part of achieving our vision for the region. Eg how will we adapt to logging truck volumes which are expected to increase by 2.5 times current volumes. This is only one part of the puzzle. Waka Kotahi are going through a strategic change in what they see as their business model and purpose for the future. It’s a significant change from the past. There are good opportunities to be an early adopter in transport change to secure additional funding from their budgets.
Attended meetings with Council officers on 26/8 to review the Inglewood pool maintenance and the new Jo Gibbs walkway.
Attended Council Three Waters workshop and financial case for installing water meters. Also attended the Equip zoom module, Three Waters Programme and Overview. It clarified the pathway for transitioning to a new governance structure for managing NZ water systems.
Met with Councillor Clinton-Gohdes and Nick Jones of Indemic.
38 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Decision - Members Activity Report GS
3
Report Details Prepared By: Graeme Sykes Team: Inglewood Community Board Ward/Community: South-West/Inglewood Date: 7 September 2020 File Reference: ECM8366146
------End of Report ------
39 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Decision - Members Activity Report Jono
4 COMMUNITY BOARD ACTIVITY REPORT – JONO BURROWS
PURPOSE 1. This report advises of the community board activities of Jono Burrows in the period to 8 September 2020.
ACTIVITIES 11 August I attended the Inglewood Community Board meeting at Inglewood Library. 18 August I attended a Council Extraordinary meeting. 19 August I attended a community board workshop. 26 August I attended two meetings with council staff. First meeting was regarding the feasibility of covering the surrounds at Inglewood swimming pool and the second meeting was to inspect the walkway connecting Trimble Park and Joe Gibbs Reserve. 7 September I attended a community board workshop regarding a proposed trial in Kelly Street.
______
Report Details Prepared By: Jono Burrows Team: Inglewood Community Board Ward/Community: South-West/Inglewood Date: 8 September 2020 File Reference: ECM8366458
------End of Report ------
40 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
NAMING OF ROADS
5 MATTER
1. The matter for consideration by the Council is the naming of a rights-of-way as a result of subdivision development at Maire Street and Kelly Street Inglewood.
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION That, having considered all matters raised in the report, the following name be approved and the Chief Operating Officer allocate street numbers, where appropriate, to the properties fronting this right-of-way.
i) Toutouwai Lane
ii) Whekī Lane
STRATEGY & OPERATIONS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 2. The Strategy & Operations Committee endorsed the recommendation.
COMPLIANCE
Significance This matter is assessed as being of some importance.
This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter:
Options 1. Approve the recommended name
2. Recommend alternative names for the right-of-way
The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter Affected persons are identified in the P18-005 Road Naming and Numbering Policy. Recommendation This report recommends option 1 for addressing the matter. Long-Term Plan / Annual Plan No Implications Significant Policy and Plan No Inconsistencies
41 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3. This report recommends the Council approve the rights-of-way names 5 Toutouwai and Whekī.
4. The proposed name is consistent with the approach for road naming as set out in P18-005 Road Naming and Numbering Policy and with NZ Standard AS/NZS4819:2011
5. Once the Council has approved the name, street numbers will be applied to the properties served by the right-of-way.
BACKGROUND
Legislation
6. Council’s general powers in relation to roads, including road naming, are set out in Section 319 of the Local Government Act 1974. Section 319(j) provides the power “to name and to alter the name of any road and to place on any building or erection on or abutting on any road a plate bearing the name of the road.”
7. The Act does not specify any process to be followed in identifying and allocating road names and no consultation with, or input from, any party is required.
8. Section 319A provides that where the Council names a road for the first time, or alters the name of a road, the Council must, as soon as practicable, send a copy of the resolution to Land Information New Zealand (LINZ).
9. Section 319B relates to the allocation of property numbers and provides that “for electoral, postal and other purposes” the Council may allocate street numbers and requires the Council to advise LINZ of the numbers it has allocated. Where a property number is unacceptable such as where it does not comply with the ‘Addressing Standard’, LINZ may require the Council to change the number.
10. LINZ validates the road name and property numbers and updates the official national record.
11. LINZ makes the official address information that it holds available in several forms. Data resellers, in particular, take this data and tailor it for end-users such as the emergency services, businesses, and local government and central government agencies.
42 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
Council Policy
12. Council adopted P18-005 Road Naming and Numbering Policy in October 2018. 5 A copy of the Policy can be found on the Council’s website. https://www.newplymouthnz.com/Council/Council-Documents/Policies/Road- Naming-and-Numbering-Policy.
13. The Policy provides for the same provisions and processes for the naming of roads and private ways (rights-of-ways) with six or more primary address sites, or the potential to develop six or more address sites.1
14. The Policy sets out processes to identify and inform affected and interested parties, Council facilitating engagement between iwi/hāpu and developer and interested parties, reflecting LINZ new requirements, ensuring cultural appropriateness and identifying overseas military history and use of RSA poppy image.
SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT
15. In accordance with the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter has been assessed as being of some importance, as the area is of cultural and historical significance to both Tangata Whenua and the local community.
16. Road naming can contribute to a sense of connection, place and belonging. Road naming can be a contributing factor to strengthening a sense of community between residents, Tangata Whenua and local communities across the New Plymouth District.
17. Puketapu hāpu and Pukerangiora hāpu have been consulted on the naming of these rights of way.
ROAD NAME RECOMMENDATION
18. The following section provides information regarding the names now recommended for approval.
19. During consultation, various parties proposed alternative right of way name suggestions. The reasons why these names were not selected are set out later in this report.
1 Clause 9 Policy P18-005
43 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
TOUTOUWAI LANE
Why the name Toutouwai was chosen 5
20. Toutouwai is the proposed name for the right of way off Maire Street, Inglewood.
21. Initially, Pukerangiora hapῡ proposed alternative right of way name suggestions, including Kereru and Ruru. LINZ did not accept these proposals as they are existing road names within the district.
22. On account of this, Pukerangiora hapῡ proposed the name of Toutouwai in accordance with the Inglewood road naming theme of birds. Toutouwai being a North Island Robin.
23. The name Toutouwai complies with policy requirements
24. The name Toutouwai complies with the P18-005 Road Naming and Numbering Policy District specific criteria, in that it is an already established theme in a neighbourhood, or a proposed common locally relevant theme in a new subdivision with multiple new roads. (Appendix 1(1A)(i)(c) refers).
25. The property does not adjoin land included as a Statutory Acknowledgement Area under the Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Act 2016.
26. LINZ have confirmed appropriateness of using this name in the area.
WHEKĪ LANE
Why the name Whekī was chosen
27. Whekī is the proposed name for the right of way at 63A Kelly Street.
28. Pukerangiora hapu proposed the name of Whekī (Dicksonia Squarrosa) otherwise known as Tree Fern. This is an endemic species found within the Egmont Ecological District lowland bioclimatic zone particularly in Rimu Rata/ Tawa forest (https://restoretaranaki.nz/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Wild-for- Taranaki_Restoration-Planting-Guide_Egmont_ecological_.pdf).
29. In the Ecological Assessment of Effects prepared by Mounga Ecology (7 April 2020) for a proposed wider development of the application site, the report identifies Whekī as existing on the site.
30. Traditional Māori use of Whekī included lining pits for root crops with the stems, fronds used to cover pit floors, use in the construction of whare tirawa and were often used for cooking sheds.
44 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
The name Whekī complies with policy requirements 5 31. The name Whekī complies with the P18-005 Road Naming and Numbering Policy District specific criteria, in that it is an already established theme in a neighbourhood, or a proposed common locally relevant theme in a new subdivision with multiple new roads. (Appendix 1(1A)(i)(c) refers)
32. Road names in Inglewood predominantly follow a theme of native trees.
33. The property does not adjoin land included as a Statutory Acknowledgement Area under the Te Ātiawa Claims Settlement Act 2016.
34. LINZ have confirmed appropriateness of using this name in the area.
KORU LANE
35. Koru was put forward as a suggested name for this right of way. The name was proposed by surveyor Colin Jackson on behalf of his client, developer All Good Properties Ltd.
The name Koru complies with policy requirements
36. The developer has subsequently agreed with the name Whekī proposed by Pukerangiora hapῡ in response to the developers initial request for Koru Lane.
37. LINZ have confirmed appropriateness of using this name in the area.
OPTIONS
38. There are two reasonably practicable options:
Option 1 Allow the road names and numbering of properties to be allocated to meet legislative requirements. The road names align with the criteria set out in the road naming and numbering policy.
Option 2 Decline the recommended names and recommend alternative names for the right-of-way. Further engagement with tangata whenua and the developer would be recommended before a final decision is made.
39. The following assessment covers both options.
Financial and Resourcing Implications
40. Council officers do not expect any financial or resourcing implications. Installation of new road names is a financial undertaking by the developer and no costs fall on the Council.
45 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
Risk Analysis 5 41. There are no risks anticipated by approval of road names and allocation of property numbering.
Promotion or Achievement of Community Outcomes
42. The proposed name fulfils the criteria of Councils Road Naming and Numbering Policy P18-005 which puts in place processes to identify and inform affected and interested parties, Council facilitation engagement between iwi/hāpu and developer and interested parties.
Statutory Responsibilities
43. This option allows road names and numbering of properties to be allocated to meet legislative requirements. The road names align with the criteria set out in the New Plymouth District Council P18-005 Road Naming and Numbering Policy.
Consistency with Policies and Plans
44. The recommended names are consistent with New Plymouth District Council P18-005 Road Naming and Numbering Policy. https://www.newplymouthnz.com/Council/Council-Documents/Policies/Road- Naming-and-Numbering-Policy.
Participation by Māori
45. The outcomes contribute to Council’s obligations regarding developing capacity and providing opportunity for Māori to participate in Council decision making.
Community Views and Preferences
46. The recommended road name reflect the views of Tangata Whenua and the property developer.
Advantages and Disadvantages
47. The P18-005 Road Naming and Numbering Policy has assessed the advantages and disadvantages in relation to naming of roads.
Recommended Option This report recommends option 1 to approve the recommended name for addressing the matter.
46 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
APPENDICES 5 Appendix 1: Road Location Map for Toutouwai Lane. (ECM8349440)
Appendix 2: Road location Map for Whekī Lane (ECM8349440)
Report Details Prepared By: Rowan Williams (Planning Lead) Team: Consents Approved By: Juliet Johnson (Planning Manager) Ward/Community: Inglewood community Date: 18 August 2020 File Reference: ECM 8207446
------End of Report ------
47 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
Location Map of proposed ROW name Toutouwai Lane 5.1
At 55 Maire Street, Inglewood.
48 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
Plan of Subdivision at 55 Maire Street, Inglewood 5.1
Proposed ROW Toutouwai Lane
49 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
Location map of Proposed ROW – Whekī Lane or Koru Lane 5.2
At 63 A Kelly Street, Inglewood
50 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Naming - Maire Street and Kelly Street, Inglewood
Plan of Subdivision at 63 A Kelly Street, Inglewood 5.2
Proposed ROW Whekī Lane or Koru Lane
51 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Three Waters Network Maintenance Contract
THREE WATERS NETWORK MAINTENANCE SERVICE REVIEW & TERM EXTENSION
MATTER 6
1. The matter for consideration by the Council is a variation to contract to extend the existing Three Waters Network Maintenance contract with City Care Ltd by an additional term of three years. The variation follows a s17A Review under the Local Government Act 2002.
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION That having considered all matters raised in the report Council notes the variation of contract to extend the term of the of the existing Three Waters Network Maintenance contract for three years which may include removing or adding activities to the scope of the contract.
STRATEGY & OPERATONS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 2. The Strategy & Operations Committee endorsed the recommendation.
DISCUSSION
3. Council has a maintenance contract to operate and maintain its three waters network (the pipes, valves etc.) which form part of the drinking water, wastewater and stormwater reticulation network. This contract includes the operation of 32 sewer pump stations. This contract has an annual contract value of $4 million and consists of three, three year terms (making a total contract term of nine years). It is currently with City Care Ltd and is due to expire on 30 June 2021.
4. Ordinarily this contract would be retendered for another nine or ten years. However due to the following events it is considered prudent to delay the retender of this contract for a further period of three years. These events are:
a) A review of the delivery of the activities included in this contract has identified that it would be more cost effective to bring some the activities included in this contract in house;
b) The economic uncertainty created by the Covid-19 outbreak and central government and Councils have a desire to wherever possible provide business and employment certainty during this period;
c) Recent progress by the Government’s three waters reform indicates that there is a high likelihood that within the early period of any retendered contract there is a high possibility of disruption to the current method of three waters service delivery including the possibility that these could be
52 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Three Waters Network Maintenance Contract
amalgamated with other water service providers under a new publically owned entity.
Review of Method of Delivery of Service 6
5. Under Section 17A Delivery of services of the Local Government Act 2002, Council must review how it delivers the services covered by this contract (good quality local infrastructure) to ensure it is cost-effective and meets the needs of its communities. Council officers have undertaken such a review and the conclusions are summarised below.
6. The Network Maintenance Contract (currently Contract 12/PM01) is due to expire on 30 June 2021. 15 activities within the contract (Appendix 1) were evaluated to determine whether they should continue to be contracted out or be brought back in-house once the contract ends.
7. A review of how to deliver the tasks covered by the Network Maintenance contract was undertaken by Council officers. Without making changes to the services delivered (i.e. not making any level of service changes) two viable options for delivering the services were considered: continue with the status quo of delivery via outsourcing to a contractor or bring some or all of the activities in house.
8. The review consisted of an initial high level review of the feasibility of bringing the various tasks in house based upon the number of staff and the impact of organisational structure and accommodation (i.e. the scale of reorganisation that maybe required to accommodate the new staff), the investment in plant and equipment (some of this is highly specialist and expensive and it may not be adequately utilised if brought in house) and the impact this would have on the overall viability of the remaining network activities (i.e. would there be a suitable critical mass for a contract).
9. Following this initial review a cost comparison between the current contract and the estimated cost of bringing the activities in house was undertaken.
10. The following table summarises the cost benefit of those activities considered feasible to bring in house:
No. Item Savings / (cost) 3,4,5,6,7,8 Backflow testing, meter reading, restrictor inspection, water trunk main and pipe bridge inspection, flow and pressure audit (3 FTE) $72,900 10 CCTV ($205,000) 11,12 Sewer trunk main and pipe bridge inspection (1 FTE) ($36,300) 14 Sewer pump station Operation and Maintenance (3 FTE) $156,300
53 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Three Waters Network Maintenance Contract
11. Due to the high cost and high level of expertise needed for the CCTV inspection it is not worth bringing this in-house.
12. It is apparent that it would be more cost effective to deliver the following activities 6 in house: Backflow testing; meter reading; restrictor inspection; water trunk main and pipe bridge inspection; flow and pressure audit; sewer pump station operation and maintenance. The total cost saving would be $229,200 per year.
13. CCTV and sewer trunk main and pipe bridge inspection are not cost effective. However it may be worth considering bringing in house the sewer trunk main and pipe bridge inspection activities as these are associated with maintaining good oversight of Council’s critical assets. If this was brought in house the total cost saving across the activities would be $192,900 per year.
Three Waters’ Reform
14. On the basis of the Havelock North campylobacter outbreak enquiry, Government has launch a package of reforms to the three waters regulatory system in New Zealand.
15. Government has advised that the status quo for is not acceptable and change is needed. It considers larger multi-regional delivery entities are needed but has made it clear that water services must remain in public ownership.
16. Council has resolved to accept a grant from the Crown in return for participating in a review of options for reform of Council’s three waters delivery.
17. The Government has established a dedicated Water Services Regulator entitled Taumata Arowai to oversee and enforce a new drinking water regulatory framework. It is also currently considering the Water Services Bill. Once enacted it provides the Regulator with the regulatory framework necessary to enforce mandatory compliance including the requirement for water suppliers to be authorised, the ability to set minimum standards that water suppliers must comply with, the ability to issue compliance orders and the ability to appoint an “operator” where the water supplier has …persistently failed to comply with 1 or more legislative requirements (effectively statutory management).
18. During recent workshops the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) provided indications that as early as three years’ time changes to structure are envisaged.
19. Via the Mayoral forum the three district councils in Taranaki are undertaking a study of the options available to the councils for better shared services or changes to their three waters service delivery structure.
20. Whilst water reform has not been forced upon any water suppliers, the regulatory changes described above along with the Governments clear preference for larger water suppliers indicates that change is highly likely.
54 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Three Waters Network Maintenance Contract
21. There is therefore significant uncertainty in the area of three waters service delivery and it is considered a risk to retender a long term contract during a time of uncertainty as this may make water reform in whatever its new form less effective. 6
Covid-19 Business Certainty
22. The Covid-19 lockdown has had a negative impact on many businesses, including the Council’s. The original programme prior to Covid-19 for this contract scheduled the retendering in mid-2020. This was to allow time for any new organisation to set up and transition to a new contract.
23. The completion of the 17A service review was delayed due to the lock down and this also impacted negatively on the original timeframe for retendering.
24. Recognising the negative impact of Covid-19 on the business community, Council launched a recovery initiative called Get Us Back On Our Feet (GUBOOF). As part of the GUBOOF initiatives, a procurement recovery plan was adopted by Council on 30 June 2020 aimed to maximise efficiency in NPDC’s procurement processes, add confidence to our local suppliers by identifying a number of go local initiatives to low value procurements. Whilst this contract is a high value contract it does align with the intent of the GUBOOF initiative.
25. City Care Ltd has a large local presence and has been established in the New Plymouth and the Taranaki region for sixteen years. It employs over 50 local people in a variety of roles. By extending this contract for an additional period of three years Council will be providing this business and these local workers with certainty of employment during the economic recovery.
26. The adopted procurement recovery plan identifies the option to extend contracts outside of the current Terms and Conditions. This option is undertaken when procurement and contract planning has been negatively impacted by the Covid- 19 pandemic.
NEXT STEPS
27. Before the proposed activities and roles are bought in house, two processes need to be followed; discussion with the existing contractor on how to transfer these activities (a transition plan) and discussion with existing Council staff on how these positions would best be incorporated into the Council’s organisational structure.
28. Council has resolved to sign a memorandum of understanding to participate in reviewing three water reform and receive a grant. Whilst this grant has no commitments the next tranche of grants may be linked to commitment to participating in some form of reform.
55 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Three Waters Network Maintenance Contract
29. The Chief Executive will commence negotiations with City Care Ltd to extend the current contract for three years. This may include increasing or decreasing the scope of this contract and bringing some activities in- house.
SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT 6
30. In accordance with the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter has been assessed as being of some importance because the decision will not change the level of service to the community, just how the service is provided.
31. The Council has delegated authority to Council officers to execute the variation of contract as it falls within the financial authority limits and is approved in the Long-Term Plan. As the variation involves a significant sum of money the matter is being referred to Council for information purposes. No public engagement is required.
32. The decision is reversible as it only extends the contract which can be retendered in the future. Similarly any activities which are brought in house can be outsource in the future if that is decided.
Financial and Resourcing Implications
33. These services are budgeted in the Long Term Plan so the contract variation does not introduce additional expenditure which is not otherwise already provided for.
34. The variation allows Council time to bring in house some of the activities which would provide a saving of up to $229,200 per year. If activities are brought in- house an additional seven FTE to be employed and additional plant such as vehicles purchased.
Risk Analysis
35. The benefits of bringing these activities in house include more direct control and oversight of some critical water safety activities, in particularly backflow prevention, and sewer pump station operation.
36. Backflow prevention is critical to the protection of water within the Council’s network as it protects the water quality by preventing contaminants from private property and industry backflowing into the reticulation.
37. Sewer pump stations are located at low points in the Council sewer network. Any disruption to their operation that is not responded to quickly can result in an overflow to the environment.
56 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Three Waters Network Maintenance Contract
38. Bringing the activities in-house creates an operational risk to the continuity of service. Implementing the changes will take time and there is a risk that if not implemented by the end of the current contract the Council will be left without adequate resourcing (staff and expertise) to carry out the activities. Extending the current contract by a further period of three years to provides time for 6 assessment and implementation. This will also provide more certainty to the incumbent contractor to allow for a smoother transition.
39. Not retendering for the next three years of the contract creates a risk that contract rates have not been tested by competitive tender and Council is paying more for the service than it may otherwise pay. It is considered that the current rates are still competitive when compared to recently tendered rates for similar types of activities, e.g. backflow installation prices were tested and are less than other competitor’s rates.
40. It is expected that any new rates set via competitive tender in the current environment will attract a risk premium as contractors will have to price in the possibility of changes in scope (if activities are bought in house), uncertainty regarding the wider economy and supply chains due to the disruption caused by Covid-19 and the possibility of major disruption to the service delivery when the water reform process is completed.
41. The likely impact of Covid-19 will extend beyond the next 12 months and the likelihood that it will take another two to three years for more certainty to be known about water reform, makes it prudent to extend the contract by three years.
Promotion or Achievement of Community Outcomes
42. The Three Waters’ services contribute to Prosperity, sustainability and Community by providing infrastructure which provides for the safe provision of drinking water for the community and industry and treats wastewater to prevent disease and negative environmental impacts.
43. This decision aligns with Council’s Community Outcomes as all options will continue to provide these services.
Statutory Responsibilities
44. Council has obligations under the Local Government and Health Acts to provide the three water services covered by this contract. This decision aligns with these obligations as all options will continue to provide these services.
45. Under Section 17A Delivery of services of the Local Government Act Council must review how it delivers the services covered by this contract (good quality local infrastructure) to ensure it is cost-effective and meets the needs of its communities. The review undertaken and summarised in this report meets this obligation.
57 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Three Waters Network Maintenance Contract
46. Legislation is being passed through Parliament relating to three water reform. This includes the Taumata Arowai – the Water Services Regulator Bill which set up the water regulator and the Water Services Bill which provides the regulatory framework for future water supply in New Zealand. This may impact on the future 6 structure of Three Waters’ delivery. Delaying the retender of this contract will enable Council to be more aware of the outcomes of this reform and take this into account when retendering the Contract. If this is retendered now Council may unintentionally expose the Community to future risk depending upon the outcomes of the water reform.
Consistency with Policies and Plans
47. The variation of contract is consistent with Council’s Long Term and Annual Plans as delivery of these services is budgeted. The variation is also consistent with Council’s Blueprint, particularly the Key Directions of Environment (by protecting the environment from the harm caused by wastewater discharges); Growth (by providing infrastructure which enables growth); and Industry (by providing the infrastructure necessary for industry to operate such as clean water and treatment of wastewater).
48. The variation is consistent with Council’s recently adopted Procurement Recovery Plan (Covid-19) for providing business certainty and certainty for employment in the region by avoiding the potential disruption caused by retendering a contract of this size during the Covid-19 economic upheaval. Participation by Māori and Community Views and Preferences
49. Council meets regularly with Iwi and hapu representatives via He Puna Wai and specific project working groups such as the Waitara Stormwater Project. Council is also working though many consent renewals, the process for which includes consulting with iwi and the community (such as neighbours and landowners, Department of Conservation, Fish and Game). Council also consulted widely with the community as part of the 2018 Long Term Plan in which water was specifically consulted upon following the water outage caused by ex-cyclone Gita.
50. Based upon previous consultation, it is understood that both Māori and the community hold water services in high regard and they have an expectation that Council will provide adequate water, wastewater and storm water services. It is also understood that these services must be delivered in the most cost effective manner.
51. A variation of contract will continue to provide these services. This decision relates to procurement and how these are delivered. Cost effectiveness of these services is considered by the Section 17 (A) review which considered the cost effectiveness of delivery. The contract variation provides the opportunity to bring activities in house and realise the cost savings.
58 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Three Waters Network Maintenance Contract
52. There is a separate process underway at a national level with regards to the delivery of three waters’ services. Delaying the extension of this contract whilst Government works though the water reform process provides time for more consultation with iwi and the community on the future structure of three waters services. 6
53. The DIA have advised that they will be running a specific piece of work as part of the water reform design to include Māori input and the principles of Te Mana o te Wai.
54. It is therefore considered that there is little benefit in any specific community consultation on this decision.
Advantages and Disadvantages
55. Contract variation has the advantage of providing certainty for a large local business as well as providing time to ensure a risk free transition for bring some activities in-house and it provides the best opportunity to understand what the outcome of the three waters reform before locking in another long term contract.
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Scope of Contract 12/PM01
Report Details Prepared By: Mark Hall (Manager Three Waters) Team: Three Waters Approved By: David Langford (Group Manager Infrastructure & Assets) Ward/Community: District Wide Date: 18 August 2020 File Reference: ECM 8350164
------End of Report ------
59 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Three Waters Network Maintenance Contract
Appendix 1 Scope of Contract 12/PM01
6.1 No. Item Description 1 Support Management, admin, mechanic, reinstatement, service marking, special e.g. property survey. Water Service 2 Water network On call 24 hours to respond to and fix leaks; hydrant repair, valve maintenance exercising and painting; fire hydrant painting; refreshing; pipe excavation and repair. 3 Water backflow testing Annual scheduled testing. 4 Water meter reading Monthly, quarterly and annual meter reading. 5 Restrictor inspection Annual inspections and check valve replacement. 6 Water pipe bridge Annual inspection of pipe bridges. inspection 7 Water trunk main Annual inspection of trunk mains. inspection 8 Flow and pressure Annual flow and pressure testing at a sample of manifolds. audit Wastewater Service 9 Sewer network On call 24 hours to respond to and fix overflows and clear blockages; maintenance flushing; air release valve maintenance; pipe excavation and repair. 10 CCTV CCTV sewer pipes based upon a list provided by NPDC. 11 Sewer pipe bridge Annual inspection of pipe bridges. inspection Two weeks work. 12 Sewer trunk main Annual inspection of trunk mains. inspection 26 weeks. 13 Sewer pipe lining Lining of pipes based upon a list provided by NPDC. 14 Sewer pump station The operation and maintenance of 36 sewer PS. including regular Operation and cleaning; responding to alarms; clearing blockages; scheduled Maintenance maintenance on pumps. Stormwater Service 15 Stormwater network On call 24 hours to respond to and prevent overflows; inspect and clean maintenance inlets; pipe excavation and repair.
60 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
INNOVATING STREETS – KELLY STREET CYCLEWAY
MATTER
1. The matter for consideration by the Council is approving the temporary installation of the Kelly Street Cycleway. 7
RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION
That having considered all matters raised in the report Council approve:
a) The temporary closure of on-street parking on the southern side of Kelly Street from Miro Street to Inglewood High School (~915m), for a period not exceeding 6 months, and;
b) The temporary installation of a bidirectional cycleway on the southern side of Kelly Street from Miro Street to Inglewood High School (~915m), for the duration of the closure, and;
c) The temporary closure of Kelly Street to vehicular traffic from Miro Street to the vehicle entrance of #32 Kelly Street (~35m), for a period not exceeding 6 months, and;
d) The temporary installation of a cul-de-sac on Kelly Street from Miro Street to the vehicle entrance of #32 Kelly Street (~35m), for a period for the duration of the closure, and;
e) The temporary closure of on-street parking on the Northern side of Kelly Street from Brown Street to Matai Street (SH3) (~210m), for a period not exceeding 6 months, and;
f) The temporary installation of two unidirectional cycleways on the both the northern and southern sides of Kelly Street from Brown Street to Matai Street (SH3) (~210m), for the duration of the closure.
STRATEGY & OPERATIONS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
2. The Strategy & Operations Committee made the following recommendation:
That having considered all matters raised in the report
a) Council approve:
i) The temporary closure of on-street parking on the southern side of Kelly Street from Miro Street to Inglewood High School (~915m), for a period not exceeding 6 months; and
61 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
ii) The temporary installation of a bidirectional cycleway on the southern side of Kelly Street from Miro Street to Inglewood High School (~915m), for the duration of the closure; and
iii) The temporary closure of Kelly Street to vehicular traffic from Miro Street to the vehicle entrance of #32 Kelly Street (~35m), for a 7 period not exceeding 6 months; and
iv) The temporary installation of a cul-de-sac on Kelly Street from Miro Street to the vehicle entrance of #32 Kelly Street (~35m), for a period for the duration of the closure; and
v) The temporary closure of on-street parking on the Northern side of Kelly Street from Brown Street to Matai Street (SH3) (~210m), for a period not exceeding 6 months; and
vi) The temporary installation of two unidirectional cycleways on the both the northern and southern sides of Kelly Street from Brown Street to Matai Street (SH3) (~210m), for the duration of the closure.
b) Council note that community consultation will commence following the Strategy and Operations Committee meeting (8 September 2020) and feedback will be provided to final decision being made prior to the full Council meeting on 27 October 2020.
COMPLIANCE This matter is assessed as being the trial of the Kelly Street Significance Cycleway. This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter:
1. Agree to the installation of the Kelly Street Cycleway and Options the temporary closure of on-street parking and.
2. Do nothing and retain the existing on-street parking.
The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter are the local schools, residents, and users of the transportation Affected persons network. The views of these persons are discussed in this report. Recommendation This report recommends Option 1 for addressing the matter.
62 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
COMPLIANCE Long-Term Plan / If the trial is successful there will be a case for LTP funding to Annual Plan propose changing the space permanently. Implications Significant The learnings from the trial, be it successful or not, will Policy and Plan inform NPCD’s Cycling Strategy that is currently being 7 Inconsistencies reviewed.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3. It is recommend that the Council endorse the temporary installation of the proposed Kelly Street Cycleway (the Trial) in order to demonstrate improved cycling amenity to the community.
4. Taking this approach will show that Council is continuing to be innovative and is prepared to trial new ways of providing improved access.
5. For the duration of the Trial, 1.16km of on-street parking spaces (minus vehicle crossings and other similar restrictions) will be closed.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Innovating Streets
6. Innovating Streets is an in initiative set up by Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency’s (Waka Kotahi) to provide Local Authorities with guidance and funding to trial changes to the transportation network as a way of reallocating space from cars to people.
7. The primary purposed of a trial is to “demonstrate by doing” which is considered a more accessible way of engaging a community when compared to asking them to comprehend a series of concepts and design normally provided on paper.
The Project
8. NPDC is leading a project to trial and evaluate a cycle route across Inglewood that prioritises cycling for the ‘interested but concerned’ cyclist through the installation of temporary cycling infrastructure the length of Kelly Street.
9. The trial is intended to run for approximately six months (February to July 2021) with ongoing evaluation and the ability to make layout modifications if needed. Kelly Street is identified as a key cycling route in the New Plymouth District Network Operating Plan. If the trial is successful, lessons from the design may be incorporated into a permanent upgrade.
63 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
10. A project team comprising representatives of the local schools, the Inglewood Community Board, Waka Kotahi, Mackie Research, ViaStrada, and NPDC’s Integrated Transportation Team has been formed to lead the project with the wider Inglewood community.
11. The project has been designed as temporary, with the long-term view of becoming a permanent, should the trial prove successful, and funding become 7 available.
12. The following elements are proposed to be included in the Trial (west to east):
12.1. Protected bi-directional cycleway on Kelly Street from the high school in the west to Miro Street midway along Kelly St. Note:
A Bi-direction cycleway means cycle lanes running in two directions on one side of a street.
Protected means traffic cannot enter the cycle lane except to enter an access way.
12.2. Community Cul-de-sac where people on foot, bicycle, etc. can move through the space in either direction. Motor vehicles driving through should re-route around the cul-de-sac via Brookes St. (Concept art below.)
12.3. Neighbourhood Greenway (Miro Street to Brown St). This is a slow- speed environment where vehicle numbers and operating speeds are low, allowing for the safe sharing of the space with people on foot, bikes, skateboards, etc. The Neighbourhood Greenway is dependent upon the cul-de-sac to be safe and effective.
Note: If the Neighbourhood Greenway and Community Cul-de-sac do not proceed, there are two lesser options that improve the intersection but do not prioritise walking and cycling. (See Appendix 2)
12.4. Two protected uni-directional cycle lanes either side of Kelly Street from Brown Street to Matai Street (SH3).
12.5. Raised dual crossings – a raised concrete pedestrian and cycling platform. Intended for installation across Miro Street at Kelly St, across Kelly Street at the intersection with SH3 and, importantly, across Matai Street SH3.
64 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Note: These crossings will be permanent. They will remain even if other elements are not made permanent. They are considered as essential with or without the wider project.
12.6. Shared paths – short sections of footpath suitable for walking and cycling together. Miro/Kelly Street intersection. 7 12.7. Some on-street car parking will be affected – every effort will be made to accommodate on-street car parking where it is safe to do so. A parking audit has been initiated to assess the potential effect.
12.8. All straight-through traffic on Kelly Street for the trial will be directed around the Community Cul-de-sac and Neighbourhood Greenway via Brookes Street in order to prioritise walking and cycling. The reroute will be no more than 500m in distance.
Artist’s impression of the Community cul-de-sac
13. An options assessment explaining the design in more detail is included as Appendix A.
14. It is proposed that the Trial is for a period of 6 months which will allow for a full assessment of the effects of the changes to the area, the residents, and the views of the community using the space. NPDC has engaged an external research agency to assist us in monitoring and evaluating the Trial.
NEXT STEPS
15. A Road Safety Audit for the dual (walking and cycling) raised crossing across SH3 Matai Street has been initiated. The audit’s conclusion will advise on design details that are agreeable to Waka Kotahi.
65 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
16. Early consultation has begun with Inglewood Primary School, Inglewood High School, the Inglewood Community Board and Waka Kotahi (key stakeholder group).
17. At the time of writing this report, wider community consultation including Kelly Street residents and businesses is yet to commence. In order to meet the time 7 frame to allow construction to be completed before the commencement of the first school term and fit in with the council’s meeting reporting cycles, wider community consultation will be undertaken in the weeks following the Strategy and Operations committee meeting, with a supplementary report provided ahead of the full Council meeting scheduled for October.
18. Depending upon consultation outcomes, we aim to construct the raised platforms on Kelly Street and Matai Street SH3, and install the temporary trial sections, during this summer.
19. The Trial is planned to be installed and open to the public in early February 2021. There will be an opening ceremony at this time to increase public participation and understanding.
20. NPDC staff will continue keep the local schools, the Inglewood Community Board and other stakeholders, informed of the progress and any necessary changes.
21. The trial will remain in place until July 2021, thereafter be removed, modified or made permanent.
SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT
22. In accordance with the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter has been assessed as being of some importance because the changes can be funded from current transportation budgets.
23. There are interested and affected parties regarding the matters raised in this report. Consultation has already been undertaken with these parties to obtain their views and preferences on the matters proposed in this report. Their views are covered in the options assessment section of this report.
OPTIONS
24. There are three options available to the Council:
Option 1 Endorse the Trial of the Kelly Street Cycleway.
Option 2 Do nothing and retain the status quo
66 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
25. The options have been assessed together below:
Financial and Resourcing Implications
26. The costs for manufacturing, installing, and undertaking the Trial are to be covered by the Innovating Streets fund which is already been secured for this project. Waka Kotahi have agreed to fund $192,000 towards to project and 7 NPDC have agreed to contribute $22,000. Other associated, such as administration, are relatively low and are covered within existing operational budgets.
27. There are no short term associated costs should the Council choose not to proceed with the trial but, the contribution from Waka Kotahi for the project will no longer be available to Council and this contribution will not cascade down to the local community through our local suppliers.
Risk Analysis
28. The risk associated with the Trial are minimal. The proposed Trial has come through via various requests from our local residents and schools.
Promotion or Achievement of Community Outcomes
29. The proposed Trial promotes the ‘people’ outcome by improving open space amenity for the community.
30. This project is a ‘people first’ project that contributes to our community aspiration of building a lifestyle capital.
Statutory Responsibilities
31. The proposed Trial enables the Council to meet its statutory responsibility to provide efficient, effective, and appropriate infrastructure to meet the needs of the community.
Consistency with Policies and Plans
32. The proposed Trial is consistent with the Long Term Plan.
Participation by Māori
33. There are no specific issues relating to Māori with either option.
Community Views and Preferences
NPDC staff have met, with the school principals and board of trustees members from both Inglewood Primary school and Inglewood High school and also with
67 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
the Inglewood Community board and Waka Kotahi to discuss the intent and options for the trial. Wider community consultation will follow general agreement from the key stakeholders on the details of the Trial.
Advantages and Disadvantages 7 34. Making the proposed changes in line with Option 1 would contribute towards the vibrancy of Inglewood and would meet the expectations of the community.
OPTION SUMMARY Option 1 Option 2 1. Financial and Resourcing Implications ✔ - 2. Risk Analysis ✔ - 3. Promotion or Achievement of Community Outcomes ✔ ✘ 4. Statutory Responsibilities ✔ ✘ 5. Consistency with Policies and Plans ✔ ✘ 6. Participation by Māori n/a n/a 7. Community Views and Preferences ✔ ✘ 8. Advantages and Disadvantages ✔ ✘ KEY: ✘ Negative effect, ✔ Positive effect, - Neutral
RECOMMENDED OPTION This report recommends Option 1 for addressing the matter.
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Kelly Street Cycleway options assessment (ECM# 8347605)
Appendix 2 Kelly Street / Miro Street options (ECM# 8347811)
Report Details Prepared By: Nathaniel Benefield (Sustainable Transportation Officer) Team: Transportation Approved By: David Langford (Group Manager Infrastructure & Assets) Ward/Community: New Plymouth City Ward Date: 18 August 2020 File Reference: ECM# 8347822
------End of Report ------
68 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
7.1
www.viastrada.nz
LevelStreet Kilmore 284 1, Kelly Street, Inglewood Transport Planning and Design Planning and Transport Option assessment
Report prepared for New Plymouth District Council
January 2020
69 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
This document has been prepared for the benefit of New Plymouth District Council. No liability is accepted by ViaStrada Ltd, or any of its employees or sub-consultants with respect to its use by any other party.
Quality Assurance Statement 7.1 Project manager: Axel Wilke, ME (Civil), BE (Civil) Director – Senior Transportation Engineer & Transportation Planner 027 292 9810 [email protected] ViaStrada Ltd Level 1, Prepared by: Axel Wilke, ME (Civil), BE (Civil) 284 Kilmore Street PO Box 22 458 Director – Senior Transportation Engineer & Christchurch 8140 Transportation Planner New Zealand 027 292 9810 Phone: (03) 366-7605 www.viastrada.nz [email protected] [email protected] Reviewed by: Gemma Dioni Senior Transportation Engineer 021 400 599 [email protected]
Project number: 1047-06 Project name: Kelly Street, Inglewood Document version Date
First draft 31/01/2020
70 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
Contents 1 Background ...... 1 2 Method ...... 1 3 Findings ...... 1 Road widths ...... 1 7.1 Traffic volumes ...... 3 School rolls...... 3 4 Discussion of traffic volume ...... 4 Cul-de-sac at Miro Street ...... 5 Diagonal diverter at Brown Street ...... 6 5 Option assessment ...... 7 Section A ...... 8 Section B ...... 10 Section C ...... 12 6 Comparison of options ...... 15 Pros and cons ...... 15 Multi-criteria analysis ...... 16 Option assessment ...... 18 Section C sub-option ...... 18 7 Conclusions and recommendations ...... 20
Figures Figure 1: Kelly Street road width – western end ...... 1 Figure 2: Kelly Street road width – central part ...... 2 Figure 3: Kelly Street road width – eastern end ...... 2 Figure 4: Kelly Street traffic volumes (ADTs) ...... 3 Figure 5: School rolls...... 3 Figure 6: Inglewood area unit ...... 4 Figure 7: Inglewood meshblocks ...... 4 Figure 8: South-west meshblocks and road connections to surrounding areas ...... 5 Figure 9: Cul-de-sac at Miro Street ...... 5 Figure 10: Traffic redistribution for cul-de-sac treatment ...... 6 Figure 11: Diagonal diverter at Brown Street ...... 6 Figure 12: Traffic redistribution for diagonal diverter treatment ...... 7
Option assessment i
71 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
Figure 13: Sections A, B and C used for further assessment ...... 8 Figure 14: Existing cross section for section A ...... 8 Figure 15: Greenway cross section for section A ...... 9 Figure 16: Separated cycleway cross section for section A ...... 9 Figure 17: Shared path cross section for section A ...... 10 Figure 18: Existing cross section for section B ...... 10 7.1 Figure 19: Greenway cross section for section B ...... 11 Figure 20: Separated cycleway cross section for section B ...... 11 Figure 21: Shared path cross section for section B ...... 12 Figure 22: Existing cross section for section C ...... 12 Figure 23: Greenway cross section for section C...... 13 Figure 24: Separated cycleway cross section for section C ...... 13 Figure 25: Shared path cross section for section C ...... 14 Figure 26: Uni-directional separated cycleway cross section for section C ...... 19 Figure 27: Recommended options by section ...... 20 Figure 28: Cul-de-sac recommended at Miro Street ...... 20 Figure 29: Separated cycleway recommended for section A ...... 21 Figure 30: Greenway recommended for section B ...... 21 Figure 31: Uni-directional separated cycleway recommended for section C ...... 21
List of tables Table 1: Option pros and cons ...... 15 Table 2: Criteria definitions for option evaluation ...... 16 Table 3: Multi-criteria analysis for options by section ...... 17 Table 4: Multi-criteria analysis for options by section ...... 19
ii New Plymouth District Council
72 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
1 Background
ViaStrada has been commissioned to provide an assessment of options to make Kelly Street in Inglewood suitable for the Interested but Concerned cycling audience. We note that there are both a primary and high school located on this street. The target audience is as per the New Plymouth planning map prepared by ViaStrada and Abley for New Plymouth District Council. Treatment types would include a separated facility, shared path, and neighbourhood greenway. The intention is to have options available for consultation later this financial year, and to proceed with a implementation at the western end of the corridor in the following 7.1 financial year. Apart from the two schools, the land use is mainly residential, but changes to commercial (e.g. vet and childcare), heavy commercial (timber processer, car painters), and trade (e.g. café, hotel, bar) in the two easternmost sections. Waionganaiti Stream crosses Kelly Street at the primary school and a pathway may be built alongside that stream, necessitating a future road crossing in this location. 2 Method 3 Findings
Road widths Road widths vary greatly along the length of Kelly Street. Between kerbs, three blocks have a width of 9.3 m. The road measures 16.0 m just outside the high school where angle parking is permitted.
16.0 11.0
11.0
Figure 1: Kelly Street road width – western end
Option assessment 1
73 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1 11.0
11.0
11.8 14.4
Figure 2: Kelly Street road width – central part
12.2 13.9 14.4 13.6 9.3 9.3
Figure 3: Kelly Street road width – eastern end
2 New Plymouth District Council
74 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
Traffic volumes Traffic volumes for both peak hour traffic and ADTs (average daily traffic) are available through the council’s GIS Viewer and shown in Figure 4.
Oct 2018 Oct 2014 Nov 2013 Oct 2016 Jul 2017 309 peak 230 peak 264 peak 284 peak 271 peak 7.1 1,641 1,390 1,822 1,657 2,010 ADT ADT ADT ADT ADT
Figure 4: Kelly Street traffic volumes (ADTs) School rolls Inglewood High School, located at the western end of Kelly Street, has a roll of 383 students.1 Inglewood School, the full primary school located near the middle of Kelly Street, has a roll of 355 students.2
Inglewood School 355 pupils
Inglewood High School 383 pupils
Figure 5: School rolls It is not known how many of the pupils bike to school. What is known is that biking to school has been trending down for decades and while cycling in general is increasing in New Zealand, school cycling is still declining. There is no co-ordinated programme in New Zealand to monitor mode share for journeys to school, but ViaStrada staff are aware of the following high cycling mode shares: • Primary schools: Clive School in Hastings (11%) • Intermediate schools: Chisnallwood Intermediate in Christchurch (20%) • High schools: Palmerston North Boys’ High (17%) and Christchurch Boys’ High School (25%) Note that in primary schools, travel by push scooter is much more common than travel by bike. Should Inglewood get a cycle-friendly network and the schools gained high cycling mode shares (say 10% for the
1 Inglewood High School; education institution number 177 2 Inglewood School; education institution number 2177
Option assessment 3
75 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
primary and 20% for the high school), then this alone would generate over 200 cycling trips3 in Kelly Street per day. 4 Discussion of traffic volume and speed
As outlined above, three sections of Kelly Street are quite narrow at 9.3 m between kerbs. The Cycling Network Guidance recommends that traffic volumes for neighbourhood greenways should preferably be below 1,500 vehicles per day. As a primary school is involved, this threshold should not be exceeded, 7.1 otherwise the environment would never be acceptable for young children. However, existing volumes of up to 2,000 vehicles per day are present. Before ruling out a neighbourhood greenway, consideration ought to be given whether traffic volumes could possibly be reduced. It is suggested that this is possible, but it must fit into the wider travel needs of people who drive in the Kelly Street neighbourhood. 2013 census data have been analysed. Inglewood is covered by one area unit (“Inglewood”; see Figure 6), with 3,246 people living there. This area unit is made up of 31 meshblocks. The south-west quadrant of Inglewood, located south of SH3 and west of Miro Street, is made up of 10 meshblocks (highlighted in Figure 7). 1,290 residents live in those 10 meshblocks (i.e. 40% of Inglewood’s population), and 303 of them are under 15 years old.
Figure 6: Inglewood area unit Figure 7: Inglewood meshblocks Road connectivity for those meshblocks is quite restricted (highlighted in red in Figure 8), as right turns onto SH3 from any of the side streets may be challenging during traffic peaks. If people are heading for the shopping precinct (near the Matai / Rata corner), they may appreciate the opportunity to turn left onto SH3 from either Kelly Street or alternatively Brookes Street.
3 2*(383*0.1+355*0.2)=218.6 single journey trips per school day 4 New Plymouth District Council
76 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 8: South-west meshblocks and road connections to surrounding areas Due to the poor connectivity, any travel restrictions would need to be restricted to the area west of Miro Street (i.e. to the right of the area highlighted in blue in Figure 8). Two suggestions are presented here. The idea is to restrict motor vehicle traffic but lay out the devices so that walking and cycling along Kelly Street is not impeded. Cul-de-sac at Miro Street Creating a cul-de-sac at on Kelly Street east of Miro Street (see Figure 9) would significantly reduce the motor vehicle volumes through the three narrow sections. It would reduce traffic volumes on Kelly Street west of Miro Street as some drivers would divert onto the SH3 via Pukatea Street or Hinau Street, and other journeys may be made by bike. We estimate the reduction west of here to be between 10% and 20%. In the block between Maire Street and Mahoe Street, we estimate that the traffic reduction would be greater than 80%.
Figure 9: Cul-de-sac at Miro Street Figure 10 highlights corridors that would see an increase in traffic.
Option assessment 5
77 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 10: Traffic redistribution for cul-de-sac treatment Diagonal diverter at Brown Street An alternative treatment is a diagonal diverter at Brown Street (Figure 11). This would reduce traffic volumes on Kelly Street west of Brown Street as some drivers would divert onto SH3 via Pukatea Street or Hinau Street, and other journeys may be made by bike. Other drivers may reach Matai Street (SH3) via Brown Street. We estimate the reduction west of Miro Street to be between 10% and 15%. In the block between Maire Street and Mahoe Street, we estimate that the traffic reduction would be around 25%. Therefore, this treatment would not achieve the same quality cycling corridor through the three narrow sections of Kelly Street as the cul-de-sac option presented above.
Figure 11: Diagonal diverter at Brown Street Figure 12 highlights corridors that would see an increase in traffic.
6 New Plymouth District Council
78 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 12: Traffic redistribution for diagonal diverter treatment Speed limits The options assessment below mentions reduced speed limits. There are several components that interact with one another: • For a greenway, the success of it always hinges on whether the speed differential between people driving and cycling is within a certain band; Dutch guidance suggests that the differential should not exceed 15 km/h. • Whether a speed environment is achieved through a speed limit (i.e. is formally imposed) or good design is not important. When greenways are first used in an area, we recommend that changing the speed limit should be included so that driver behaviour is clearly communicated. • Reduced speed limits can be beneficial even when cycling is not on the carriageway, as lower operating speeds reduce the need for drivers to turn quickly (e.g. across a cycle facility) to “get out of the way”. • Where speed limits are reduced not just along a corridor, but in a wider area, it makes it easier / more pleasant for people to use side streets to get to the cycling network link (i.e. in this case Kelly Street). • Speed limits in an area need to make sense. For example, it would not be logical to introduce a 30 km/h speed limit (as is appropriate for a greenway) immediately adjacent to a 40 km/h speed limit (as is appropriate along a separated cycleway); in such a case the lower speed limit should prevail. 5 Option assessment
For further option assessment, Kelly Street has been broken into three segments. That roughly corresponds to carriageway width as discussed in section 3.1.
Option assessment 7
79 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
A C B 7.1
Figure 13: Sections A, B and C used for further assessment For each section, a separated facility, a shared path, and a neighbourhood greenway has been assessed. Sub- options exist for section B as discussed above under traffic volumes. Section A
Figure 14: Existing cross section for section A Section A has, on its south side, a narrow berm against the property boundary, a narrow footpath, and a further berm between the footpath and the carriageway’s kerb. There are some power pole laterals in the roadside berm.
8 New Plymouth District Council
80 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 15: Greenway cross section for section A For a greenway, sharrows would be marked and the speed limit lowered to 30 km/h so that sharing becomes appropriate. As the parking demand is low, significant traffic calming would be needed as the speed environment is too high for the required speed limit. The south side footpath should be widened as part of the proposed footpath renewal and there may be a desire to plant some trees.
Figure 16: Separated cycleway cross section for section A For a separated cycleway option, a physical separator would be built between the cycleway on the south side and the road. A lower speed limit should be considered (40 km/h or lower). Parking would be on the north side only. The south side footpath should be widened as part of the proposed footpath renewal and there may be a desire to plant some trees.
Option assessment 9
81 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 17: Shared path cross section for section A For a shared pathway option on the south side, much of the existing berm would be sealed over, with a narrow berm left against the property boundary. One continuous surface would be provided (not separated as indicated in Figure 17). A lower speed limit should be considered (40 km/h or lower). Parking would be on the north side only. The power pole laterals would need to be relocated towards the property boundary. Section B
Figure 18: Existing cross section for section B Section B has, on its south side, a berm against the property boundary, a narrow footpath, and a narrow berm between the footpath and the carriageway’s kerb. The road is narrower than in other sections. Much of the legal road is taken up by berm and footpath on the north side.
10 New Plymouth District Council
82 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 19: Greenway cross section for section B For a greenway, sharrows would be marked, parking would be marked, and the centre line removed. The speed limit would be lowered to 30 km/h so that sharing becomes appropriate.
Figure 20: Separated cycleway cross section for section B For a separated cycleway option, a physical separator would be built between the cycleway on the south side and the road. A lower speed limit should be considered (40 km/h or lower). Parking would either not be provided or if it’s permissible on the north side, then the remaining road is reduced to a single lane (which, at low traffic volumes, is acceptable).
Option assessment 11
83 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 21: Shared path cross section for section B In section B, it would make most sense to provide a shared pathway on the north side; this would mean that pathway users had to swap from the south to the north side when transitioning from section A to B. For this option, some of the existing berm would be sealed over, with a generous berm left between the power poles and the property boundary. One continuous surface would be provided (not separated as indicated in Figure 20). A lower speed limit should be considered (40 km/h or lower). Parking would be on the south side only. Section C
Figure 22: Existing cross section for section C Section C has, on its south side, a narrow footpath between berms as shown in Figure 22 (Brown St to Cutfield St), or a fully sealed path (Cutfield St to SH3). In the westernmost section, there are two power pole laterals in the footpath. The road is very wide.
12 New Plymouth District Council
84 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 23: Greenway cross section for section C For a greenway, sharrows would be marked and the speed limit lowered to 30 km/h so that sharing becomes appropriate. As the road is very wide, excess carriageway width would be taken up by a wide flush median, and in addition significant traffic calming would be needed as the speed environment is too high for the required speed limit. Beyond the question of speed environment, it needs to be recognised that this section is used by heavy commercial vehicles.
Figure 24: Separated cycleway cross section for section C For a separated cycleway option, a physical separator would be built between the road and the cycleway on the south side. A lower speed limit should be considered (40 km/h or lower). Parking would be on the north side only.
Option assessment 13
85 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 25: Shared path cross section for section C For a shared pathway option on the south side, the southern kerb would need to be relocated, making the carriageway narrower. One continuous surface would be provided (not separated as indicated in Figure 25). A lower speed limit should be considered (40 km/h or lower). Parking would be on the north side only, or on both sides (as indicated in Figure 25) with significant setbacks from the driveways to achieve good intervisibility between turning drivers and shared path users. The power pole laterals would need to be relocated towards the relocated kerb.
14 New Plymouth District Council
86 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
6 Comparison of options
Pros and cons Although each section has opportunities and constraints, in general the pros and cons of each option are listed in Table 1. Table 1: Option pros and cons Option Pros Cons 7.1 1 Improves provision for cycling compared with No physical separation; only appeals to a Greenway current situation more-confident cycling audience at Low-cost treatment in section B current traffic volumes No impact on car parking provision Would see little use by primary school Residents may appreciate lower traffic pupils volumes if combined with traffic diverter options discussed in section 4. People cycling are being given way to by side- street traffic No negative impacts on walking; wider footpath and lower traffic speeds would improve amenity 2 Appeals to less-confident cyclists; Cycling in a contra-flow direction is known Separated significantly improves provision for cycling to be more hazardous than in the with- cycleway Vehicles accessing / leaving on-street parking flow direction do not cross over cycleway Under current rules, people cycling give Could be done without moving existing kerbs way to side-street traffic Has good intervisibility between people On-street parking removed from the side cycling and drivers coming out of driveways of the road that takes the separated No negative impacts on walking; lower traffic cycleway to maximise visibility of people speeds would improve amenity cycling to turning drivers; no on-street parking in section B. 3 Shared Appeals to less-confident cyclists; Cycling in a contra-flow direction is known pathway significantly improves provision for cycling to be more hazardous than in the with- Vehicles accessing / leaving on-street parking flow direction do not cross over cycleway Under current rules, people cycling give Could be done in two sections without way to side-street traffic moving existing kerbs Sometime very little intervisibility between people cycling and drivers coming out of driveways Sharing of the footpath not liked by many pedestrians, especially the elderly On-street parking removed from the side of the road that takes the shared path to maximise visibility of people cycling to turning drivers Kerb work needed in section C. Shared path would swap from south (sections A and C) to north side (section B).
Option assessment 15
87 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
Multi-criteria analysis The following multi-criteria analysis considers the options for the three segments, based on the criteria outlined in Table 2. There may be other criteria, e.g. level of public / political support, or effect on pedestrians, but the list has been limited to the most pertinent. Table 2: Criteria definitions for option evaluation Criteria Evaluation (dark green = best, dark red = worst) Cycling target Likely to appeal Should appeal to Should appeal to Will probably Will only appeal 7.1 audience to majority of 25-50% of 10-25% of only appeal to to “strong & people people people “enthused & fearless” cyclists confident” cyclists Cycling safety No potential for With Some potential Cyclists at risk of Cyclists conflict with appropriate for conflict but opening car commonly at risk motor vehicles. intersection and will be extremely doors and of serious injury driveway infrequent. drivers crossing treatments, over / into the cyclists will be cycling space. thoroughly protected. Cycling LOS Geometric Good Some delay to Significant delay Severe delay and directness, good opportunity for some cyclists, to cyclists due to poor quality of opportunity for passing within due to lack of lack of passing ride. passing, cycle facility, but passing opportunity, compatible with motor vehicles opportunity, geometric delay, priority (e.g. accessing motor vehicles or significant treatment at parking spaces) or pedestrians, delay at intersections. or pedestrians or lack of ability intersections. will cause delay. to assign priority at intersections. Appropriate Will satisfy Will satisfy Cannot satisfy Insufficient Insufficient parking provision parking demand parking demand parking demand parking capacity parking capacity in all segments most of the time in critical in certain along majority of in most locations locations during locations, most route, majority peak periods of the time. of the time. Cost Very low cost – Low cost – paint Medium cost – High cost – due Very high cost – paint only plus signs, plastic some substantial to some kerb significant kerb posts etc components relocation, pole relocation, (e.g. kerbs relocation etc. carriageway attached to reconstruction carriageway). etc. Intersection Very low – Low – paint plus Medium – some High – e.g. raised Very high – e.g. treatments painted signs, plastic construction. platforms signalised markings only posts etc crossings A score has not been assigned because different criteria should not necessarily be weighted equally – meaning an option with a larger proportion of red squares may in fact be preferable over another with fewer red squares, depending on the importance of the various criteria. While the corridor has been divided into segments, when determining the respective treatments, combining treatments may affect coherence of the route and the potential usage by various audiences. Certain options are considered infeasible and are therefore greyed out.
16 New Plymouth District Council
88 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
Table 3: Multi-criteria analysis for options by section
, ,
,
sac
-
de
-
Greenway
Greenway
Separated Separated Shared
Greenway
–
–
– – –
1 1 1a cul Miro 1b Browndiverter 2 cycleway 3 pathway Section A 7.1 Anticipated cycling target audience a a
Cycling safety
Cycling level of service in the mid-block (not including safety aspects) Appropriate parking provision (based on current parking demand) Unit cost (e.g. per metre of road)
Level of treatment required at intersections to achieve equivalent safety and satisfy same target audience Section B Anticipated cycling target audience b b b
Cycling safety c
Cycling level of service in the mid-block (not including d safety aspects) Appropriate parking provision (based on current e parking demand) Unit cost (e.g. per metre of road)
Level of treatment required at intersections to achieve equivalent safety and satisfy same target audience Section C Anticipated cycling target audience
Cycling safety f f
Cycling level of service in the mid-block (not including safety aspects) Appropriate parking provision (based on current g g parking demand) Unit cost (e.g. per metre of road)
Level of treatment required at intersections to achieve equivalent safety and satisfy same target audience Table footnotes: a. Option 1a scores more highly than option 1b, but the rating system is not fine-grained enough to show that. b. These options score more highly for section B compared to section A due to lower traffic volumes. c. Remaining berm between shared path and property boundary should make this safer than the other shared pathway sections, but safety concerns about contra-flow cycling close to driveway exits remain.
Option assessment 17
89 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
d. Having to swap sides (south to north to south) is captured here only to avoid double-counting; a different option may be chosen for this section and thus the problem could be avoided e. Parking demand in section B is low and when it does occur, drivers tend to park on the wide grass berm on the north side rather than the carriageway (for unknown reasons). It is thus not straightforward how to rate a formal ban on parking on the carriageway. If this behaviour continues, a parking ban could be inconsequential, and the rating would thus be one of the green colours. f. Heightened risk for contra-flow cycling at commercial driveways g. The high demand exists in the easternmost section only and much of it will presumably be commuter parking. If commuter parking gets displaced via time parking restrictions to side streets, there is likely to be enough parking provision available. 7.1 Option assessment In section A, the three highest-rated options are 1a (greenway, with a cul-de-sac treatment at Miro Street), 1b (greenway, with the diagonal diverter at Brown Street), and option 2 (separated cycleway). Option 1 (greenway) is rated lower as traffic volumes are too high to make this option attractive for primary school pupils, thus losing a key target audience. Option 3 (shared pathway) rates lowest. In section B, the two highest-rated options are 1a (greenway, with a cul-de-sac treatment at Miro Street), 1b (greenway, with the diagonal diverter at Brown Street). The next highest rating is achieved by option 1 (greenway). Option 2 (separated cycleway) rates only marginally better than option 3 (shared pathway). That the shared pathway will have to swap sides between sections A, B and C is captured in this section assessment only to avoid double-counting. The opportunity of mixing different options by sections exist, i.e. if a different option than shared pathway was chosen for this section, the disadvantage would not occur. In section C, the two highest-rated options are 1a (greenway, with a cul-de-sac treatment at Miro Street), 1b (greenway, with the diagonal diverter at Brown Street). The next highest rating is achieved by option 1 (greenway). Option 2 (separated cycleway) rates only marginally better than option 3 (shared pathway). Parking demand in the easternmost block is high, but if it were accepted that long-term commuter parking could be displaced into side streets through parking management, this concern could be mitigated. Safety issues exist, mainly at commercial driveways through cycling in a contra-flow direction. There is also the issue that contra-flow facilities cannot be laid out at side streets in a way that turning traffic reliably giving way to facility users in a contra-flow direction would ever be safe (i.e. after the anticipated law change). Section C sub-option A further sub-option has been developed for section C to see whether the concerns stemming from contra- flow cycling through an area with commercial driveway can be overcome. Figure 26 shows uni-directional separated cycleways. A lower speed limit should be considered (40 km/h or lower), in addition to a supporting gateway to highlight to users the different environments between the residential area and the commercial zone. Parking would be on one side only, with significant setbacks from the driveways to achieve good intervisibility between turning drivers and cycleway users. In this option, interactions at the commercial driveways would be much safer as cycleway users come from only that direction that leaving drivers automatically check (as they must give way to drivers coming from that direction). Side streets are also much easier to lay out.
18 New Plymouth District Council
90 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 26: Uni-directional separated cycleway cross section for section C Table 4 repeats the multi-criteria analysis for section C with the option 2a added in.
Table 4: Multi-criteria analysis for options by section
-
, ,
, ,
sac
-
cycleway
de
-
Greenway
Greenway uni Separated
Separated Separated pathway Shared
Greenway
–
– –
ectional ectional
– – –
a
1 1 1a cul Miro 1b Browndiverter 2 cycleway 2 dir 3 Section C Anticipated cycling target audience
Cycling safety f f
Cycling level of service in the mid-block (not including safety aspects) Appropriate parking provision (based on current g g g parking demand) Cost
Level of treatment required at intersections to achieve equivalent safety and satisfy same target audience Table footnotes: f. Heightened risk for contra-flow cycling at commercial driveways g. The high demand exists in the easternmost section only and much of it will presumably be commuter parking. If commuter parking gets displaced via time parking restrictions to side streets, there is likely to be enough parking provision available. As it can be seen, option 2a is quite attractive. The concern about parking provision remains shown, but this could well be mitigated through parking management. Importantly, this option rates higher for “target audience” than the two greenway options that previously scored highest.
Option assessment 19
91 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7 Conclusions and recommendations
The analysis has shown that existing traffic volumes on Kelly Street are too high for a greenway option to be suitable without any volume-restricting measures. Even with those restrictions implemented, a greenway option is suitable for section B only. The analysis has also shown that a shared pathway is the least preferred option. Different options have achieved the highest ratings for the various sections along Kelly Street. It is recommended that those options be combined to achieve the preferred treatment along this corridor. These 7.1 are summarised in Figure 27.
A C B
Miro cul-de-sac
Figure 27: Recommended options by section In section A, option 2 (separated cycleway; see Figure 29) is recommended as it best meets the needs of the target audience including the school children at Inglewood Primary school. In section B, option 1a (greenway, with a cul-de-sac treatment at Miro Street; Figure 28 and Figure 30) is recommended as that will achieve the best cycling environment in those three sections; it will also make for a reasonably straightforward crossing facility at Miro Street itself that can connect the greenway in section B with the separated cycleway located on the south side of section A. For section C, option 2a (uni-directional separated cycleways; Figure 31) is preferred. With a cul-de-sac treatment at Miro Street, it would make sense to have two different speed limits for Kelly Street as it is broken into two distinct segments at the proposed closure. As discussed in section 4.3, 30 km/h and 40 km/h are the appropriate speed limits east and west of Miro Street, respectively. It could be considered to apply area-wide speed limits as shown in Figure 32.
Figure 28: Cul-de-sac recommended at Miro Street
20 New Plymouth District Council
92 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
Figure 29: Separated cycleway recommended for section A
Figure 30: Greenway recommended for section B
Figure 31: Uni-directional separated cycleway recommended for section C
Option assessment 21
93 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
Kelly Street, Inglewood – Option assessment
7.1
30 km/h Miro cul-de-sac 40 km/h
Figure 32: Recommended speed limits
22 New Plymouth District Council
94 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
7.2
95 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
7.2
96 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Kelly Street, Inglewood Innovating Streets
7.2
97 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
INFRASTRUCTURE TERM SERVICES CONTRACT – YEAR 1
PURPOSE
1. The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the performance of the Infrastructure Term Service Contract on the first year of delivery.
RECOMMENDATION 8 That, having considered all matters raised in the report, the report be noted.
STRATEGY & OPERATONS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 2. The Strategy & Operations Committee endorsed the recommendation.
SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT
3. This report is provided for information purposes only, and has been assessed as being of some importance.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4. This report provides Council with an overview of the performance of the Infrastructure Term Maintenance Contract and highlights the key benefits realised to date at the end of its first year of operation.
5. The infrastructure term maintenance contract, awarded to Downer NZ, is the largest single contract Council has ever let with a total value over the 10 year long term of $156m.
6. In its first year a total value of $17.22m of work was completed using the infrastructure Term Service Contract. By aggregating works that, previously had been tendered as separate contracts into a single contract large contract as well as the use of the NEC4 Target Price form of contract, it is estimated that approximately $705k of cashable efficiency savings have been made.
7. A number of environmental and health and safety benefits have been realised by switching to bitumen emulsion for road resealing operations. In total, it is estimated that emulsions have reduced Council’s CO2 by over 500 tonnes.
8. The relatively long 10 year term of the contract and its larger scale has provided a platform for Downer to invest with certainty into the region. This is best illustrated by Downer’s investment in modern equipment, such as the Secmair chip spreading trucks and the construction of a regional bitumen emulsion import facility at Port Taranaki.
98 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
9. Local sub-contractors have partnered with Downer and, during the first year of the contract, supported the delivery of approximately 40% of the contract turnover. In a post COVID-19 lockdown economy, this support for local employment is a critical measure of success.
BACKGROUND
10. In early 2019 Council signed the Infrastructure Term Services Contract with Downer NZ. This contract is monetarily ($156m over 10 years) the largest singular contract let by Council. 8
11. This contract also marked the culmination of over two years of work to transition the majority of Council infrastructure contracts onto the NEC4 suit of standards forms of contract, largely replacing the previously wides spread use of NZS3910:2013.
12. The Infrastructure Term Service Contract is the first of its kind in New Zealand, and was the outcome of substantial engagement with the contracting market as well as a Section 17A Service Delivery Review.
13. As an outcome of the new delivery model a number of benefits were expected to be achieved. These are summarised as follows:
Cost efficiency savings of $3.5m over the life of the contract
Improvements in the management of key Health & Safety Risks
Environmental benefits from the use of Bitumen Emulsion
Social and economic benefits associates with workforce development and consequential investment in the Taranaki region
14. In addition to routine road maintenance activities, the scope of Infrastructure Term Services Contract includes the following activities that previously would have been separately contracted out:
Road resealing and rehabilitation
Bridge maintenance & renewals
CBD street cleaning
Parks vegetation control
Drinking water and wastewater reticulation renewals
Let’s Go Cycling and walking improvement projects
99 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
BENEFITS REALISATION
15. The following section summarises and explains the actual benefits that have been realised during the first year of the new Infrastructure Term Services Contract.
NEC4 Target Price Contract
16. The Infrastructure Term Service Contract uses the NEC4 standard form of 8 contract to drive efficiency and encourages a collaborative approach in order to:
Reduce duplication of effort and overheads
Optimise the use of (labour and equipment) resources
Facilitate knowledge sharing
Speed up communication/actions
Create a single team approach with a focus on customer outcomes
17. In order to better facilitate the collaboration between the Council and Downer teams, the majority of the Council’s transportation personnel have been relocated so that they work alongside the Downer personnel at the Downer depot on Rifle Range Rd.
18. In addition to the physical co-location, the NEC4 contract provides financial incentives for the two parties to work together to find efficiency gains. This is achieved through what is known as the “Pain/Gain” mechanism which is explained in the following paragraphs.
19. The contract schedule of prices submitted by the contractor at the time of tender are used as “Target Prices” for any work undertaken. The contractor is not paid these rates, but is instead reimbursed for all of the costs incurred to deliver the work plus a fixed percentage to cover overheads and profit.
20. Once the work is complete, the actual cost of delivery is compared to the Target Price. If the work has been delivered efficiently for a lower cost that the Target Price there is a “gain” (the difference between the two sums). However, if the works cost more to deliver then the difference is described as “pain”.
100 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
21. The Pain/Gain are shared 50/50 between the Council and contractor. The intention is to provide a financial incentive that drives continuous efficiency improvements with the Council effectively receiving a discount on the tendered prices whilst the contractor is rewarded for any innovation or efficiency initiatives the implement.
22. For the Infrastructure Term Maintenance Contract, the share of Pain/Gain is calculated at the end of each financial year. At the end of the first year of the contract, total Target Price for all works completed was $18.15m and the actual cost to deliver the work was $16.8m resulting in a Gain of $420k that is shared 8 50/50 with Downer.
23. It is important to note that under previous contract models where the contractor is paid based on the tendered schedule of prices, any efficiency gains are exclusively the contractors to keep. The NEC Pain/Gain mechanism has effectively allowed the Council to claim a $210k discount on the contractor’s prices.
Procurement Efficiencies
24. One of the benefits identified during the Section 17A Service Delivery review was the opportunity to reduce the administrative cost of drafting contracts and tendering infrastructure projects. By bundling projects and maintenance programmes together into a single, 10 yearlong contract, the Council would have to write fewer contracts meaning expenditure of legal and professional services fees would reduce.
25. In total it was forecast that aggregating works into a single contract would save approximately $3.5m over the 10 years of the contract. This has been achieved by combining a total of 14 maintenance contracts into a single contract along with the following projects that were delivered through the Infrastructure Term Services Contract in its first year:
7 pavement reconstructions projects
2 bridge repair projects
A package of minor structures repairs
A package of parks bridge repairs
5 packages of water main renewals
101 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
8 packages of sewer renewals
Marfell Storm water project
Marfell earthworks and road construction project
Plastic asphalt road surfacing trial
26. In total, it is estimated that bundling these works together avoided approximately $830k of legal and professional services costs. After accounting 8 for the $355k cost to draft and tender the Term Services Contract, there has been a net saving of approximately $495k in the first year, which is substantially greater than the original forecast of a $295k net saving during year one.
27. Because these savings are associated with capital works they will result in lower debt levels where individual improvement projects are delivered below the set budget or, in the case of renewals work which are funded from reserves, they have been reinvested into the assets, allowing a large quantum of work to be completed for the same cost.
Workforce Development
28. One of the key focuses of the Term Services Contract was to drive long term investment into the construction sector workforce. This is one of the four broader outcomes the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) included in the latest edition of the Government Procurement Rules.
29. The Broader Outcome specifically requires government agencies to consider how they can use procurement to partner more effectively with the construction sector to grow the size and skills of New Zealand’s construction workforce.
30. One feature of the Term Maintenance Contract that was aimed at supporting this outcome was the 10 year long term. This was intended to provide long term certainty and stability for the main contractor and sub-contractors. This would allow them to make long term investments in training and developing their workforces with confidence.
31. During the first year of the contract Downer has started to implement their workforce development plan. Some of the achievements to date are summarised below:
Created employment for 60 new staff members
Delivered a COVID “shovel ready” project funded by MBIE creating a further 3 full time jobs for local people who lost their jobs because of COVID
102 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
Downer have been a proactive member of the Talent Pipeline Partnership, taking a leading role, engaging with Secondary schools across the district and promoting careers in the construction sector to school career advisors and school students.
Created 3 Gateway placements for secondary school students so that they can gain work experience in the construction sector as part of their National Certificate of Education Achievement (NCEA)
Delivered a targeted driving license training programme for more than 8 40 workers to advance them from Class 1 licences to Class 2 to 5 licences.
Taken on 3 Engineering Cadets and commenced a career development training programme to help them advance towards their professional certification (chartered engineer status)
3 staff members have completed Downer’s (award winning) Maori Leadership Programme, Ta Ara Whaneke.
10 staff members have completed Downer’s Inspiring Leadership programme. This succession planning programme provides foundation leadership training to workers that have the potential to progress into management roles.
Project managers have been on the official NEC Contract Management training programme. These staff, along with some Council project managers have become the first people to become certified NEC Project Managers in New Zealand.
Downer have provided specialist technical training to local contractors so that they have the skills to use bitumen emulsions. Not only does this allow local contractors to work as sub-contractors on the Term Maintenance Contract, it also opens up broader opportunities – e.g. for local contractors to work for the NZTA on state high projects.
Downer have started to develop a skills development programme particularly focused on concrete works and water reticulation work, which is both areas with a significant skills shortage. Going into the second year of the contract, Downer will continue to recruit and train local people as they expand their teams undertaking these types of work.
Environmental Benefits
32. One of the innovations Downer has brought to the Term Services Contract is the use of bitumen emulsions as a replacement to traditional hot cut-back bitumen used for resealing road pavements. The infographic in Figure 1 illustrates the typical Carbon Dioxide Emissions of each product.
103 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
8
33. During the first year of the contract, the Council use a total of 723 tonnes of emulsion to reseal the district’s roads. It should be noted that this is approximately 20% lower than has been typically used in previous years due to the COVID-19 lockdown interrupting the sealing programme.
104 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
34. Based on the above figures, continuing with the status quo of using hot cutback bitumen would have resulted in approximately 1027 tonnes of CO2 emissions. Switching to bitumen emulsion reduced this to 523 tonnes, a saving of 504 tonnes of CO2.
35. Another environmental benefit delivered through the Infrastructure Term Maintenance Contract was the Plastic asphalt road resurfacing trial carried out at the beginning of the contract. Due to the long term, partnership approach that the contract facilitates, the Council has been able to work collaboratively with both Downer and Envirowaste (the Council’s kerbside refuse and recycling 8 collection contractor) to develop the asphalt product “Plasmix” that uses plastics from the Council’s kerbside recycling collections. Photograph 1 below shows the Plasmix trial being laid on Liardet Street.
Photo 1
105 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
36. Another environmental benefit of the Term Services Contract is the facility Downer has established for recycling asphalt, concrete and other aggregates. Photo 2 shows the processing facility were recycled material is screened before it gets a second life as aggregate that is used in rural road maintenance.
8
Photo 2
Health & Safety Risk Management
37. In addition to the environmental benefits, the switch to bitumen emulsions has improved worker health and safety by eliminating several critical risks. Traditional cutback bitumen needs to be heated to approximately 1700C so that it can be sprayed. Emulsions on the other hand can be spayed at much lower temperatures, typically only about 800C. This lower temperature greatly reducing the risk of workers being burned by hot materials.
38. Furthermore, traditional bitumen is often “cutback” with kerosene in order to reduce viscosity and improve spray flows. Being highly volatile, heating the kerosene/bitumen mix to high temperatures is risky. Historically, there have been a number of incidents across New Zealand involving bitumen spray trucks catching fire and in some cases exploding. Because bitumen emulsions use water and non-volatile emulsifying agents to improve spray flows, their use completely eliminates these risks.
106 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
39. One of the goals of the Term Maintenance Contract was to provide a 10 year long contract that would in term provide certainty for the contractor so that they could invest with confidence in safer, modern equipment. One area specifically targeted was the trucks used to spread stone chip during road resealing operations.
40. Historically, stone chip has been spread from a bar at the rear of a reversing truck. Trucks with large bind spots reversing surrounded by multiple workers on foot is a highly hazardous operation with the risk of workers being run over by the trucks. With the 10 year Term Service Contract to support them, Downer 8 NZ has invested in modern Secmair combi-trucks, shown in photo 3, which can spray bitumen at the same time as spreading stone chip whilst travelling in forward gear. Use of these trucks on the New Plymouth road resealing programme has all but eliminated the risk associated with reversing trucks.
Photo 3
107 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
Local Economic Benefits
41. In addition to investment in modern equipment, the 10 year term of the Term Services Contract was a key enabler to Downer investing in the Taranaki region. Because of the Council’s commitment to use bitumen emulsions, Downer NZ has constructed an emulsion processing facility at Port Taranaki, as shown in photo 4.
8
Photo 4
42. This facility allows Downer to import bitumen directly into New Plymouth instead of trucking it across the country from the port at Tauranga where it has previously been imported. This new emulsion facility has created additional jobs and contributes to the Taranaki region’s GDP as it is now used to supply bitumen emulsions to the lower North Island.
108 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
43. Another aspect of the Term Maintenance Contract was a requirement for the successful contractor to support local small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). In support of this, Downer has sub-contracted approximately 40% (by monetary value) to local contractors.
44. Downer’s commitment to supporting local SMEs extends beyond simply providing access to a certain volume of work. In addition, Downer has shared its technical and business management expertise with local contractors. For example: 8 Training Taranaki Civil Construction Ltd teams how to spray bitumen emulsions so that they can deliver pave repair works. Not only does this technical skill and experience allow Taranaki Civil to undertake works for NPDC, it also opens up opportunities for them to work for other clients such as the NZTA
Sharing financial accounting practices with several of the local SMEs so that they have the ability to properly account for actual costs required by the NEC4 form of contract. This will allow these contractors to move onto back-to-back contractual terms and have the opportunity to share in the Pain/Gain mechanism instead of being locked into fixed price lump sums.
Workforce Development
45. Since the commencement of the Term Maintenance Contract, the local Downer branch has a committed workforce of 62 Full time equivalent (FTE) staff members. Each FTE is a New Plymouth district resident that has secure employment for the 10 year term of the contract. This does not account for Supply Partners, which make up 40% of the value spent locally.
46. In addition, Downer has assisted the Council deliver the road safety improvement on Egmont Road, this project was fully funded by MBIE from the Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) as part of the “shovel ready” economic response to COVID-19. One of the requirement of receiving this funding was that at least 3 new FTE positions had to be created.
47. Downer has also been an active member of the Infrastructure Talent Pipeline Partnership; a civil construction skills and capacity building initiative Coordinated by the Council. Through this partnership programme Downer has created Gateway work experience placements for secondary school students from within New Plymouth District. Downer has also provided support to the workplace literacy and numeracy programme run by the Talent Pipeline Partnership with several of their staff attending the training.
109 Inglewood Community Board Agenda (22 September 2020) - Recommendation - Road Maintenance Contract - Year 1 Progress Report
NEXT STEPS
48. The combined Council and Downer team will build on the performance and experiences of the first year of the contract so that efficiency gains and service delivery performance is sustained and improved upon.
FINANCIAL AND RESOURCING IMPLICATIONS
49. There are no financial or resourcing implications associated with this report. All activity detailed is funded from existing approved budgets. 8
IMPLICATIONS ASSESSMENT
50. This report confirms that the matter concerned has no particular implications and has been dealt with in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002. Specifically: Council staff have delegated authority for any decisions made; Council staff have identified and assessed all reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter and considered the views and preferences of any interested or affected persons (including Māori), in proportion to the significance of the matter; Council staff have considered how the matter will promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present and the future. Unless stated above, any decisions made can be addressed through current funding under the Long-Term Plan and Annual Plan; Any decisions made are consistent with the Council's plans and policies; and No decisions have been made that would alter significantly the intended level of service provision for any significant activity undertaken by or on behalf of the Council, or would transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset to or from the Council.
Report Details Prepared By: Rui Leitao (Manager Transportation) Team: Infrastructure Approved By: David Langford (Group Manager Infrastructure & Assets) Ward/Community: District Wide Date: 11 August 2020 File Reference: ECM 8349976
------End of Report ------
110