9:00Am Date: Tuesday, 3 December 2019 Venue: Council Chambers, Waipa District Council, 101 Bank Street, Te Awamutu

Time: 9:00am Date: Tuesday, 3 December 2019 Venue: Council Chambers, Waipa District Council, 101 Bank Street, Te Awamutu

INDEX PAGE NO.

Agenda – 3 December 2019 1 - 10

3 Minutes of Previous Meeting – 6 September 2019 (No Papers)

4 Waipa Community Facilities Trust (11 - 49)

4 - 5 District Plan Update (50 – 55)

5 Civil Defence Emergency Planning Quarterly Report (56 – 70)

5 - 6 District Growth and Regulatory Services Quarterly Report (71 – 151)

6 - 7 Amendment to the Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2015 (152 – 166)

7 - 8 Amendments to the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy (167 - 187) 2

INDEX PAGE NO.

9 - 10 Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund (188 – 205)

10 Meeting Schedule 2020 (No Papers)

3 December 2019 Page 2 of 10

AGENDA ITEMS

1 MEMBERS

Chairperson SC O’Regan

Members His Worship the Mayor JB Mylchreest, EM Andree-Wiltens, EH Barnes, AW Brown, LE Brown, PTJ Coles, RDB Gordon, ML Gower, MJ Pettit, EM Stolwyk, CS St Pierre, BS Thomas, GRP Webber

2 APOLOGIES

3 DISCLOSURE OF MEMBERS’ INTERESTS

Members are reminded to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as an elected member and any private or other external interest they may have.

4 MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

The last meeting before the Triennial Election was held on 3 September 2019. The Chairperson and the Chief Executive are responsible for the correctness of the Minutes of the last meeting before a triennial election.

5 LATE ITEMS

6 CONFIRMATION OF ORDER OF MEETING

Recommendation That the order of the meeting be confirmed.

3 December 2019 Page 3 of 10

7 WAIPA COMMUNITY FACILITIES TRUST File: 10128530 Page: 11 - 49

Waipa District Council has contracted Waipa Community Facilities Trust (the Trust) to operate the Trust Waikato Te Awamutu Events Centre and the Cambridge Swimming Pool Complex; a Services Agreement sets out roles and responsibilities for both parties. Under the Service Agreement in line with Schedule 6 S6/2, the Trust has obligations to provide Council with various reports and updates. The following are included as information for the Committee:

The following appendix/appendices accompanies the staff report: • Appendix 1 – Waipa Community Facilities Trust October 2019 Monthly Non-Financial Report • Appendix 2 – Waipa Community Facilities Trust 2018-2019 End of Year Report.

• Appendix 3 – Waipa Community Facilities Trust Draft Statement of Intent 2020-2021.

Recommendation That a) The report of Sally Sheedy, Manager Community Services be received; b) The Waipa Community Facilities Trust October 2019 Monthly Report (Document Number 10128524) and 2018-2019 End of Year Report (Document Number 10128526), of Matt Horne, Chief Executive of Waipa Community Facilities Trust be received; and

c) The Strategic Planning and Policy Committee confirm no changes are required to the Draft Statement of Intent 2020-2021 of the Waipa Community Facilities Trust (Document number 10128819).

8 DISTRICT PLAN UPDATE File: 10118350 Page: 50 - 55

A number of district plan processes are underway. The staff report provides an update on the following plan projects:

. District Plan Work Programme . National Planning Standards . Potential Plan Changes

3 December 2019 Page 4 of 10

. Plan Changes 2 and 10.

The following appendix accompanies the staff report: . Appendix 1 – District Plan Work Programme

Recommendation That the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee: a) RECEIVE the information contained in the report titled ‘District Plan update’ (document number 10118350) of Julie Hansen, Policy Advisor District Plan.

9 CIVIL DEFENCE EMERGENCY PLANNING QUARTERLY REPORT File: 50.38 Page: 56 - 70

To provide the quarterly update report on the Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) activity for the period 1 July to 31 October 2019. This includes emergency management activities under the shared service arrangement between Waipā, Ōtorohanga and Waitomo District Councils and activities of the Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management Group including the Joint Committee.

Recommendation That the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee: a) RECEIVE the information contained in the ‘Civil Defence Emergency Planning Quarterly Report (1 July 2019 to 31 October 2019)’ report (document number 10129093) of Wayne Allan, Local Civil Defence Controller and David Simes, Emergency Management Operations Manager be received.

10 DISTRICT GROWTH AND REGULATORY SERVICES QUARTERLY REPORT File: 51.48 Page: 71 -151

To provide a quarterly update on proposed legislative changes influencing key services, Waipā District Plan changes, district growth and regulatory services for the period 1 July 2019 to 30 September 2019.

The following appendices accompany the staff report: . Appendix 1 – Submission on the National Policy Statement - Urban Development (document number 10111926)

3 December 2019 Page 5 of 10

. Appendix 2 – Submission on the National Policy Statement – Highly Productive Land (document number 10111920) . Appendix 3 – Submission on the Action for Healthy Waterways documentation (document number 10118852) . Appendix 4 – Submission on the Resource Management Act Amendment Bill 2019 (document number 10116078) . Appendix 5 – Quarterly statistics . Appendix 6 – Yearly statistics . Appendix 7 – Applications determined by the District Licensing Committee . Appendix 8 – Building consents issued . Appendix 9 – Major resource consent applications

Recommendation That the ‘District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report’ (document number 10111702) of Wayne Allan, Group Manager District Growth and Regulatory Services be received.

11 AMENDMENT TO THE WAIPA DISTRICT FIRE CONTROL BYLAW 2015 File: 10122198 Page: 152 – 166

The Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw (attached as Appendix 1 of the staff report) was last reviewed in 2015. The Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 has removed from the jurisdiction of local authorities most of the responsibilities contained within the Bylaw. Council is therefore required to determine whether a bylaw remains the most appropriate way of addressing the remaining issues (sections 155(1) and 160 LGA).

Retaining a bylaw would enable Council to fulfil its remaining responsibilities more flexibly through a wider range of authorised officers who would not otherwise be available to Council. If Council had no bylaw, Council staff would be limited in the actions they could take and by whom.

Staff have reviewed the existing bylaw. The Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 inserted a new section 152B into the Local Government Act 2002. This provides that Council does not need to consult the public on this bylaw. Council is only required to consult Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) as the key stakeholders. Council has undertaken pre-consultation with FENZ.

3 December 2019 Page 6 of 10

A draft of a new bylaw has subsequently been prepared and is attached to the staff report for Elected Member determination.

The following documents are included as appendices to the staff report: . Appendix 1 Draft Fire Control Bylaw 2019 (document number 10087909).

Recommendation That the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee: a) RECEIVES the report of Graham Pollard, Strategic Projects Driver [document number 10122198]; and

b) DETERMINES that a new Fire Control Bylaw is the most appropriate method for addressing Council’s remaining fire control responsibilities; and

c) AGREES that the draft Fire Control Bylaw 2019 as set out in Appendix 1 [document number 10087909] is in the most appropriate form for addressing Council’s fire control responsibilities and does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill Of Rights Act 1990; and

d) RECOMMENDS that Council adopts the draft Fire Control Bylaw 2019 as set out in Appendix 1 [document number 10087909] and thereby makes a new Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2019, effective from 1 January 2020.

12 AMENDMENTS TO THE WAIPA DISTRICT COUNCIL CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION (CCTV) POLICY File: 10122204 Page: 167 - 187

The Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy for Community Safety in Public Places was adopted by the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee by resolution 2/19/26 on 5 March 2019.

The purpose of the Policy is to:

(a) Monitor and manage traffic at specific intersections and to investigate incidents that occur in those locations.

3 December 2019 Page 7 of 10

(b) Improve road user safety by monitoring traffic flow patterns and investigating traffic incidents.

(d) Detect and capture evidence of offending to allow for a quick response from the Police, emergency services or Council and assist with investigations and prosecutions of offending in the Waipa District.

(e) Actively deter offending in the Waipa District, including that which relates to Council assets or facilities.

Work has continued during 2019 to install, configure and test the system hardware; and to recruit and train volunteers to monitor the live camera images. In doing so, a significant Policy omission has been identified. New Zealand Police has requested that this omission be rectified as it potentially affects the efficiency of Police operations and their ability to respond more effectively to incidents.

In proposing this amendment, the opportunity is being taken to ask the Committee to adopt a number of minor amendments arising from changes to organisational titles.

The following appendix/appendices accompanies this report:

. Appendix 1 – Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy for Community Safety in Public Places (document number 10121548)

Recommendation That the Strategic Planning & Policy Committee: a) RECEIVES the Amendments to the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy report (document number 10122204) of Graham Pollard, Strategic Projects Driver; and b) ADOPTS the minor amendments to policy clause 4.4.2 of the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy, as shown in Appendix 1 of this report; and c) ADOPTS the new amendments to policy clause 4.8 of the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy, as shown in Appendix 1 of this report.

3 December 2019 Page 8 of 10

13 TREE POLICY REVIEW AND CONTESTABLE PROTECTED TREE MAINTENANCE FUND File: 10128591 Page: 188 - 205

The Waipa District Council Tree Policy (Section 4.45 of the Procedural Policy Manual – document number 1135767) has been reviewed in conjunction with the recent District Plan Change 2 (PC2) and was workshopped with elected members on 2 April 2019. With PC2 now operative, the Tree Policy has been finalised for approval. Furthermore, PC2 saw a significant change in the way protected trees are managed in Waipa district – most notably the shift of maintenance and responsibility to the landowner.

Staff preferred option for this fund proposes Council develop a contestable fund with a claim cap of $2,500 per tree. This option provides a good level of support to protected tree owners, while not placing significant financial and resource strain on Council.

The following appendix accompanies the staff report: . Appendix 1 – Draft Tree Policy (document number 10128529) . Appendix 2 - Section 4.45 of the Procedural Policy Manual – Existing Tree Policy (document number 1135767)

Recommendation a) That the Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund report (document number 10128591) of Brad Ward, Community Facilities Team Leader be received;

b) that the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee adopt the draft Tree Policy 2019 as set out in Appendix 1 (document number 10128529) effective from 9 December 2019, and revoke the existing tree policy as set out in Appendix 2 (document number 1135767) from the same date;

3 December 2019 Page 9 of 10

c) that the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee approve the establishment of a Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund of $50,000 per annum to be funded from existing budgets for the current and subsequent financial years which will process claims from protected tree owners on the basis that Council will, in the case of a successful application, pay half the cost of one claim received per annum with a maximum payment of $2,500 per protected tree (option 2 in this report);

d) that the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee approve the criteria for applications as set out in Section 3 of this report, for applications to the Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund.

14 MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 2020 No Papers

The Local Government Act 2002 requires Council and its Committees to set the dates of meetings, or a schedule of meetings, for a period of time.

Recommendation That in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7 Clause 19(6)(a)(b), the Strategic Planning & Policy Committee adopt the following schedule of meeting dates for 2020 (generally being the first Tuesday of each month, except January):

4 February; 3 March; 7 April; 5 May; 2 June; 7 July; 4 August; 1 September; 6 October; 3 November; 1 December.

3 December 2019 Page 10 of 10

To: The Chairperson and Members of the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee From: Manager Community Services Subject: Waipa Community Facilities Trust Report Meeting Date: 3 December 2019 File Reference: 10128530

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Under the Service Agreement in line with Schedule 6 S6/2, the Trust has obligations to provide Council with various reports and updates. The following are included as information for the Committee:

The following appendix/appendices accompanies this report: • Appendix 1 – Waipa Community Facilities Trust October 2019 Monthly Non- Financial Report • Appendix 2 – Waipa Community Facilities Trust 2018-2019 End of Year Report .

• Appendix 3 – Waipa Community Facilities Trust Draft Statement of Intent 2020- 2021.

2 RECOMMENDATION

That a) The report of Sally Sheedy, Manager Community Services be received; b) The Waipa Community Facilities Trust October 2019 Monthly Report (Document Number 10128524) and 2018-2019 End of Year Report (Document

10128530 12

Number 10128526), of Matt Horne, Chief Executive of Waipa Community Facilities Trust be received; and c) The Strategic Planning and Policy Committee confirm no changes are required to the Draft Statement of Intent 2020-2021 of the Waipa Community Facilities Trust (Document number 10128819).

3 OPTIONS AND ASSESSMENT

As per the Service Agreement, Council has until 20 December 2019 to provide feedback to the Trust on any changes it would like made to the draft Statement of Intent for 2020-2021. The Trust will then provide a final version of the Letter of Intent to Council by 1 March 2020.

The main consideration for 2020-2021 for the Trust will be opening and running of the new Cambridge Pool along with maintaining business as usual at the Trust Waikato Te Awamutu Events Centre.

Sally Sheedy MANAGER COMMUNITY SERVICES

Debbie Lascelles GROUP MANAGER STRATEGY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Waipā Community Facilities Trust Report Page 2 of 6 10128526

SUPPORTING INFORMATION: ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSAL

1 Statutory and policy requirements

Legal and regulatory considerations

Local Government Act 2002 s.10 Purpose of Local Government The decision to contract out the operation of the Trust Waikato The Awamutu Events Centre and Cambridge Swimming Pool Complex meets current and future needs of communities for good-quality local public services in a way that is most cost effective for households and business.

Consultation and Engagement There are no Significance and Engagement Policy implications in approving the draft Statement of Intent.

2 Background to proposal

The Services Agreement between Waipa District Council and Waipa Community Trust, dated 3 April 2018 (document number 7389161), sets out the roles and responsibilities of each party. This includes the Trust’s reporting and Statement of Intent obligations.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Waipā Community Facilities Trust Report Page 3 of 6 10128526

Appendix 1 Waipa Community Facilities Trust October 2019 Monthly Non-Financial Report

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Waipā Community Facilities Trust Report Page 4 of 6 10128526

Waipa Community Facilities Trust Monthly Non-Financial Report

Oct 2019

1. SUMMARY

October has been a busy month for GoWaipa with ASB Stadium and Livingstone Aquatics hosting events and school holidays.

GoWaipa YTD 2019-2020 overall attendance visitor is up 9,605 visits or up 13% compared with the same period previously in 2018*. This is due to Livingstone Aquatics being closed for July in 2018.

2019/2020 81,544 2018/2019 71,939* (*Livingstone Aquatics closed July) 2017/2018 80,403

October visitor numbers were up 1,444 or 6.7%

2. OPERATIONS ASB Stadium hosted ConnexU 30yr Celebrations, TA Primary Schools Kapa Haka Festival, and TA College Senior Prizegiving

Livingstone Aquatics hosted the Special Olympics annual swimming carnival and the school holidays

2.1. VISITOR NUMBERS – WCFT SUMMARY

TAEC September Visitor Numbers 2019 – 18,365

TE AWAMUTU EVENT CENTRE

LIVINGSTONE SWIM WAIPA CLUB SWIMMING ASB CLUB TAEC TOTAL AQUATICS WAIPA SUB TOTAL STADIUM WAIPA LTS CLUB SWIM 4 HP AQUATIC LIFE 11,630 1,195 939 0 142 302 13,662 3,910 5,417 22,989

2.2. VISITOR NUMBERS –TAEC AQUATIC

Oct 2019 overall YTD aquatic patronage was up for the year against the same period last year by 5,709* visits.

2019 37,859 2018 32,150*

October aquatic visitor attendance is up 705 or 5.4% from the same period measured last year.

2019 Oct 13,662 2018 Oct 12,957 2017 Oct 13,068

2.3. VISITOR NUMBERS – YTD – ASB STADIUM

YTD Tracking has been a good for the stadium with a few key events bringing the total attendance in line with last year up slightly at 173 or 1.2%.

2019 15,224 2018 15,051

October stadium usage was significantly better than the same month last year with a few key events helping raise attendance and increasing usage by 2,417 or 162%.

2019 Oct 3,910 2018 Oct 1,493

BOOKINGS HOURS OCCUPIED TOTAL HOURS OCCUPANCY RATE (%) Court 1 35.50 8.20 Court 2 30.50 7.04 Stadium 33.00 7.62 Meeting Room 67.00 15.47 TOTAL 166.00 433 38.33%

Occupancy rates up 90.25hrs or +119% on October 2018

Oct 2019 38.33% Hours used – 166.00 Oct 2018 17.49% Hours used – 75.75

2.4. VISITOR NUMBERS – YTD – TAEC CLUB WAIPA

Membership dropped 22 members from 905 to 883 members. Members attendance continues to be tracking well above the previous comparisons up 5,511 or 34.3% overall.

2019 YTD 21,587 2018 YTD 16,076

Club Waipa monthly attendance is up 728 or 15.5% for Oct and Group Fitness (GF) classes continue to do well and have a strong following up 738 or 48%.

2019 Oct 5,417 2018 Oct 4,689

Group Fitness (GF) 2019 YTD 4,824 compared to 4,019 (2018) up 805 visits or 20% 2019 Oct 1,224 compared to 969 (2018) up 255 visits or 26.3%

2.5. VISITOR NUMBERS – YTD – CAMBRIDGE

Structural framing for the Toddler Pool and 25m pool roof and most of the main changing room block work is completed.

2.6. VISITOR NUMBERS – YTD – TAEC SWIM WAIPA

Swim Waipa now has a total of 932 students/members. 836 students in the learn to Swim programme and 96 squad members.

It has been a quiet month for squads, re-competitions and our race night was low on attendance for October. We are planning an earlier race night to capture our Juniors to encourage them into our race nights early in December and will follow up on an Xmas race night at the end of term.

YTD Swim Waipa attendance numbers are down 2 visits so on track with last year.

2019 YTD 7,659 5,579 SW 1,830 CB 0 SP 250 HP 2018 YTD* 7,661 5,622 SW 1,419 CB 446 SP 174 HP *Livingstone Aquatics closed for maintenance July 2018

3. HEALTH & SAFETY - October

We had 10x Accidents, 5x Incidents and 6x Contaminations and 4x Near Misses and 0x Trespass

3.1 Notifiable Events (0) Nil to report

3.2 Ambulance (0) Nil to report

3.3 Accidents (10) Bump/Cut/Graze (4) 1x child stepped off toddler pool and scraped head, forearm and knee 1x adult scrapped knuckle on men’s changing room door 1x child bumped nose on handrail swimming in hydrotherapy pool 1x child hit head on edge of mushroom

Hydroslide/Inflatable (3) 2x children knocked head on turn halfway down hydroslide 1x child fell off inflatable and slapped leg on water

Blood nose (1) 1x child accidently hit in the head by friend and got a bleeding nose

Concourse (1) 1x under 5 slipped walking on concourse cutting their chin

Grandstand (1) 1x Adult slipped on stairs in grandstand – mat placed at the bottom step

Staff provided first aid for all accidents

3.4 Incidents (5) Poor Public Behaviour (1) 1x under 5yr biting staff in creche

Accident 1x member of the public accidently smashed community room slide window while closing it

Pool Rescues (3) 1x dry rescue - under 5 climbed into hydrotherapy pool while caregiver was swimming and was out of their depth. LG pulled to the side of pool and pulled them out 1x dry rescue – child fell off inflatable and started to panic, LG threw floatation device and pulled them to the side 24

1x wet rescue – under 5 went over the side of the Toddlers Pool into the lido and was out of their depth. LG jumped in to save child and take back to mother in Toddler Pool after checking toddler was ok

3.5 Near Miss (4) 1x child fell off lizard into beach area 1x autistic child unable to follow directions got out of their depth and was rescued by LG. 1x child snorkelling was jumped on by sibling causing them to panic and swallow water. LG conducted dry rescue and spoke to the granddad about signs of second-hand drowning. 1x child swimming in Hydrotherapy Pool got out of their depth and was rescued by their mother.

3.6 Contaminations (6) 2x Hydrotherapy Pool – 2x solid 2x Toddlers Pool – 1x solid, 1x vomit 2x 25m Pool – 2x solid

3.7 Trespass Nil to report

Health and Safety – 2019 - 2020 YTD Comparison (Oct)

YTD 2018/19 YTD 2019/20 VARIANCE Notifiable Event 0 0 - Ambulance 3 0 -3 Accidents 50 33 -17 Incidents 25 11 -14 Contamination 14 18 4 Near Miss 16 7 -9 Trespassed/Banned 0 1 1

Slips Trips and Falls (1)

YTD we have 2 slips due to the concourse which is – 34 slips compared with the same period last year.

October monthly tracking we had 1 slip compared to 13 last year.

3.7 POOL WATER QUALITY

The Operational Team has maintained YTD pool water quality average at 93% tracking above the recommended minimum Pool Water Quality Standard of 85%.

3.8 WATER QUALITY – YEARLY AVERAGE (TARGET: 85%)

Water Quality Results 2019/2020 Month TAEC Cambridge July 92% August 94% September 92% October 94% November December January February March April May June

3.9 POOL TEMPERATURES

LTS/Hydrotherapy 25m Pool Toddlers Pool Spa Pool Pool Temperatures 31-33˚c 25-28˚c 30-33˚c 38-40˚c July 32.5 28.0 33.1 38.6 August 32.5 28.0 33.5 38.5 September 32.7 28.0 33.7 38.5 October 32.6 28.0 33.8 38.5 November December January February March April May June Total Average 32.6 28.0 33.5 38.5

4. CUSTOMER FEEDBACK

For Oct we had 1x Compliments, 0x Valid Complaints, 0x Non-valid Complaint and 0x Suggestions

4.1 Compliments (1) 1x Brittany Edwards – Thank you to CW, SW and Operations for supporting me throughout the year.

4.2 Complaints Valid (0) Nil to report

4.3 Complaint Not Valid (0) Nil to report

4.4 Suggestions (0) Nil to report

YTD Feedback Comparison

2018/19 2019/20 Variance Compliment 8 9 1 Complaint Valid 4 2 -1 Complaint Not Valid 6 3 -3 Suggestion 2 2 0

5. CAPITAL NEW AND RENEWAL ASSET MANAGEMENT PROJECTS

• Gas Tube Heaters ($20,000) – • Retractable Seating ($50,000) – Ordered • Stadium Tables and Chairs ($10,000) – • Pump Replacement ($12,000) – • Sauna Refurbishment ($25,000) – Ordered • BMS upgrade ($25,000) – finalising quote

• TAEC Reception desk – Completed • Carpet office space – • Heat Pump Office space –

6. GENERAL BUSINESS

October 18-20 ConnexU 30-year Celebration 20 Special Olympics Annual Swim Meeting 24-25 Pirongia Primary School – Kapa Haka Festival 31 TA College Senior Prize Giving

Upcoming Key Dates/Bookings

November 1 TA College Senior Prize Giving 28 Open Country Supplier Dinner

7. Appendices

7.1. Visitor Numbers – Monthly & YTD Breakdown

2019/20 GOWAIPA YTD VISITS Swim Waipa Club Club Swim Swim Swim Livingstone Swim Waipa Swimming ASB Waipa TAEC Cambridge Grand Waipa Waipa Holiday Waipa Month Aquatics Waipa - Sub-Total Stadium Non- Total Aquatic Total Learn to Schools Programme Total Club Aquatic Aquatic Swim Programme July 8786 834 408 0 90 1332 358 10476 2978 5099 18553 18553 August 7693 1766 563 0 0 2329 353 10375 5695 5567 21637 21637 September 7718 1784 466 0 18 2268 362 10348 2641 5376 18365 18365 October 11630 1195 393 0 142 1730 302 13662 3910 5417 22989 22989 November December January February March April May June

YTD Totals 35,827 5,579 1,830 0 250 7,659 1,375 44,861 15,224 21,459 81,544 0 81,544

Appendix 2 Waipa Community Facilities Trust 2018-2019 End of Year Report

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Waipā Community Facilities Trust Report Page 5 of 6 10128526

Waipa Community Facilities Trust 2018-2019 Annual Report

1. SUMMARY

2018-2019 has been a busy year for the Trust with record numbers through the Te Awamutu Events Centre even though Livingstone Aquatics was only open for 11 months.

Throughout the months of June and July 2018 Livingstone Aquatics was closed for its 5-year maintenance service and staff had been busy preparing the pools for a number of major capital works projects.

These projects included:

• CCTV • HVAC Acoustic Louvre Replacement • 3x Hot Water Cylinder Replacement • Water feature Pump Replacement

2. OPERATIONS Additional to the record visitors and the impending maintenance closure, a key capital project was to improve and enhance our levels of service:

➢ Installed Links Modular System replacing the previous Centaman system

This investment back into the facilities totalled over $75,000. With the introduction of Links, we will be able to connect with the future Cambridge Pool and have better support and reporting.

2x new board members were appointed Fiona Carrick and Michelle Hollands with former Waipa Networks CEO Raymond Milner resigning by rotation.

2.1. VISITOR NUMBERS – TAEC SUMMARY

TAEC Visitor Numbers 2018-2019

TE AWAMUTU EVENT CENTRE

LIVINGSTONE SWIM WAIPA CLUB SWIMMING ASB CLUB TAEC TOTAL AQUATICS WAIPA SUB TOTAL STADIUM WAIPA LTS CLUB SWIM 4 HP AQUATIC LIFE 111,637 21,417 4,446 1,676 430 3,576 143,182 37,770 51,724 232,676

Overall attendance (TAEC Only)

Over the past 5 years of operation, the Trust has increased overall participation at TAEC by 48,186 visits p.a. or 26%

2.2. VISITOR NUMBERS – LIVINGSTONE AQUATICS

2018-2019 Livingstone Aquatics exceeded 2016-2017 visits even though it only operated for 11 months. Overall, we have still managed to increase visitor numbers by 7,661 visits or 7.3% over the past 5 years.

2.3. VISITOR NUMBERS – ASB STADIUM

ASB Stadium had an outstanding 2017-2018 year and while 2018-2019 usage was better than the previous 3 years, we could not match last year. ASB Stadium hosted 33 Regional (Waipa/Waikato) and 7 National/North Island events and 1 international event.

2018-2019 key events:

• Bay Aerobics – Midland Aerobic Championships • Swimming Waikato – Waikato Short Course Champs Part 1 & 2 • Swimming Waikato – Caro Cup – Waikato vs Auckland Relay Event • NZ Maori Men vs Australian Indigenous Basketball • WBOP Magic vs Northern Mystic Preseason Game • 2019 Healthcare NZ Low Point Wheelchair Rugby Nationals • Hamilton Model Railroaders Exhibition • WBOP Magic Open Training Session • NBL – Super City Rangers vs Taranaki Mountain Airs

2.4. VISITOR NUMBERS – YTD – TAEC CLUB WAIPA

Club Waipa membership remained steady with a slight increase from 831 to 843. This reflected in the membership visits being similar 51,887 to 52,659 or -772 visits. The maintenance closure of Livingstone Aquatics for July had an effect on attendance compared to July in the previous years where members lost services to the sauna and pools.

Group Fitness class attendance continued to improve also improved significantly by 2,126 or 23%

2.5. VISITOR NUMBERS – YTD – CAMBRIDGE

Under construction due to open mid 2020

2.6. VISITOR NUMBERS – YTD – TAEC SWIM WAIPA

Swim Waipa has now been operating the Squads and Swim School (LTS) for over 12 months. Over the last 12 months squad members have increased from 59 to 83 peaking at 91 in the summer terms. Similarly, LTS students have increased from 520 to 680 peaking at 856 during Term 1.

Numbers through Swim Waipa have increased by 6,824 or 32% over the past 12 months and will be the model used at the future Cambridge Pool.

Swim Waipa Breakdown:

LTS 21,417 Squads 4,446 Schools 1,676 HP 430

3. HEALTH & SAFETY – 2018-2019

There was one Notifiable Event reported to WorkSafe NZ which they replied they would not be taking anything action. There were 5x ambulance callouts 2x Disabled Patrons Seizure’s, 1x Medical Seizure, 2x Heat Exhaustion.

Of the 120 accidents, 86 were slips on the new concourse which has been addressed with the introduction of commercial floor scrubbers. We had 19x pool rescues - 12x dry 7x wet and 15 additional accidents where first aid was required.

Health and Safety – 2017-2018 YTD Comparison

YTD 2017/18 YTD 2018/19 VARIANCE Notifiable Event 0 1 1 Ambulance 3 5 2 Accident 67 120 53 Incidents 67 58 -9 Contaminations 68 55 -13 Near Miss 17 32 15 Trespassed/Banned 4 0 -4

3.1. POOL WATER QUALITY

Pool water quality is was maintained at an average of 93% against the national criteria. This was well above the minimum 85% benchmark required.

The Operational Team has maintained YTD pool water quality average at 98% well above the recommended minimum Pool Water Quality Standard of 85%.

3.2. WATER QUALITY – YEARLY AVERAGE (TARGET: 85%)

Water Quality Results 2017/2018 Month TAEC Cambridge July 95% August 97% September 92% October 92% November 92% December 94% January 92% February 89% March 92% April 92% May 92% June 92%

3.7 POOL TEMPERATURES

ACTUAL 25m Pool LTS/Hydro Toddlers Spa Pool CB 50m (25- AVERAGE (25-28°c) Pool (31-33°c) (30-33°c) (38-40°c) 28°c) July 32.2 28.4 33.6 39.2 Aug 32.3 28.3 33.2 38.6 Sept 32.5 28.1 32.7 38.3 Oct 32.4 28.0 32.6 38.4 Nov 32.3 27.9 33.0 38.5 Dec 32.3 28.0 32.6 38.6 Jan 32.3 28.0 32.7 38.5 Feb 32.3 27.9 32.6 38.5 Mar 32.4 27.7 32.9 38.5 Apr 32.5 27.6 32.8 38.3 May 32.6 27.8 33.1 37.2 June 32.7 28.0 33.2 38.6 TOTAL AVERAGE 32.4 28.0 32.9 38.4

4. CUSTOMER FEEDBACK

Overall Customer feedback compared with the previous period last year has seen an increase in Compliments by 7 or 20%. Complaints decreased by 3 or -16% and non-valid complaints increased by 7 or 77% based on 232,636 visits. Suggestions had a slight decrease of -1 or 6.7%.

Customer Feedback – YTD Comparison YTD 2016/17 YTD 2017/18 Variance Compliment 34 41 7 Complaint – Valid 19 16 -3 Complaint – Not Valid 9 16 7 Suggestion 15 14 -1

5. CAPITAL NEW AND RENEWAL ASSET MANAGEMENT PROJECTS

• CCTV - Completed • HVAC Acoustic Louvre Replacement – Completed • Hot Water Cylinder Replacement – Completed • Rain Drop Water Feature Pump Replacement – Completed • WCFT – Links Modular System Installation - Completed

6. CUSTOMER SURVEY

Our Annual 2019 Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted in Feb 2019 and we had 319 responses over a 3-week period (please note we did not survey Cambridge users this year)

Overall, we have increased our CSI Rating 4 points from Very Good Performance to Excellent

CSI RATING 2017/18 2018/19 Variance Livingstone Aquatics 77 80 3 Cambridge 69 - - Club Waipa 85 85 - Swim Waipa 84 82 -2 WCFT Overall Average 79 82 4 41

Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) Rating 66 or lower Needs significant improvement 67-72 Fair – needs improvement 73-77 Good performance – but potential for improvement 78-81 Very good performance 82-83 Excellent performance 84 or higher Exceptional performance

7. FINANCIAL

2018-2019 July - June WCFT Financial Report

Income 2018/2019 2017/2018 Diff WDC Operating Funding $1,148,442 $1,387,698 -$239,256 WDC Capital Renewal $124,000 $0 $124,000 WDC Special Funding $444,013 $0 $444,013 WCFT Trading & Other Revenue $1,398,454 $1,258,347 $140,107 $3,114,909 $2,646,045 $468,864

Expenditure YTD $2,845,240 $2,405,392 -$439,848 Difference $269,669 $240,653 $29,016 Approved CAPEX Surplus (Deficit) before Tax $269,669 $240,653

2018-2019 WCFT USER AN RATEPAYER ANALYSIS PER USER PER NO. OF RATING ANN COST PER TOTAL USER VISIT UNITS RATEPAYER

WDC Sub less net $878,773 232,676 $3.78 ($4.55) 22,559 (22,169) $38.95 ($51.74) Profit Commercial $1,398,454 232,676 $6.01 ($4.99) 22,559 (22,169) $62.00 ($56.76) income

Cost to Operate $2,277,227 $2,405,392 $9.79 ($9.54) $100.95 ($108.50)

Equity $784,455 $514,786 22,559 (22,169) $34.77 ($23.22)

Key 2017-2018

8. Appendices

8.1. Visitor Numbers – Monthly & YTD

2018/19 GOWAIPA YTD VISITS Swim Waipa Club Club Swim Swim Swim Livingstone Swim Waipa Swimming ASB Waipa TAEC Cambridge Grand Waipa Waipa Holiday Waipa Month Aquatics Waipa - Sub-Total Stadium Non- Total Aquatic Total Learn to Schools Programme Total Club Aquatic Aquatic Swim Programme July 364 157 142 0 88 387 25 776 4,156 3,220 8,152 8,152 August 9,197 1,978 461 180 0 2,619 357 12,173 4,825 4,118 21,116 21,116 September 9,632 1,972 409 168 0 2,549 319 12,500 4,577 4,049 21,126 21,126 October 12,957 1,515 407 98 86 2,106 300 15,363 1,493 4,689 21,545 21,545 November 9,560 2,505 496 291 0 3,292 359 13,211 3,490 4,528 21,229 21,229 December 11,318 1,608 317 34 0 1,959 239 13,516 797 4,997 19,310 19,310 January 14,397 217 130 0 208 555 180 15,132 493 3,911 19,536 19,536 February 11,393 2,332 432 230 0 2,994 347 14,734 2,006 4,326 21,066 21,066 March 10,362 3,035 405 549 0 3,989 385 14,736 4,475 4,492 23,703 23,703 April 8,240 1,275 235 126 48 1,684 349 10,273 3,772 4,171 18,216 18,216 May 6,660 2,178 549 0 0 2,727 406 9,793 3,293 4,535 17,621 17,621 June 7,557 2,645 463 0 0 3,108 310 10,975 4,393 4,688 20,056 20,056

Closed YTD Totals 111,637 21,417 4,446 1,676 430 27,969 3,576 143,182 37,770 51,724 232,676 0 232,676

Appendix 3 Waipa Community Facilities Trust draft Statement of Intent 2020-2021

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Waipā Community Facilities Trust Report Page 6 of 6 10128526

2020-2021 WAIPA COMMUNITY FACILITIES TRUST STATEMENT OF INTENT

Prepared by Matt Horne WAIPA COMMUNITY FACILITIES TRUST 2020-2021 46

WCFT STATEMENT OF INTENT 2020 – 2021 Recommendation

That the Waipa District Council: 1. Approves the Statement of Intent 2020/21

Executive summary

1. WCFT is required to prepare an annual Statement of Intent (SOI). The Board approved the draft SOI for 2020/21 commencing 1 July 2020 2. The Draft SOI 2020/21 was submitted to Council on 3 December 2019 for Council to provide its comments. 3. A final SOI is required to be submitted to Council by 1 March 2020

Strategic context

1. The SOI sets out WCFT’s activities and objectives to which it will contribute. This SOI provides the means by which Waipa District Council can influence the direction of key performance objectives and social issues they would like the WCFT to focus on.

WCFT Vision and Purpose

1. Home of Opportunities 2. To provide high quality facilities and enable participation in sports, recreation and leisure activities across the district

2020-2021 WCFT STATEMENT OF INTENT - WORKPLAN

OBJECTIVES DESCRIPTION PERFORMANCE ASPIRATIONS MEASURE

3.1 (b) To collaborate with clubs and schools, Improve swimming across Develop and implement Swim Aquatic activity becomes a lifelong and other organisations that have the Waipa district Waipa model at Cambridge: leisure interest common interests • competitive squads, Swim Waipa model becomes the new (e) To provide learn to swim and other • rehabilitation classes benchmark across the region aquatic skills programmes to promote • special needs/disabilities water safety, particularly amongst the classes Free or cost neutral classes are provided District’s children and youth • fitness classes for Waipa School children • masters • adult LTS classes Waipa children have enough water • learn to swim programmes confidence and swimming ability to • School based programmes save themselves in the event of an • Water and boat safety aquatic emergency programmes Waipa competitive swimmers compete • Intensive and stroke on a national and international level correction clinics

OBJECTIVE DESCRIPTION PERFORMANCE ASPIRATIONS MEASURE

3.1 (a) To enable wide community use of the Commission Cambridge Pool Provide excellent level of customer Maximise the potential and attendance facilities and develop programmes to service through facility cater to demand and provide Provide high quality facility to (d) To contribute to and promote physical access and opportunity for enable participation in aquatic Premier Aquatic Facility in the Waikato activity and healthy lifestyles through the our community recreation# Region use of the facilities together with specific programmes and activities that maximise Promote the benefits of an active Improve fitness and quality of life for access and opportunities for physical lifestyle our Waipa Community activity by as a broad a spectrum of the districts population as possible PoolSafe Accreditation Reduce doctor and hospital visits

Quality Management Systems Increase in senior attendance and usage implemented throughout the facility

# Identified Risks relating CB Pool: Improve social networks by providing • Unconfirmed operational opportunity for seniors to meet other funding and ongoing costs likeminded people • Unconfirmed CAPEX funding and ongoing costs • Unconfirmed funding for FFE • Pool design impact on maximising services and activities • Car parking impact on facility access and safety • Unknown impact on TAEC

OBJECTIVE DESCRIPTION PERFORMANCE ASPIRATIONS MEASURE

WCFT – Community Working together to develop positive Provide opportunity and Develop an internship programme Waipa unemployed youth are provided outcomes practical work experience for with WINZ focussing on work with work experience opportunities in our community youth experience, qualifications and the Aquatic, Sport and Recreation possible employment for 16-24yrs Industry

Developing junior swimming Opportunity for permanent coaches and teachers employment in the Aquatic, Sport and Recreation Industry Training and mentoring Lifeguards and Team Leaders Upskilling of youth. National Lifeguard, Learn to Swim and Workplace First Aid qualifications

Wider recruitment base of applicants for GoWaipa to select from

To: The Chairperson and Members of the Strategic Planning & Policy Committee From: Julie Hansen, Policy Advisor District Plan Subject: District Plan update Meeting Date: Tuesday, 3 December 2019 File Reference: 10118350

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A number of district plan processes are underway. This report provides an update on the following plan projects: . District Plan Work Programme . National Planning Standards . Potential Plan Changes . Plan Changes 2 and 10.

The following appendix accompanies this report: . Appendix 1 – District Plan Work Programme

2 RECOMMENDATION

That the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee: a) RECEIVE the information contained in the report titled ‘District Plan update’ (document number 10118350) of Julie Hansen, Policy Advisor District Plan.

10118350 51

3 OPTIONS AND ASSESSMENT

District Plan Work Programme

The five year work programme for the District Plan team is appended as Appendix 1. This shows four separate workstreams and a relatively complex implementation programme to implement National Planning Standards, various national directions and plan changes.

The work programme will be updated as needed, and further details will be brought to the February 2020 Committee meeting so that staff can receive guidance on the relative priorities within the work programme.

National Planning Standards

The National Planning Standards were gazetted by central Government in April 2019 and all local authorities must comply. Their purpose is to improve efficiency and effectiveness of the planning system and ensure nationally consistent structure, format, definitions, noise and vibration metrics, and electronic functionality and accessibility of district and regional plans. In essence, they standardise RMA plans (district plans, regional plans and unitary plans) across the country. Waipā’s current operative District Plan must be updated to apply a format which is standardised to all district plans.

Full compliance with the Standards, including moving to an ePlan platform, is required by 2026.

Minor amendments can be made to the District Plan as a result of implementing the National Planning Standards, without undertaking a consultative process. More substantive consequential changes will need to go through a plan change process (Schedule 1 RMA).

It is anticipated that there will be some issues for which a plan change to implement the National Planning Standards will be required. They are likely to be related to zones and definitions. However, as this will not be a full plan review, standards, conditions and thresholds will not be changed. It is only an update to meet the prescribed standards.

Potential Plan Changes

To date, a total of 18 potential changes to different parts of the District Plan have been nominated/requested by the Consent Planners, developers, and customers. These cover a range of different changes including: rezoning; changes to objectives, policies and rules; changes to provisions in the District Plan that are ambiguous, difficult to interpret or implement, and are not meeting the desired RMA outcomes; and technical drafting improvements.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Plan Update Page 2 of 4 52

Plan change assessment criteria are being developed to assist in determining priorities for potential plan changes. Further information on these plan changes will be brought to this Committee early in 2020 as part of seeking further direction on which priority plan changes to progress.

Plan Changes 2 and 10

Plan Change 2 (Protected Trees) and Private Plan Change 10 (Eastern Side Access to Titanium Park) have been completed with no appeals, and are now operative and incorporated into the District Plan.

Julie Hansen POLICY ADVISOR – DISTRICT PLANNING

Reviewed by Tony Quickfall MANAGER DISTRICT PLAN & GROWTH

Approved by Wayne Allan GROUP MANAGER DISTRICT GROWTH & REGULATORY SERVICES

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Plan Update Page 3 of 4 53

APPENDIX 1

District Plan work programme (document number 10113455).

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Plan Update Page 4 of 4 54

Cr ea DISTRICT PLAN WORK PROGRAMME Legend: En TBC = Low Risk Med Risk Tentative te Waipa DC to be confimred te Notes: Milestone Project Lead High r 1. "FTE" = averaged over the full period shown On Track Risk/Critical th 2. TBC = to be confirmed A 3. Plan change programme and timing to be confirmed Sc 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 A sc is Pol resources (Inter) ro Workstream Category Lead Status Progress Start Due Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec w FTE Dependency En te 1 Sch 1 Plan Changes3 Goal Julie 70% 14/11/2019 1/12/2020 1.1 Approved proj plan Med Risk Julie 0.4 not started 0% 3,4 1.2 Council PC bundle a Low Risk TBC 0.3 not started 0% 3,4 1.3 Council PC bundle b Low Risk TBC 0.4 not started 0% 3,4 1.3 Council PC bundle c

1.4 Council PC bundle d Low Risk TBC 0.2 not started 0% 3,4

April 2025 2 Nat Plng Standards Goal Julie 70% 1/11/2020 2.1 Approved proj plan Milestone Julie 0.1 60% 20/11/2019 2.2 Assess needs Milestone Julie 0.2 not started 0% 3,4 2.3 Migrate DP Med Risk TBC 0.1 not started 0% 2.4 Test, train, comms

2.5 Go-live Low Risk TBC 0.1 not started 0%

Tony April 2025 3 ePlan & submissions 3.1 Approved proj plan & Tony, George, Milestone 10% 29/11/2019 1/07/2020 budget Richard Milestone TBC 0.1 not started 3.2 Procure and contract Med Risk TBC 0.2 not started 3.3 Gap assessment Low Risk TBC 0.3 not started 1,4 3.4 Migrate DP Med Risk TBC 0.1 not started 3.5 Test, train, comms

3.6 Go-live Low Risk TBC 0.1 not started

4 Implement National Tony Directions & RMA, non schd 1 Med Risk TBC 0.1 Proposed 1 4.1 NPSUD Med Risk TBC 0.1 Proposed 1 4.2 NPSHPL Med Risk TBC 0.1 Scoping 1 4.3 three Waters Med Risk TBC 0.05 Proposed 1 4.4 NESFM Med Risk TBC 0.05 Amendment 1 Thi 4.5 NPSFM Th High Risk TBC 0.2 Draft 1 is 4.6 NPSIB Th High Risk Quentin 0.1 Bill 2 is 4.7 RMA stage 1 changes

4.8 RMA stage 2 reform High Risk TBC 0.8 Scoping 1

total pol rsrs ne 4.1 available on staf 2.3 55

STRATEGY Sets vision & long term strategic direction Implements RMA national direction Strategies, Structure Plans, Concept plans

LGA: over-riding legislation implements strategic direction RMA: specific planning legislation LTP; Annual Plan; Building; Bylaws; Implements strategic direction Infrastructure; CCOs; Governance; Sets nattional direction LGA enforcement District Plan; Resource Consents; RMA Enforcement

Page 2 of 2 56

INFORMATION ONLY

To: The Chairperson and Members of the Strategic Planning & Policy Committee and Community Boards (Copy to NZ Police, Fire Service, Te Awamutu and Cambridge Community Boards) From: Local Civil Defence Controller and Emergency Management Operations Manager Subject: Civil Defence Emergency Planning Quarterly Report (1 July 2019 – 31 October 2019) Meeting Date: Tuesday, 3 December 2019 File Reference: 50.38

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2 RECOMMENDATION

That the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee: a) RECEIVE the information contained in the ‘Civil Defence Emergency Planning Quarterly Report (1 July 2019 to 31 October 2019)’ report (document number 10129093) of Wayne Allan, Local Civil Defence Controller and David Simes, Emergency Management Operations Manager be received.

3 OPTIONS AND ASSESSMENT

The Local Civil Defence Controller and Emergency Management Operations Manager provide a quarterly information report for information purposes to this Committee on emergency management activities affecting the Western Waikato Emergency

10129093 57

Operating Area (WWEOA) which includes Waipā, Ōtorohanga and Waitomo District Councils.

This is the first quarterly report for the 2019/20 period to be provided to this Committee. A copy of this report will also be circulated to the Community Boards and the NZ Police and Fire Service.

4 STAFF COMMENT

For the period 1 July 2019 to 31 October 2019 the following civil defence emergency management activities have been undertaken.

Reduction

Work has commenced in conjunction with the Waikato Regional Council hazards team on mapping flood information. This will assist with the response and recovery plans associated with the identified areas.

Readiness

Prioritised work

Prioritised work is underway to improve the Western Waikato Area’s “Readiness” to respond to significant civil defence emergencies or disasters.

This will focus on the following areas: . Local Emergency Operating Centres (EOC’s) are maintained at high levels of readiness to support local, regional and national events. . Appropriate civil defence (CDC) facilities are identified and resourced to provide for evacuated or displaced persons, along with information to communities. . Community response plans and arrangements have the sustained capability to deliver effective, expedient and efficient responses tailored to local communities.

Civil defence resources

During recent EOC exercises, the requirement for dedicated laptops and cell phones for each functional area was identified. Staff are investigating the best options available for this and it is expected these resources will be purchased in the current financial year.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – December 2019 Civil Defence Emergency Planning Quarterly Report Page 2 of 6 58

Civil Defence Centre Project

As part of the Civil Defence Centre project, an inventory has been completed of all historical Civil Defence Centre or Warden Post signs. The deadline for the completion of this project is mid-2020 and a plan is being developed around socialising where and how the CDC’s will be activated during an event.

Community Notices

All three Council’s signed up for the National “Shake Out” Exercise in October this year. A campaign using social media to increase awareness of the Exercise was undertaken by all three Councils.

Response

Three severe weather Met Service “Orange” warnings were received for rain, wind and also a rain ‘1 in a 20 year event’ on 4 July 2019. This event consisted of short but intense rainfall over a 24 hour period with a level 2 river alert attained in the Waipā River during this period.

Community Response Plans (CRPs)

CRPs have been completed for Kawhia, Aotea, Marakopa and Mokau. Plans have been drafted and discussions held with Community Response members in Bennydale and Pureora National Park, Ōhaupō and Kaipaki, Pirongia, Ngāhinapōuri and Te Pahu.

Response plans should be completed within the next quarter and following this, the next group of CRPs will be commenced for Piopio, Puahue and Te Kawa/Waikeria.

Recovery

Recovery Plans have been completed and will now be reviewed and updated in conjunction with recent information released from the Group Recovery Manager. Debbie Lascelles has now been appointed as the Recovery Manager for Waipā.

General

Emergency Management Operations

A significant focus has been on increasing the capability across the emergency operating centres (EOCs) across all three Councils. A full EOC activation exercise was held at Waipa District Council on 25 September 2019 with all functions operationally tested. The exercise was based on a flooding event across the District and was extremely successful. A number of learnings was taken from the exercise and will be implemented. This was also attended by Waikato Regional Council hazards staff and the Waikato Regional Group Emergency Management Office who provided independent assessment and evaluation of the EOC response.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – December 2019 Civil Defence Emergency Planning Quarterly Report Page 3 of 6 59

Training

Foundation Course training continues to be carried out across all three Councils with new staff being captured as they join the organisations and a systematic approach of engaging with existing staff has been actioned. During this quarter 25 staff in total across the three Councils have completed this Foundation training.

Staff from all three Councils have attended the Integrated Training Framework Intermediate Courses, the Public Information Management and Welfare EOC Function Courses.

Training in the Delivery of Welfare Services in an Emergency and Civil Defence Supervisor was held on 24 and 25 September 2019. Thirteen people from the Waipā, Ōtorohanga and Waitomo Council staff or members of the Local Welfare Committee groups, attended this training and a further six people attended the Civil Defence Supervisor training. More training will be undertaken during the next quarter.

Welfare

The Waipā Welfare Committee carried out full set up at the Cambridge Raceway Civil Defence Centre. The set up included ensuring the venue could cope with the number of people and agencies required for the Centre and enabled the Committee to assess the best areas for each sub-function to be established. An assessment of the companion animal facilities were also completed and the venue proved to be more than adequately suitable.

The Committee also completed a table top exercise in preparation for the Group Welfare Exercise being carried out in November. They were required to provide a Situation Report and a Welfare Action Plan in response to an exercise in relation to an Ex-Tropical Cyclone hitting the whole Waikato Region.

The Western Waikato Welfare Committee met in September 2019 and adopted their Welfare Plan. They also completed the table top exercise in preparation for the Group Welfare Exercise in November.

With the establishment of both Local Welfare Committee’s further training of volunteers and staff are required for the setting up of Civil Defence Centres.

There are insufficient numbers if more than one Centre over the three Councils was required to be established. Identification of suitable people to undertake this training will be a priority for the next quarter.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – December 2019 Civil Defence Emergency Planning Quarterly Report Page 4 of 6 60

Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Joint Committee

The Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Joint Committee meeting was held on 2 September 2019. The unconfirmed minutes have been attached as Appendix 1.

Wayne Allan David Simes LOCAL CIVIL DEFENCE CONTROLLER EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS MANAGER

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – December 2019 Civil Defence Emergency Planning Quarterly Report Page 5 of 6 61

APPENDIX 1 Unconfirmed minutes of the meeting of the Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management Joint Committee held on 2 September 2019.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – December 2019 Civil Defence Emergency Planning Quarterly Report Page 6 of 6 62

Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Joint Committee MINUTES

Date: Monday, 2 September, 2019, 1:00 pm Location: Te Puia Room, Genesis Building Bryce Street Hamilton

Members Present: Cr H Vercoe - Chair (Waikato Regional Council) Cr L Tooman - Deputy Chair (Hamilton City Council) Cr A Goddard (Waitomo District Council) Cr T Lee (South Waikato District Council) Cr A Park (Taupō District Council) Cr J Bannon (Waipa District Council) Mayor J Barnes (Matamata Piako District Council) Cr A Williams (Otorohanga District Council)

Also Present Suzanne Vowles – Ministry of Civil Defence Emergency and Management

Staff Present: J Snowball - Group Manager/Controller J Baird – Hamilton City Council L Bartley – Democracy Advisor

Doc # 15087355 63 Minutes Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management 2 September 2019

1. Apologies

Apologies were received from Cr Rex Simpson, Mayor S Goudie from Thames-Coromandel District Council.

CD19/25 Moved by: Cr T Lee Seconded by: Mayor J Barnes

RESOLVED (SECTION A)

THAT the apologies of Cr R Simpson and Mayor S Goudie from Thames-Coromandel District Council be accepted.

The motion was put and carried

2. Confirmation of Agenda

CD19/26 Moved by: Cr A Park Seconded by: Cr J Bannon

RESOLVED (SECTION A)

THAT the agenda of the meeting of the Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group, as circulated, be confirmed as the business of the meeting subject to any change or order to reflect the order set out in the minutes of that meeting.

The motion was put and carried

3. Disclosures of Interest

There were no disclosures of interest.

4. Confirmation of Minutes

CD19/27 Moved by: Cr L Tooman Seconded by: Cr J Bannon

RESOLVED (SECTION A)

THAT the minutes of the previous meeting of the Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management Joint Committee dated 24 June 2019 were received and accepted as a true and accurate record.

The motion was put and carried

5. Appointment of Local Recovery Manager - Waipa District Council

Group Manager/Controller (J Snowball) presented the report to members to appoint a local recovery officer for Waipa District Council. The appointee is a staff member of Waipa District Council and the role of Recovery Manager will be additional to their permanent position. The Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management have recently released a

Doc # 15087355 Page 2 64 Minutes Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management 2 September 2019

director's guideline. The Director’s Guideline will assist the GEMO in providing information to all territorial authorities on the scope of the position, proposed job description, estimation of hours required along with the skill set required to undertake the position. This is work in progress for the Statutory Roles Advisory and Appointment Committee.

CD19/28 Moved by: Cr A Park Seconded by: Cr J Bannon

RESOLVED (SECTION A)

1. That the report (Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee 2 September 2019) be received.

2. That Debbie Lascelles be appointed as Local Recovery Manager for the Waipa District Council territorial area. The motion was put and carried

6. Information Communications Technology (ICT) Business Case

Group Manager / Controller (J Snowball) presented the report. He noted to members that whilst the building is state of art and meets the needs as an Emergency Coordination Centre, the facility needs further updates in relation to communications technology in order to meet the needs of all partners in an emergency.

1.07 pm - Cr A Williams entered the meeting.

A review of the ICT equipment has been reviewed and the following areas were found to be needing improvements:

• Printer technology - current have 2 separate printers each linked to a server that has limited access beyond Council staff. Need to buy one standalone printer which can be used by anyone.

• Computer Suite - insufficient computers currently available - need to increase from the 6 desktops and purchase 21 additional laptops and appropriate docking and storage.

• TV's screens + Hardware to connect to these - mobile tv screens

• Bluetooth speakers - to cover 3 offices once opened up

• Mobile phones - to replace existing stock. Will be used by staff on shift so that critical information is not lost by them using their own phones

• Security door look so that swipe access is required.

Members expressed surprise at the report - thought this would have been dealt with through the initial kitout. They were also concerned whether the budget identified would be sufficient or was it just enough. Group Manager/Controller (J Snowball) felt that a 10% increase as a contingency would be helpful.

CD19/29 Moved by: Mayor J Barnes Seconded by: Cr A Williams

Doc # 15087355 Page 3 65 Minutes Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management 2 September 2019

RESOLVED (SECTION A)

1. That the report (Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee 2 September 2019) be received.

RECOMMENDS (SECTION B)

2. That the use of financial reserves, to a maximum of $110,000 plus GST, for purchase and installation of increased ICT capability in the Group ECC and Hamilton EOC, be approved.

The motion was put and carried

7. Group Work Plan

Group Manager/Controller (J Snowball) presented the report. All priority one action points are on target with exception of one. The one that is off target is due to one Council stating that they do not have a recovery plan. An ongoing independent audit of regional CDEM shows that other Council's recovery plans could also be improved. The new Directors guide for Recovery will assist all Council's.

A brief update was given by the Group Manager/Controller regarding the independent audit. It was noted that all draft reports are due in by 14 September. 2 reports are fully signed off, 5 are in draft format and 4 are not yet received. Members felt that a press release should be issued to reassure public that all Council's have reviewed their audit reports and the region is in a good position to respond to an emergency.

CD19/30 Moved by: Cr A Williams Seconded by: Cr T Lee

That the report Group Work Plan – Progress towards completion of priority 1 actions (Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Joint Committee 2 September 2019) be received.

The motion was put and carried

8. GEMO - End of Year Performance - Financial Year 2018/2019

Group Manager/Controller (J Snowball) presented the report. The end of year financials show that the GEMO came in slightly under budget - this was due to staff vacancies throughout the year. The office is now fully resourced.

There is a slight overspend of $35,000 of allocated costs - this is predominantly due to corporate costs and outside of the control of the office.

Members discussed the targeted rate set by Waikato Regional Council - members believe that the targeted rate should be set against the number of properties each year rather than reducing due to increases in population. This would future proof the budget without having to revisit how funds are gathered. The Chair, Cr H Vercoe is to address with Waikato Regional Council.

Doc # 15087355 Page 4 66 Minutes Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management 2 September 2019

Surplus funds are carried over into the reserves fund for future year's expenditure.

CD19/31 Moved by: Cr A Goodard Seconded by: Cr L Tooman

That the report GEMO – end of year performance – financial year 2018/2019 (Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee 2 September 2019) be received.

The motion was put and carried

9. Group CDEM Delivery Arrangements

Group Manager/Controller (J Snowball) presented the report. Service level agreements with Matamata-Piako and Hauraki District Council's have been signed. Matamata-Piako have filled their staff vacancy for a full-time civil defence officer and Hauraki is at interview stage.

The Civil Defence audit reports will provide the new staff with a start of a business plan/work programme to commence their activities.

CD19/32 Moved by: Cr A Park Seconded by: Cr J Bannon

That the report Group CDEM Delivery Arrangements (Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee 23 August 2019) be received.

The motion was put and carried

10. Inter Group Collaborations

Group Manager/Controller (J Snowball) presented the report which outlined an application for resilience funding made by Taranaki CDEM Group, for the development of an Eruption Response and Recovery North Island Plan (TERRNIP). The application for funding is to scope out what the impact of an explosion would be. It is estimated that there is a 50% chance that Mt Taranaki will erupt within the next 50 years.

The Taranaki Group have asked for support from Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management as its neighbour. It was recognised that any potential eruption would likely impact the lower western and southern reaches of the Waikato region.

There is a need for CDEM Groups to establish working relationships with their neighbours and to engage in establishing a framework of response, roles of each entity for our shared hazards and risks

J Snowball highlighted that any support of the application, could mean that we are committing to supporting the Taranaki group, even if they are unsuccessful in their funding application. This could lead to an expectation of financial support in the future.

Doc # 15087355 Page 5 67 Minutes Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management 2 September 2019

Members discussed the benefits to be gained from establishing a better working relationship with the group and felt there was much to be gained through a better working relationship.

CD19/33 Moved by: Cr A Goddard Seconded by: Cr A Park

That the report Inter Group Collaboration – Taranaki CDEM Group (Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee 2 September 2019) be received.

The motion was put and carried

11. Update on the Status of Public Education and Public Engagement

Group Manager/Controller (J Snowball) presented the report.

The public education and public engagement is one of the Group Plan action plan points that is currently off track. He doesn't believe that being off track is a bad point as having reviewed the requirements, he does not believe that the current programme of work provides the best possible public engagement for those most vulnerable in our communities.

One of our Group plan goals is that our communities are ready - this is currently achieved by communities being prepared and aware of risk. One of the main activities used to deliver our goal is community response planning with community groups. Experience shows us that the most vulnerable people in communities are those that are not engaged through community response planning. There is no way to measure that we are reaching our most vulnerable communities.

Prioritisation of targeted community engagement needs to happen in a wider way. It is recommended that the action plan be updated so that the action point focusses on vulnerable communities. Need to have greater communication on warning systems, what hazards exist in each community. Some will have risk of tsunami, other will have great risk of flooding. So more individualised engagement is required depending on risk involved. This may require an increase in resources, including staff time, to achieve this. Also need to do further engagement with iwi. Some of the extra work will be achieved by the staff at the territorial authorities but the refocus needed to get staff to target most vulnerable communities.

The role of community engagement and education is probably one of the highest requirements of Civil Defence and Emergency Management - one of the most fundamental responsibilities.

Members discussed timing and the mechanism of delivery which are operational issues. However, it was felt that any decision of change will go beyond operational and into governance and strategy. Some outcomes will be identified by November however any increase in funding won't make this year's annual plan funding round.

The purpose of the report was to make committee aware and seek input from the committee.

Doc # 15087355 Page 6 68 Minutes Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management 2 September 2019

Members discussed that there were difficulties in keeping people engaged when no emergency had occurred. Until something actually happens, it is hard to keep community focussed and engaged. Member also discussed that the most vulnerable (homeless and those in poverty) will always rely on community to help them recover and get through an emergency. These pockets of communities live day to day - pay packet to pay packet - and simply are unable to become prepared due to circumstances.

CD19/34 Moved by: Cr A Williams Seconded by: Cr L Tooman

That the report, Update on the status of public education and public engagement, (Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee 02nd September 2019) be received.

The motion was put and carried

12. Summarised CEG Minutes

The report was presented by J Baird, Hamilton City Council. J Baird outlined:

• the results of the CEG meeting and minutes. Legal opinion discussed with regard to group plan standing with respect to Resource Management Act planning documents. It was noted that it was a very useful piece of work. Members requested a copy of the legal opinion.

• GIS - update on programme of work being undertaken. A significant update to spatial understanding of area and ensuring there is the right mix of people/skills in place to be effective.

• Waikato Lifelines Utility Group - hotspots where multiple lifeline utilities, core infrastructure, and hazards collide - what if something happened in that space. Work is progressing with external/commercial partners

The Chairperson also noted to members that he had attended the joint meeting of the Waikato/BOP Lifeline Utilities meeting recently and was good to see the collaboration/networking happening.

CD19/35 Moved by: Cr A Park Seconded by: Cr J Bannon

RESOLVED (SECTION A)

That the report Summarised CEG Minutes – 8 August 2019 (Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee 2 September 2019) be received.

The motion was put and carried

Doc # 15087355 Page 7 69 Minutes Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management 2 September 2019

13. Ministry of Civil Defence Emergency Management (MCDEM) Update

The Regional Emergency Management Advisor, Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, Suzanne Vowles presented a report, updating the work programme being undertaken:

• There are 2 plans out for consultation

o Risk Assessment and how it relates to group plan

o Recovery Preparedness Guidelines - need to discuss and provide feedback on how the guidelines will impact operations

• Also, recently released CIMS which explains how agencies work together. EMAT teams - Ministry have recently completed another part of the selection process. Members to be announced shortly.

• Legislation about new entity (NEMA) due out in early December - a number of regulations will be attached to the legislation. The regulations will be item specific. A project manager has been appointed to create the entity (NEMA) to do the work to enable change but project manager won't do change work.

• Members queried what the opinion of Central Govt was - S Vowles noted that central government is closely watching and will be providing feedback. Group Manager/Controller J Snowball is going to Wellington and should have more information to provide after that visit.

Members queried whether there was any progress on warning devices. It was noted that the number of communication tools and methods being relied on will depend on hazard and area affected. A tsunami warning must include sirens. It was noted that under legislation warning is the number one requirement. How to alert is part of a regional/national discussion. MCDEM only have ability to issue an ultra-short national message telling people of the emergency and directing them to seek further information locally.

CD19/36 Moved by: Mayor J Barnes Seconded by: Cr A Park

RESOLVED (SECTION A)

That the report Ministry of Civil Defence Emergency Management Update (CDEM Joint Committee 2 September 2019) be received.

The motion was put and carried

14. Items for Next Meeting

Members noted the following item for next meeting:

• Update on Hikurangi

Doc # 15087355 Page 8 70 Minutes Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management 2 September 2019

• Budgets

The Chairperson thanked members for their hard work over the last 3 years and looked forward to welcoming back members, if successful, to the new triennium.

2.40 pm The meeting closed.

Doc # 15087355 Page 9 71

INFORMATION ONLY

To: The Chairperson and Members of the Strategic Planning & Policy Committee From: Group Manager District Growth and Regulatory Services Subject: DISTRICT GROWTH AND REGULATORY SERVICES QUARTERLY REPORT Meeting Date: Tuesday, 3 December 2019 File Reference: 51.48

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The following appendices accompany this report: . Appendix 1 – Submission on the National Policy Statement - Urban Development (document number 10111926) . Appendix 2 – Submission on the National Policy Statement – Highly Productive Land (document number 10111920) . Appendix 3 – Submission on the Action for Healthy Waterways documentation (document number 10118852) . Appendix 4 – Submission on the Resource Management Act Amendment Bill 2019 (document number 10116078) . Appendix 5 – Quarterly statistics . Appendix 6 – Yearly statistics . Appendix 7 – Applications determined by the District Licensing Committee . Appendix 8 – Building consents issued . Appendix 9 – Major resource consent applications

10111702 72

2 RECOMMENDATION

That the ‘District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report’ (document number 10111702) of Wayne Allan, Group Manager District Growth and Regulatory Services be received.

3 NATIONAL LEGISLATION, REGULATIONS, PLANNING & POLICY INITIATIVES

A number of Central Government policy initiatives have been progressed recently as part of the Government’s Urban Growth Agenda. These comprise the following:

National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD)

The NPS – UD focuses on the role of the planning system (under the RMA) in enabling growth and regulating land use in urban areas. It seeks to provide for growth by requiring councils to provide development capacity to meet the diverse demands of communities; address unnecessary regulatory constraints; and encourage quality urban environments.

It is proposed that the NPS – UD will replace the NPS on Urban Development Capacity which came into effect in 2016.

The NPS – UD contains objectives and policies in 4 key areas, being: . Future Development Strategy – requires councils to undertake long term planning to accommodate growth and provide for well-functioning cities. . Making room for growth in RMA plans – requires councils to allow for growth ‘up’ and ‘out’ in a way that contributes to a quality urban environment, ensuring that rules do not unnecessarily constrain growth. . Evidence for good decision-making – requires councils to develop, monitor and maintain an evidence base about demand, supply and prices for housing and land, to inform their planning decisions. . Processes for engaging on planning – ensures council planning is aligned and co-ordinated across urban areas and issues of concern to tangata whenua are taken into account.

A NPS is considered to be the most effective mechanism to support system-wide, long term changes.

A copy of Waipa District Council’s submission on the NPS-UD is attached to this report as Appendix 1.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 2 of 30 10111702 73

National Policy Statement – Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL)

The NPS – HPL focuses on land that is highly productive for primary production, which is identified using the Land Use Capability Classification system (LUC). The LUC classifies land into 8 classes – land that has a Class 1 rating is the most versatile and has the fewest limitations for its use, whilst land that is classified as LUC Class 8 is the least versatile with the most limitations on its use.

Under the NPS – HPL, councils are required to identify highly productive land that is classified as Classes 1, 2 or 3 under the LUC system, until such time as they are able to complete their own regional or district assessments.

The purpose of the NPS – HPL is to improve the way highly productive land is managed under the RMA. A focus is to protect highly productive land from inappropriate subdivision, use and development. Councils will have some flexibility as to how they apply this through regional policy statements and district plans. The proposal does not impact on existing urban areas and land that councils have identified as future urban zones in district plans.

A copy of Waipa District Council’s submission on the NPS – HPL is attached to this report as Appendix 2.

Action for Healthy Waterways

The new requirements outlined in the Action for Healthy Waterways documentation are intended to provide: . Better management of stormwater and wastewater. . No further loss of wetlands and streams. . Tighter controls to prevent sediment loss from earthworks and urban development. . Farmers and growers understanding and managing environmental risks and following good practice. . New standards and limits on some farming activities in some regions or catchments.

This will include: speeding up the implementation of freshwater regulations through changes to the RMA; an updated NPS for Freshwater Management which aims to protect threatened species and habitats and bring freshwater to a healthy state within a generation; an updated National Environmental Standard for Sources of Human Drinking Water; and new National Environmental Standards for Freshwater and Wastewater.

A copy of Waipa District Council’s submission on the Action for Healthy Waterways documentation is attached to this report as Appendix 3.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 3 of 30 10111702 74

Resource Management Act (RMA) Amendment Bill 2019

Proposed key changes to the RMA 1991 include: a) Repealing the changes enacted in 2017, which include restoring: i) Participation rights, particularly in respect of resource consents relating to subdivision and residential activity. ii) Appeal rights in relation to decisions on resource consents relating to subdivisions and residential activity. iii) The presumption that subdivision is to be restricted unless expressly permitted by a district plan rule. iv) Financial contributions, Councils can now impose financial contributions as a consent condition after April 2022 (excluding Ministry of Education and Ministry of Defence). b) For RMA enforcement, improving enforcement under the RMA by: i) Increasing the maximum infringement fees for offences under the Act. ii) Empowering the Environmental Protection Authority to undertake investigation and enforcement actions under the RMA, even where no local authority is involved.

A copy of Waipa District Council’s submission on the RMA Amendment Bill 2019 is attached to this report as Appendix 4.

4 SUB-REGIONAL PLANNING & POLICY INITIATIVES

Future Proof

Future Proof now has an expanded sub-regional role in that it comprises membership from Central Government as well as Auckland Council for the purposes of providing overall governance for the Hamilton to Auckland Corridor Plan and the Hamilton Waikato Metro Spatial Plan projects.

In addition, the Future Proof partners, through Future Proof, are preparing for the next Urban Development Capacity Assessment which is to be undertaken in 2020. To inform this work, Future Proof have engaged consultants to do a sub-regional industrial land capacity assessment which is underway. Shortly, consultants will be appointed to undertake a sub-regional assessment of housing preferences.

Hamilton to Auckland Corridor Plan

This project has reached the conclusion of its first phase. The project focus is a 100 year shared spatial intent for the corridor. There are number of initiatives for further work that were identified at the conclusion of the first phase. Three are of relevance to Waipā. The first initiative is a sub-regional three waters investigation; the second

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 4 of 30 10111702 75

is sub-regional blue-green network planning; and the third is the Hamilton Waikato Metro Spatial Plan. Work on the first stage of the three waters study has concluded with an initial scoping assessment. Considerable further funding from the Future Proof partners is being sought to do the second phase which entails a detailed assessment of the three waters situation. The second initiative, the blue-green network planning, is still at an early formative stage. The third initiative is discussed separately below.

Hamilton Waikato Metro Spatial Plan

This project is focussed on a long 100 year time frame for the greater Hamilton area including the area from Taupiri in the north to Cambridge and Te Awamutu in the south. The project is reaching the end of its first scoping phase of work. The second phase will be similar to the three waters study in requiring a more detailed analysis and testing of development scenarios developed in the first phase of work. There will also be a round of targeted consultation on a preferred development scenario during this phase.

5 DISTRICT PLANNING & POLICY DEVELOPMENT

Ngāhinapōuri Village Concept Plan

We are working with Boffa Miskell and key stakeholders to complete a final draft document which will be workshopped with the Strategic Planning & Policy Committee prior to engagement with the Ngāhinapōuri community.

We have recently consented a 46-lot residential development at Ngāhinapōuri, as the first stage of the structure plan development. We are having ongoing discussions with major landowners in the structure plan area.

Kihikihi Urban Development Plan

Community engagement on a Draft Projects & Initiatives document closed on 18 October 2019. We are reviewing the feedback received.

T6 Growth Cell Structure Plan (St Leger Road, Te Awamutu)

Community Engagement on the draft Structure Plan closed on 18 October 2019. We are reviewing the feedback received and are meeting with a number of landowners who have properties within the T6 Growth Cell, as part of that process.

T11 Growth Cell Structure Plan (Cambridge Road, Te Awamutu)

Community Engagement on the draft Structure Plan closed on 18 October 2019. We are reviewing the feedback received.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 5 of 30 10111702 76

C4 Growth Cell Structure Plan (Lamb Street, Leamington, Cambridge)

Our internal experts have reviewed technical information provided by the consultant engaged by Council. A meeting has been held where feedback was able to be provided.

Pirongia Town Concept Plan

We are finalising the Request for Proposal (RFP) for this piece of work.

6 WAIPĀ DISTRICT PLAN CHANGES

The following plan changes were approved or made operative in the quarter.

Plan Change 2 – Protected Trees

Proposed Plan Change 2 seeks to change from using the Royal New Zealand Institute of Horticulture tree evaluation method for scoring protected trees to using the Standard Tree Evaluation Method (STEM). The STEM system is used by most councils across New Zealand and is widely accepted as best practice.

The plan change was publicly notified on 29 November 2018 for submissions and again on 7 February 2019 for further submissions. Fifteen submissions were received with 50 submission points and five further submissions were received. Following the hearing on 17 June 2019, the Decision report was released on 1 August 2019, the appeal period closed with no appeals received.

Subsequently Plan Change 2 was made approved at the Council meeting on 24 September 2019. Plan Change 2 was made operative on Monday, 14 October 2019.

Plan Change 9 – Regional Infrastructure Technical Specification

Plan Change 9 updates the Waipa District Plan to remove references to the Waipa Subdivision and Development Manual and replaces these with reference to the Regional Infrastructure Technical Specifications (RITS). The RITS was adopted and used by most of the councils across the Waikato Region.

Plan Change 9 became operative on 15 July 2019.

Private Plan Change 10 – Eastern access to Titanium Park

Plan Change 10 makes changes to the Waipa District Plan and the Airport Business Zone Structure Plan to provide for an amended access for the eastern side of the Airport off SH21. The associated Notice of Requirement secures the necessary land to provide for the relocated roundabout that will form the main gateway to the Airport and Business Park.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 6 of 30 10111702 77

Plan Change 10 became operative on 16 September 2019.

Plan Changes in progress

There are currently no council or private plan changes in progress.

Plan Changes anticipated

Council staff have a list of plan change “fix ups” which they are working through. We anticipate reporting to and seeking direction from Council in February/March 2020 on which of these plan changes to progress.

7 CONSENTS

Resource Consents

The following were processed and approved during the quarter: . 148 non-notified resource consents comprising 67 subdivision and 81 land use consents. . 1 limited notified land use consents . Zero publicly notified land use consents . 28 deemed permitted boundary activity notices . 229 Land information memoranda (LIMs).

All consents, notices and LIMs were processed within statutory timeframes.

The significant planning consents issued in the quarter are shown in Appendix 9.

Building Consents

There were 311 building consents issued with a total value of $121,365,695. This included 110 new dwellings. When compared to the same period in 2018 this is a decrease of 41 building consents issued.

Of the 110 building consents for new dwellings: . 39 were in Cambridge, . 38 in Te Awamutu or Kihikihi and . 33 were spread across the remainder of the district.

There were 345 Code Compliance Certificates issued for completed work compared to 415 for the same period in 2018.

The significant building consents issued in the quarter are:

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 7 of 30 10111702 78

. Sports and Community Centre – Forkert Road, Ohaupo – Ohaupo Rugby Sports Club Inc - $1,932,000. . Infrastructure associated with APL Building - 140 Laurent Road Cambridge – Bardowie Investments Ltd $10,000,000. . Community Centre Cambridge Oaks Lifestyle Village – 14 Terry Came Drive Cambridge – Cambridge Oaks Land Holdings Ltd - $2,600,000. . Warehouse and Offices for Summit Scaffolding – 127 Ingram Road RD2 Hamilton – Ingram Road Investments Ltd - $2,300,000. . Offices, Lab and Honey Storage - 196 Airport Road RD2 Hamilton - Interim Investments & Equities Ltd - $2,000,000. . Externa Envelop for APL Building - 140 Laurent Road Cambridge – Bardowie Investments Ltd - $17,000,000. . Office Building Stage 1 Structure Only – 204 Sloane Street Te Awamutu – Murphy Property Development Ltd - $2,600,000. . Office Building Stage 2 – 204 Sloane Street Te Awamutu – Murphy Property Development Ltd - $2,500,000. . Offices Attached to APL Building - 140 Laurent Road Cambridge – Bardowie Investments Ltd - $13,700,000. . Block E Commercial Retail and Offices – 1/94 Queen Street Cambridge – Porter Faster JV Ltd - $3,110,900.

Level of service issues identified

In September 106 consents were processed within 20 days however two consents exceeded the 20 day requirement. One was due to an administrative error and the other due to staff turnover combined with annual leave constraints.

Infrastructure development

The construction season, from 1 October 2019 to 1 April, sees on-site construction peaking over the summer period.

Projects of significance include: . Earthworks and infrastructure build within T1 growth cell in Te Awamutu. . First stage of infrastructure build within T8 growth cell in Te Awamutu, with three further stages in the planning phase to follow. . Planning and design work for C2/3 growth cell in Cambridge. . Cambridge’s C3 growth cell earthworks are now consented and due to commence construction. . Residential development on Bond Road, Te Awamutu is nearing completion and sign off.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 8 of 30 10111702 79

. APL development in Cambridge North requires continued monitoring of infrastructure builds. . Vogel Street, subdivision adjacent to C1 growth cell in Cambridge under construction. . Pukekura C6 stage 3A in Leamington is under construction. . Kihikihi, Haultain Street is consented and infrastructure is in the design phase. . N1 consent for subdivision in Ngāhinapōuri has been conditioned and we are awaiting design plans for approval . Various infill and small lot rural subdivisions within the whole District are also being conditioned and monitored.

Due to the current volume of applications being assessed a consultant has been engaged to temporarily assist whilst recruitment of permanent staff is underway. It is anticipated the consultant will only be required until early in the New Year.

8 COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT

Animal control

Nineteen dog attack allegations were received with 4 relating to an attack or bite on an adult. The remainder were attacks on other animals including a pig, chickens, sheep and other dogs. The attacks on people were relatively minor with two requiring cleaning and treatment at a medical centre.

32 complaints were received of stock on roads or trespassing. In the majority of cases the stock had been removed from the road prior to Councils arrival. In one instance a car was reported as hitting an animal on the road but this was resolved by the parties with no Council attendance required.

A total of 8,132 dogs were registered in the District with another 417 unregistered. If a dog is unregistered for the first time, a warning letter or infringement notice fine will be sent. For repeat offenders staff are prioritising seizure ahead of fines.

119 are classified as menacing and 8 as dangerous. Any classified dogs that are not registered will be the priority for seizure. Compliance checks are on-going for the balance.

During the quarter four dogs were rehomed. At the end of the quarter 15 dogs were either in the pound or in foster care.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 9 of 30 10111702 80

Enforcement

87 District Plan complaints received resulted in 30 breaches being detected. These mainly relate to secondary dwellings, animal behaviour complaints and breaches of setback distances.

95 parking complaints received resulted in 15 infringements and 25 warning letters being issued. Overstay parking and HTs parked in the Residential zone accounted for over half the complaints.

The Enforcement team continued with the swimming pool barrier inspection regime with a total of 132 pool barriers being inspected.

Environmental health

Eight food/food premises complaints and one alcohol licensing complaint were received. These related to hygiene concerns, illness, complaints about food or administrative enquires as to whether premises were registered. None resulted in formal action.

One hundred and forty-three noise complaints were received. These resulted in 12 written and 14 verbal noise directions however no stereo equipment needed to be seized. There were 10 unreasonable noise complaints the majority relating to construction noise.

One hairdresser remains unregistered for the 2019/20 year and has been issued a final warning. The same operator narrowly avoided prosecution for the same offence last year.

Sixty-one food premises audits were completed. Four received notices for matters of non-compliance.

Wayne Allan GROUP MANAGER DISTRICT GROWTH AND REGULATORY SERVICES

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 10 of 30 10111702 81

APPENDIX 1: SUBMISSION ON THE NATIONAL POLICY STATEMENT – URBAN DEVELOPMENT (document number 10111926)

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 11 of 30 10111702 82

Submission

National Policy Statement on Urban Development

October 2019

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 1 of 14 Development

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 2 of 14 Development

- Submission on the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2019

- By: Waipa District Council - Submission deadline: 10 October 2019

- Introduction Waipa District Council (the Council) welcomes the opportunity to provide comment on Ministry for the Environment’s proposed National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD).

- General Comments 1. Waipa District Council is supportive of the introduction of a National Policy Statement on Urban Development in providing greater national guidance on long term strategic urban development issues

2. The Council supports the vision of the proposed NPS-UD for achieving well-functioning thriving cities and recognises the vital role our urban environments play in the overall wellbeing of the country. The Council does believe, however, that this vision should be expanded to include towns as it is generally these urban entities that directly support the surrounding rural hinterland and provide much needed services to the farming, tourism and conservation sectors. Towns also help tie the rural economy (in its broadest sense) to the urban economies of the cities.

3. The Council supports the broadening of the scope of the proposed NPS-UD over the existing National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity.

4. The Council supports the NPS-UD advocated approach of concentrating future development around existing urban centres, with clear parameters for greenfield developments and urban intensification. This proposal aligns well with the Waipa 2050 Growth Strategy and the wider sub-regional Waikato Future Proof strategy.

5. The Council supports the proposed distinction of having two categories or urban environment with major urban centres having to meet more stringent requirements than other urban environments. In this regard it is noted that Waipa District Council along with Waikato Regional Council and Waikato District Council are included in the Hamilton major urban area. It is recommended that only those portions of the Waipa district (together probably with those adjoining portions of the Waikato district) should be taken into account when considering applying more stringent requirements. The Waipa District Council is a small well managed district, comprising a mix of highly productive farmland, two medium sized towns and a few villages. It’s town and village built environments are not overly complex or sophisticated and currently administered using a fairly simple range of land use zones, rule provisions and development controls in the Waipa District Plan. It is the Council’s view that its current strategic planning framework, the Waipa 2050 Growth Strategy, working together with the Waipa District Plan and Long Term Plan provides a well-accepted and generally appropriate platform for

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 3 of 14 Development

the districts urban areas. Application of the NPS-UD’s proposed additional stringent requirements to our towns would be unnecessarily onerous, expensive and difficult to justify.

6. The Council supports the NPS-UD proposals for local authorities having a Future Development Strategy (FDS) that guides where and how future development occurs and how it will be supported by long term plans, infrastructure strategies and land transport plans. It also supports the proposal to introduce more flexible timing to help better align these different planning processes. It is noted that while the proposals specify that only major urban centres would be required to prepare a FDS, it is the Council’s view that the Council would subscribe to a joint FDS for the sub-region that is aligned with the existing Future Proof strategy or an updated and amended version of it1. The Council also supports the partnership of iwi in the preparation and updating of this strategy.

7. The Proposed NPS-UD should make stronger links between the Local Government Act 2002, the Resource Management Act 1991, and the Land Transport Management Act 2003, in particular the plans and processes that impact local government under these statutes. In the local context there is also the need to give effect to the Te Ture Whaimana o Te Awa o Waikato - the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River as the primary direction-setting document for the Waikato and Waipa Rivers and their catchments.

8. The Council supports the proposed requirement for all urban environments to assess demand and supply of development capacity to better understand current local conditions and inform development planning. At the same time Government still needs to acknowledge that supply is constrained by inadequate infrastructure funding and alignment between Housing and Business Assessments and the Long-Term Plans of councils. It is fair to note that most councils continue to struggle to fund the major infrastructure required support urban development. The options available for resolving financing gaps are severely limited and reliance on private funding is inadequate.

9. The Council supports the intention to broaden of meaning of amenity and recommends adding the social and cultural aspects of amenity when applied to urban environments. Much of the associated amenity value of urban environments can be considered as centring on the presence or absence of people. Urban places that are thronging with people (as opposed to vehicles) are generally regarded as having good amenity. The Council also recognises that accommodating the reality of ongoing change in the urban environment using the current RMA framework for considering amenity can be is limited and can be restrictive.

10. The Council supports the NPS-UD proposals regarding major urban centres having provisions that support appropriate intensification (Hamilton City Council already has these). The proposal to gazette new provisions directing where intensification must be enabled in major centres within 18 months is considered questionable and probably unnecessarily prescriptive. Doesn’t evidence suggest that most, if not all major centres are already implementing such policies?

11. The Council notes that the timing of the consultation on the proposed NPS-UD is unfortunate. The discussion document was released for comment as our current Council was concluding it triennium with little opportunity for consideration before its final meeting on 24 September 2019. In addition consultation coincides with that on the Government’s proposed National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land as well as overlapping with consultation on the Government’s Actions for Healthy

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 4 of 14 Development

Waterways document. Not only are there interdependencies between these three proposals, they are being made against a background of wider change and uncertainty with the introduction of integrated spatial planning as part of the Government’s urban growth agenda and a commitment to thoroughly reform the RMA.

More specific comment is provided below using the same questions listed in the discussion document. It should be noted that this more specific feedback reflects a collaborative contribution drawn from a small team of staff and councillors in the Council.

Specific Comments

1. Question 1 Do you support a national policy statement on urban development that aims to deliver quality urban environments and make room for growth? Why/Why not? - Are there other tools under the RMA, other legislation or non-statutory tools that would be more effective in achieving a quality urban environment and making room for growth?

1.1 The Council supports the proposed NPS-UD and its aims to support having quality urban environments while making room for growth. The Council also notes that infrastructure funding and development financing constraints need to be better acknowledged and addressed. 1.2 The approach of concentrating development around identified urban centres, with clear parameters around greenfield developments, aligns well with planning within Waipa and the wider Future Proof sub-region. Appropriate intensification and allowance for mixed uses around town centres, neighbourhood centres and along main transport corridors is agreed to and is happening, but needs to be planned for and integrated with the required supporting community services and urban amenities (blue green spaces and transport options). 1.3 To achieve the vision of the NPS-UD of thriving urban environments, not only does the necessary infrastructure to support intensification need to be planned for, but funding from new options for infrastructure financing is urgently required. 1.4 There are non-statutory tools available that are more effective in setting the national framework in defining what is meant by quality urban environments, such as the existing mandated 7 Cs of the New Zealand Urban Design Protocol, of which Waipa and most major urban centres are signatories. It would be straightforward for MFE to restate this non-statutory guidance that has already been embedded in many councils day-to-day practice. 1.5 Council staff are of the view that zone based plans are generally easier to use and therefore better than effects based plans particularly for consent planners. Although there is repetition the need for cross-referencing is avoided and it is harder to overlook considerations where cross-referencing is used.

2. Question 2 Do you support the approach of targeting the most directive policies to our largest and fastest growing urban environments? Why/why not? - Do you support the approach used to determine which local authorities are categorised as major urban centres? Why/why not? - Can you suggest any alternative approaches for targeting the policies in the NPSUD?

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 5 of 14 Development

2.1 The Council supports targeting the most directive policies to the largest and fastest growing urban environments. As noted in our general comments these more stringent requirements are inappropriate and too resource intensive for smaller councils such as Waipa managing towns and rural areas. Our district plan has a fairly simple land use zoning classification for urban areas. Guided by our strategic town concept plans and introducing the new National Planning Standards format we are able to use precinct overlays to manage some proposed intensification where appropriate around town centres, neighbourhood centres, parks and main urban transport corridors. At this stage, and based on current evidence, we expect intensification to be secondary to greenfield development in our two towns. This may change over time but what we do see is growing acceptance by communities and developers of the need for a greater diversity of housing types to be provided for in greenfield and infill developments to accommodate differing housing wants and needs. We already have an established set of ‘deferred zoning’ provisions in our district plan that serve to demarcate and manage land use in selected areas adjoining our towns for future greenfield development. The future urban zoning in these areas can be uplifted without the need for an RMA plan change process. Originally identified in 2009, these areas have been reviewed, consulted on and updated in 2016-2017. On the basis of the current Waipa 2050 Growth Strategy we anticipate that we have identified sufficient additional land to accommodate projected population growth over the next 30 years. 2.2 The Council reiterates the need to clarify and limit the extent of the more stringent provisions that are applicable for Hamilton as a large urban centre/ city, for the adjoining Waipa and Waikato districts. It would make sense to limit the extent to the Hamilton urban area and possibly those adjoining areas of the Waipa and Waikato districts that have been or are likely to be, earmarked for inclusion in the city to accommodate anticipated growth. it should be acknowledged that Hamilton is fairly unique in the New Zealand context in that its urban extent by and large, coincides with its area of administrative jurisdiction. Hamilton makes use of existing agreements with both adjoining district councils to identify and transfer in a staged manner blocks of contiguous greenfield land that are anticipated as being required for the city’s growth according to Hamilton’s growth strategy. It would make sense that the more stringent provisions would pertain to this identified area for long term urban expansion and inclusion in the city’s jurisdiction. At the same time, there should also be clarification for inter-regional coordination under proposed Policy P10A that may be affected by the definition of ‘urban environment’ more particularly in the vicinity of Hamilton airport in Waipa’s case.

Future Development Strategy 3. Question 3 Do you support the proposed changes to Future Direction Strategies (FDSs) overall? If not, what would you suggest doing differently? - Do you support the approach of only requiring major urban centres to undertake an FDS? Would there be benefits of requiring other local authorities to undertake a strategic planning process? - What impact will the proposed timing of the FDS have on statutory and other planning processes? In what ways could the timing be improved?

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 6 of 14 Development

3.1 The Council is of the view that preparing a FDS would be useful to all high growth councils and not just those with major centres. In the case of Waipa, the Council has since 2010, already had the benefit of an equivalent to a FDS in its Waipa 2050 Growth Strategy. Not only is this non-statutory strategic document incorporated into its RMA Waipa District Plan (refer to its Section 1 Strategic Framework, Section 14 Deferred Zone, Appendix S1- Growth Cell, Staging, Preconditions for Release and Infrastructure Requirements) but is also currently used to inform and underpin the preparation of Council’s Long Term Plan and Infrastructure Strategy. For the purposes of meeting the requirements of existing NPS-UDC, the Council worked with its Future Proof partners to prepare a single combined FDS that entailed the tweaking and updating of the existing sub-regional Future Proof strategy which has been in existence since 2009. The Future Proof Strategy settlement pattern is entrenched in the Waikato Regional Policy Statement and is considered to work well for coordinating cross boundary urban development issues across the four councils involved in the greater Hamilton sub-region. It is probably accurate to say that the Future Proof Strategy currently works less well in co-ordinating the cross boundary issues between Auckland and the northern Waikato. This situation may well be improved through the widened membership of Future Proof including Auckland and Central Government with current work on the Hamilton to Auckland Corridor Plan. 3.2 The Council supports the strengthening of the requirements of FDSs and the intention of the FDS to inform not only the Council’s Resource Management Act (RMA) plans but also significantly its Long Term Plan (LTP) and Infrastructure Strategy. As mentioned in 3.1 above, the Council is already doing a version of this with its Waipa 2050 Growth Strategy. It is the Council’s view that the linkage described in the discussion document is weak and reference to the timing and sequence of steps set out in SOLGM’s submission might be helpful. In any event It would be helpful to better clarify and align the FDS to these other important local government required strategies. 3.3 As regards the timeframes for Housing and Business Assessments (HBAs) and FDSs, the undertaking of HBAs and updating the FDS every 3 years may well be warranted in a high growth period, but in the inevitable downturn periods in the property development cycle, this requirement may well be excessive. Particularly for smaller councils like Waipa it may well be more appropriate to be more flexible as to timing. It should be noted that provided good dashboard indices information is provided by central government to enable local councils to monitor development capacity supply and demand factors, then local councils are in a position to remain well informed as to local development trends. With good monitoring evidence available, councils are able to regularly update their strategic decisions regarding the planning for development and provision of required infrastructure without the added stipulation and burden of undertaking a HBA and updating a FDS. 3.3 In addition to having the preparation of the FDS being based on the findings of the HBA capacity assessments, the finance funding needed to provide the required supporting infrastructure has to be similarly taken into account in the FDS and the planning and sequencing of future growth cells.

Making room for growth Describing quality urban environments 4. Question 4 Do you support the proposed approach of the NPSUD providing national level direction about the features of a quality urban environment? Why/why not? - Do you support the features of a quality urban environment stated in draft objective O2? Why/why not? - What impacts do you think the draft objectives O2–O3 and policies P2A–P2B will have on decision making?

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 7 of 14 Development

4.1 The Council supports the intention of the NPS-UD having an objective that provides a clear description of what is meant by a quality urban environment. The description provided in Objective O2 in the discussion document is unclear. As presently described in O2, It could be fairly argued that an urban environment may well meet the objective but still not be regarded as being a quality urban environment in the eyes of the affected community. Consideration should be given to incorporating established 7Cs in the MFE Urban Design Protocol. The protocol is well established and supported by councils already and could be given increased weight as an objective. 4.2 The Council supports the proposed approach of enabling a range of housing choices, working environments and business locations. Enabling density and provision for a range of uses has the potential to create more vibrancy and mixed use in cities and towns. 4.3 The wording of b) under proposed Objective O2 is considered unclear as to what is meant or intended to be achieved? 4.4 While the wording of proposed policy P2Aa) is supported as contributing to achieving a quality urban environment it is unclear how the proposed policy P2Ab) as presently worded, contributes to achieving a quality urban environment. 4.5 Similarly, the wording of policy P2Ac) is supported while the wording of P2Ad) is considered not appropriate or relevant to achieving a quality urban environment. 4.6 The proposed wording of P2Ba) and P2Bc) seem fine and appropriate but the wording of P2Bb) and P2Bd) are considered totally inappropriate in requiring all local authorities to have particular regard to the ‘benefits and costs of urban development at national, inter-regional , regional and district scale as well as locally’ when updating plans or making decisions on consent application. Particularly when considering urban development in a town context by a small council.

Amenity values in urban environments 5. Question 5 Do you support the inclusion of proposals to clarify that amenity values are diverse and change over time? Why/why not? - Do you think these proposals will help to address the use of amenity to protect the status quo? - Can you identify any negative consequences that might result from the proposed objective and policies on amenity? - Can you suggest alternative ways to address urban amenity through a national policy statement?

5.1 The Council does not support the wording of proposed Objective O4 as it is so general and all applying as to be meaningless. It is considered local communities, Iwi and TAs are best placed to determine what amenity values are and are best determined and amended over time through the consultation done during plan review and change processes. 5.2 Policy P3A is not supported. it is difficult to see how a consent application would be assessed or a decision defended when amenity could mean anything to anyone at any one time. 5.3 If the underlying issue is how to achieve intensification of existing urban areas when the existing amenity of an area is being affected, this issue is better addressed through specifying performance standards for intensification development to achieve such that an intended new but still quality built environment is achieved.

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 8 of 14 Development

Enabling opportunities for development 6. Question 6 Do you support the addition of direction to provide development capacity that is both feasible and likely to be taken up? Will this result in development opportunities that more accurately reflect demand? Why/why not?

6.1 The Council does not support the addition of further direction regarding the provision of development capacity as it considers its current plan sufficiently flexible at present to accommodate a variety of unforeseen demands.

Ensuring plan content provides for expected levels of development 7. Question 7 Do you support proposals requiring objectives, policies, rules, and assessment criteria to enable the development anticipated by the zone description? Why/why not? Do you think requiring zone descriptions in district plans will be useful in planning documents for articulating what outcomes communities can expect for their urban environment? Why/why not? Do you think that amenity values should be articulated in this zone description? Why/why not?

7.1 We support proposals requiring objectives, policies, rules and assessment criteria to enable the development anticipated by zone description, as it is important to make sure intended development can actually occur. 7.2 We support the inclusion of zone descriptions including amenity values as they provide useful guidance as to the outcomes intended when considering resource consent applications.

Providing for intensification 8. Question 8 Do you support policies to enable intensification in the locations where its benefits can best be achieved? Why/why not? What impact will these policies have on achieving higher densities in urban environments? What option/s do you prefer for prescribing locations for intensification in major urban centres? Why? If a prescriptive requirement is used, how should the density requirement be stated? (For example, 80 dwellings per hectare, or a minimum floor area per hectare.) What impact will directly inserting the policy to support intensification in particular locations through consenting decisions have?

8.1 We support enabling intensification in locations where benefits can best be achieved. This supports the viability of public transport, and aligns with protecting highly productive land, biodiversity values and freshwater systems. 8.2 The decision on whether to intensify needs to be underpinned by several considerations, such as: - Community aspirations - Evidence from consultation and housing and business capacity assessments. - The availability and funding of infrastructure. 8.3 Policy P6A is generally supported but flexibility should be allowed for to distinguish the realities of applying it to city and town urban environments.

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 9 of 14 Development

8.4 The descriptive approach of proposed P6C Option 1 is considered preferable to the prescriptive approach of Option 2 but isn’t really applicable to the urban environments of the Waipa district. 8.5 Much of the rest of Question 7 is not relevant to the Waipa district context.

9. Question 9. Do you support inclusion of a policy providing for plan changes for out of sequence greenfield development and/or greenfield development in locations not currently identified for development? How could the example policy better enable quality urban development in greenfield area? Are the criteria in the example policy sufficiently robust to manage environmental effects to ensure a quality urban environment, while providing for this type of development? To what extent should developers be required to meet the costs of development, including the costs of infrastructure and wider impacts on network infrastructure, and environmental and social costs (recognising that these are likely to be passed on to future homeowners/beneficiaries of the development)? What impacts will this have on the uptake of development opportunities? - What improvements could be made to this policy to make development more responsive to demand in suitable locations beyond areas already identified for urban development?

9.1 The Council broadly supports inclusion of a policy in the NPS-UD that provides for out-of-sequence greenfield development policy, although such development should still be aligned with the districts growth strategy and infrastructure provision as well as wider plans and strategies such as Future Proof and the Hamilton Metro Plan in the case of Waipa. 9.2 Any out of sequence greenfield development being proposed would also need to be carefully assessed in terms of realistic development costs and risks of unforeseen costs being borne by council and existing communities. 9.3 There is need for a balance to be struck between being flexible and responsive and being too reactive to unplanned and unaligned proposals and plan changes that can be resource intensive and dependant on time consuming and expensive private development agreements to secure the necessary infrastructure funding.

10. Question 10. Do you support limiting the ability for local authorities in major urban centres to regulate the number of car parks required for development? - Why/why not? Which proposed option could best contribute to achieving quality urban environments? - What would be the impact of removing minims in just high – and medium- density commercial, residential and mixed-use areas, compared with all areas of a major urban centre? - How would the 18month implementation timeframe impact on your planning processes? - What support should be considered to assist local authorities when removing the requirement to provide car parking to ensure the ongoing management of car parking resources?

10.1 While this proposed provision is aimed at major urban centres and therefore not applicable to the towns of Waipa, it is recognised that requirements for providing on site car parking for businesses and mixed use areas in town centres is onerous and needs to change. Public parking is a contentious issue in our town centres but there is grudging recognition that achieving good public amenity in town centres is not synonymous with providing lots of space for vehicle parking on main roads but rather providing space for the movement and interaction of people.

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 10 of 14 Development

11. Question 11. Do you think that central government should consider more directive intervention in local authority plans?

11.1 The Council advocates caution with regard to considering having more directive intervention in district plans. The government would need clear evidence of a pervasive problem in current development controls to lead it to intervening. The risk of unintended perverse consequences is considered significant without a comprehensive understanding of applying an intervention in blanket fashion across the country. 11.2 The Council is of the view that National Planning Standards provide the better opportunity for considering rationalising development controls across the country. By setting standards for best practice there is opportunity for a more considered adoption of consistent and sensible standards and rules. 11.3 Again the need for distinctions to be recognised and allowed for between city and town urban environments is important, ‘one size doesn’t fit all’.

12. Question 12. Do you support requirements for all urban environments to assess demand and supply of development capacity, and monitor a range of market indicators? Why/why not?

12.1 The Council supports a differentiated application of this requirement with all councils that have urban environments that are experiencing urban growth and housing issues being required to assess demand and supply of development. It is considered that applying the requirements to those many councils with urban environments that are not experiencing growth issues places an unnecessary and unwarranted additional resourcing and financial burden on these mostly small rural councils. The informing principle should be if there is no issue why introduce the requirement?

13. Question 13. Do you support inclusion of policies to improve how local government works with iwi, hapū and whānau to reflect their values and interests in urban planning? Why/why not? How do you think local authorities should be directed to engage with Maori who do not hold mana whenua over the urban environment in which they now live?

13.1 The Council recognizes iwi as partners and seeks to ensure the principles of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 and the Treaty of Waitangi are upheld, and Treaty settlements are honoured in any urban development project. Maori interests need to recognized and provision made for meaningful engagement in all development planning. 13.2 The Council HCC supports collaboration and effective partnerships and having early and meaningful engagement with Maori and offering Maori opportunities to participate in urban development projects. This is especially important in the Waikato, and any future project should also ensure the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River is also given effect to as part of any future development plan. 13.3 The Council supports proposed Objective O9 and policies P9A and B and that local authorities provide opportunities for Maori to be involved in decisions that shape their urban and natural environment.

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 11 of 14 Development

14. Question 14. Do you support amendments to existing NPS-UDC 2016 policies to include working with providers of development and other infrastructure, and local authorities cooperating to work with iwi/hapū?

14.1 The Council supports proposed Objective O10, which seeks integrated and coordinated cross- boundary infrastructure land use and decisions. This is considered especially relevant to any sub- regional FDS and the preparation of the Hamilton Waikato Metro Plan. 14.2 The Council supports Policy P10A b), which seeks increased collaboration for the NPS-UD and HBA to cooperate and agree principles and practices for partnering with iwi and hapū.

15. Question 15. What impact will the proposed timing for implementation of policies have?

15.1 The Council supports the proposal to remove the rigid timeframes imposed in the first rounds of HBAs and recognition that they did not align with LGA planning and LTP cycles. 15.2 The Council considers the proposed 18-month timeframe from the gazettal of this new NPS to notification of intensification plan changes as being too tight and limiting, particularly given the alignment with National Planning Standards and infrastructure modeling capacity work that would be required as an evidence-base for future intensification plan changes.

16. Question 16. What kind of guidance or support do you think would help with the successful implementation of the proposed NPS-UD?

16.1 The support from Government for the first round of NPS-UDC was inconsistent, with delays between gazettal and the release of guidance. Often it felt uncertain and tentative. There was consequently much trial and error learning as we went and experimentation. Perhaps this wasn’t surprising as it was new ground for councils and the government with MBIE and MFE working together. 16.2 The Council would like to see a clear and regularly updated dashboard on the Ministry website on indicators, and targeted guidance on what the Government deems to be a quality urban environment. 16.3 Urban and environmental design guidance would help with successful implementation of this NPS- UD, with specific crossover to the Urban Design Protocol which could be updated and refreshed to focus more on support for urban intensification, amenity and higher density typology guidance.

17. Question 17. Do you think there are potential areas of tension or confusion between any of these proposals and other national direction? If so, please identify these areas below and include any suggestions you have for addressing these issues.

17.1 The Council recognises that there is an attempt to cross-reference with other national directions, in particular the proposed NPS-HPL. Nonetheless, the Council considers that there is are tensions between the proposals contained in the NPS-UD and the NPS-HPL and the proposals in the Actions for Healthy Waterways as they were each written as separate standalone documents seeking very different objectives that will at times be at odds with each other.

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 12 of 14 Development

17.2 The Question will be what trumps what rather than muddling through the overlapping and at times competing aims of each. This issue is probably something that will await the RMA reforms to seek to address.

18. Question 18. Do you think a national planning standard is needed to support the consistent implementation of proposals in this document? If so, please state which specific provisions you think could be delivered effectively using a national planning standard?

18.1 The Council supports the recommendation by Hamilton City Council in its submission that the Ministry consider a national planning standard to provide a clear definition on a) what is deemed to contribute towards a quality urban environment and b) density and typologies – what is meant by apartments, duplexes, standalone dwellings, walk up apartments and mixed use. This should assist councils with the interpretation and what is meant by quality urban intensification that has high amenity.

Submission on National Policy Statement on Urban Page 13 of 14 Development

TE AWAMUTU - HEAD OFFICE 101 Bank Street, Private Bag 2402, Te Awamutu Ph 07 872 0030

CAMBRIDGE - SERVICE CENTRE 23 Wilson Street, Cambridge Ph 07 823 3800

/WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC

APPENDIX 2: SUBMISSION ON THE NATIONAL POLICY STATEMENT – HIGHLY PRODUCTIVE LAND (document number 10111920)

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 12 of 30 10111702 97

Submission

National Policy Statement on Highly Productive Land

October 2019

Submission on National Policy Statement on Highly Page 1 of 9 Productive Land

Submission on National Policy Statement on Highly Page 2 of 9 Productive Land

Submission on the National Policy Statement on Highly Productive Land 2019

By: Waipa District Council Submission deadline: 10 October 2019

Introduction Waipa District Council (the Council) welcomes the opportunity to provide comment on the proposed National Policy Statement on Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL).

General Comments 1. Waipa District Council supports the introduction of a National Policy Statement on Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL) in providing what it considers is long overdue national guidance on protecting highly productive land for primary production.

2. The Council supports the vision of the proposed NPS-HPL for protecting the availability of highly productive land for future primary production. In this regard it is noted that although the Waipa district is not large1, 53% of its land is considered having highly productive soils according to the cost benefit analysis report informing the NPS-HPL. The district’s soil resource accounts for approximately 9% of all New Zealand’s ‘high class’ soils.

3. The Council notes the use of the Waipa district as one of six local area case studies drawn from across New Zealand in the cost benefit analysis used to inform the proposed NPS-HPL. It also notes the case study findings found that the minimum rural zone lot size of 40ha in the Operative Waipa District Plan, was ‘likely to have a substantial effect on curbing demand for lifestyle properties2’ in the district.

4. The Council recognises that the cost benefit analysis report for the NPS-HPL noted the good alignment between the objectives of the NPS-HPL and the existing priorities as set out in the Waipa District Plan in both its Strategic Management of Growth and Rural Zone chapters. The report states that the Council understands the “exceptionally productive rural sector” arises because of the existence of high class soils and that “maintaining this resource for rural production is of critical importance to the District”.

5. The recognition of the importance of highly productive land and the need to safeguard it for primary production is further endorsed in the Council’s Waipa 2050 Growth Strategy which has the aim of having at least 80% of population growth directed to the existing urban areas of the district and the deferred zone growth cells provided to accommodate urban growth. The rest is allocated to existing large lot residential area in the district’s scattered village nodes (eg Karapiro, Ngahinapouri etc). These nodes tend to be small and are not provided with Council reticulated waste water services. The cost benefit analysis for the proposed NPS-HPL, noted that even with full take up of the deferred urban zone areas in Waipa to cater for anticipated future population growth over the next 30 years, the cumulative loss of highly productive land was estimated to be only 0.3% of the district.

1 147, 347ha 2 Section 11.4.5 on Page 215 of the Proposed-National-Policy-Statement-Indicative-cost-benefit-analysi

Submission on National Policy Statement on Highly Page 3 of 9 Productive Land

100

More specific comment is provided below largely using questions listed in the discussion document. It should be noted that not all the questions have been answered, but rather focus has been on those with relevance to the Council and the Waipa District context. This more specific feedback reflects a collaborative contribution drawn from a small team of staff and councillors in the Council.

Specific Comments

Section 3:The Problem we want to solve How well or not the RMA framework works. 3.1 The Council acknowledges the importance of the proposed NPS-HPL in helping address a long standing gap in the RMA and its current lack of direction with regard to valuing and protecting highly productive land. It should be noted that it is not by accident that much of historic and recent urban expansion has tended to occur on highly productive land. This land, as is generally well understood by planners and developers, tends to have geotechnical characteristics that make it very suitable for urban development. It will be mostly gently sloping or flat with well-structured, free draining soils that are free of waterlogging, expansion or slumping. These soils have good qualities for foundations. These attributes have a huge bearing on keeping land development costs down and manageable. In comparison any urban development proposed on land not classed as highly productive land will have restrictions that significantly raise land development costs. These land factors include steep slopes (Wellington), soils with a poor foundation characteristics (eg Peat soils around Hamilton) and/ or waterlogging (the Rotokauri urban growth cell north west of Hamilton). 3.2 The issue is really about first principles and needing to have national direction to safeguard highly productive land for primary production in the first instance. Secondly, in recognising that any anticipated urban expansion onto highly productive land needs to carefully considered and planned for on a ‘need and desirability’ assessment basis. Any ad-hoc private plan change or consent driven process to place pockets of urban development on highly productive land should be guarded against through having appropriate development control provisions in local authority RMA plans that provide a high hurdle for any such proposal. Having the new NPS-HPL will be important in supporting and weighting decision making in hearings on such applications.

How highly productive land is considered in planning and consenting. 3.3 Regardless of the current limitations of the RMA for highly productive land, local authorities are not powerless to create a planning and development control framework using non-statutory strategic plans that are given effect through provisions embedded in the RMA development control plans. In this regard and by way of example, the links between our Waipa 2050 Growth Strategy and the Waipa District Plan are crucial in successfully aligning the strategic intent of the former in guiding future growth, to the development control muscle in managing that growth of the latter. 3.4 The Council considers it essential for all local authorities facing growth pressures to ‘front-foot’ their approach and have a strategic spatial plan that sets out an agreed (consultation) plan on where new and future urban growth is to occur. Such a plan, may not suit everyone but will provide much needed certainty as to where development is to be located and how and when it is likely to occur. It is this Council’s experience that the majority of developers are accepting of such a plan as it not only provides certainty as to future development areas but also flags those areas for Councils where supporting infrastructure and services are required. It aids the preparation of Council’s Infrastructure Strategy and Long Term Plans. 3.5 Most of the highly productive land in rural Waipa is currently developed for pastoral farming and is dominated by dairy. The majority of the land holdings in the district are fairly large and generally

Submission on National Policy Statement on Highly Page 4 of 9 Productive Land

101

there is little land fragmentation. The notable exception is the belt of highly productive land between Cambridge and Hamilton between the old State Highway 1 and State Highway 1B. This area has long been fragmented into smaller blocks, providing a mix of rural land uses and large lot lifestyle residential use. With the Council’s introduction of a minimum lot size of 40ha in the Rural Zone in 2010, the risk of further subdivision in this area3 or anywhere in the rural parts of the district became very limited. Through the rest of the district, large lot residential (lifestyle) is largely contained in defined village nodes. The potential future growth of these villages is effectively managed through the Waipa 2050 Growth Strategy and the Waipa District Plan.

Reverse sensitivity 3.6 Intensive farming (such as horticulture) and suburban residential on small lots generally make for unhappy neighbours. Having a sensible environmental buffer is considered helpful in separating these largely incompatible land uses. Current interzone difficulties have often been compounded by the common planning practice of using roads as zone edges between these incompatible land uses particularly when managing greenfield urban growth. A better edge would generally be a blue- green space such as a riparian area. The consideration and inclusion of suitable land buffers should be part of any new greenfield development planning. The issue is generally considered to be less of a problem between horticultural areas and large lot residential or between extensive pastoral farming areas and the suburban residential areas of the district’s towns.

Section 4: Options for Solving the Problem 4.1 The Council supports the proposed option of having an NPS-HPL rather than having a NES or simply including provisions in the NPS-UD. The preferred option is regarded as being the most direct mechanism for providing clear intention and requires all local authorities to give effect to it without specifying in an inflexible way and in ignorance of the local context, exactly how that is done. An NES is considered to be too rigid and inflexible and would fail to account for the diversity of contexts across the country. It is not like setting a standard for drinking water quality.

Section 5: How a National Policy Statement would work 5.1 Highly productive land and soils The Council agrees with the view in the Waikato Regional Council submission that it is the soils in the sub-regional context that largely drive the value of our highly productive land. In this regard it is recognised that Pukekohe and Pukekawa in the northern Waikato, are special cases and their highly productive land status is not only due to their rich volcanic based soils but is aided by climatic advantages (frost free) and proximity to the Auckland airport for freight export. In the Future Proof sub-region, probably the biggest factor other than soils affecting highly productive land, is land fragmentation.

5.2 Focus on land use planning The Council supports the focus on land use planning as it is land uses that district plans control.

5.3 Future urban zones and areas The Council supports the exclusion of future urban areas and deferred urban zone areas as these have already been through a full formal consultation process and are earmarked for urban development. These areas provide valued certainty to communities and developers as to where future urban development is intended to locate.

3 Note however that much of this land belt is under the jurisdiction of the Waikato District Council and not in the Waipa district.

Submission on National Policy Statement on Highly Page 5 of 9 Productive Land

102

5.4 Applying the NPS-HPL nationally or for specific areas The Council is of the view that it should apply nationally as it is a broad issue which applies generally across the country. Over time and with the availability of more detailed information, more specific provisions may be developed to apply regionally or locally.

5.5 Proposed NPS Objectives The Council suggests a possible rewording to strengthen the first objective as follows: ‘To recognise and protect the value and long-term benefits of using highly productive land for primary production’. As proposed in the Future Proof submission, there may be value in combining the first two objectives and using similar wording to the Waikato Regional Policy Statement Objective 3.26: “The value of high class soils for primary production is recognised and high class soils are protected from inappropriate subdivision, use or development”.

5.6 Policy 1 – Identification of highly productive land The Council supports the Waikato Regional Council submission that since this is a national issue, central government should lead a nationally consistent approach to the identification and mapping of highly productive land.

5.7 Policy 2 – Maintaining highly productive land for primary production The Council supports the intent of this proposed policy and believes that current provisions in the Waipa District Plan go much of the way in terms of achieving this protection. The proposed NPS- HPL and more specifically this proposed policy, will add national weight and direction to this intention. It is however also noted that there is a level of tension with the proposed NPS-UD in that requires sufficient land for future greenfield urban growth to be provided. It is also noted that there needs to be some provision made in the policy for local authorities to have the capability of approving sand quarries to supply the construction industry. Generally sand deposits are only found in the class 1 and 2 soils, and they’re mostly permanently lost with the establishment of a quarry. Some good quarry operators are able to mitigate this situation at quarry closure and rehabilitate the land back to a LUC class 2.

5.8 Alignment with the Urban Growth Agenda There is a dynamic balance that will need to be reached with regard to the areas that are not yet zoned but have been identified or flagged for future urban growth in non-statutory planning and strategy documents and have not been yet assessed in detail/zoned. There are areas around Hamilton for example that are subject to discussion and agreement that may well be transferred from Waipa District to the city to allow for urban growth south of the current city boundary towards the Hamilton airport. There are similar agreements and plans for similar areas to the north of the city to be transferred from Waikato District to the city. There have already been instances of such land transfers to allow for current urban expansion of the city. It is acknowledged that Hamilton City is very conservative in its greenfield expansion with more than 50% of its urban growth being achieved through intensification within its existing urban boundary during the past five years.

5.9 Policy 3 - New urban development on highly productive land The Council supports the intent of the proposed policy and considers it provides sufficient direction and flexibility to fit with the realities of our local context. It should help ensure that a robust assessment is done of urban development capacity before considering using and fragmenting highly

Submission on National Policy Statement on Highly Page 6 of 9 Productive Land

103

productive land. One of the studies not commonly done that should be considered in this regard is having an agricultural impact assessment undertaken when considering using highly productive land for urban development. It is well known, as pointed out in the discussion document, that any marginal financial analysis carried out when considering urban expansion onto highly productive land finds in favour of urban development when comparing the financial returns of farming and residential land uses. The Council supports the Hamilton City submission view that that Policies 3 and 6 of the proposed NPS-HPL and the NPS-UD proposal on providing for out-of-sequence greenfield development need to be aligned to enable consideration of anticipated growth that may not be consistent with a council’s statutory and non-statutory plans and policies for growth management and planning.

5.10 Policy 4 – Rural subdivision and fragmentation The Council supports the intent of this proposed policy and considers that its District Plan already contains provisions well aligned with the wording of this policy. It is however noted that no minimum lot size is specified but rather, guidance on appropriate minimum lot size will be developed to support the implementation of this policy. Mention is made of the need for some flexibility to allow for varying circumstances at a local level.

5.11 Policy- Reverse sensitivity See the earlier response in 3.6

5.12 Policies 6 & 7 – Considerations of private plan changes and resource consent applications on highly productive land The Council supports the intent of these two policies and notes the strong link back to the earlier proposed policies 3 & 4. Proposed policies 6 & 7 are considered subsidiary policies to the former. It is noted that these policies also need to be carefully aligned with the proposed NPS-UD. While the NPS-UD enables consideration of greenfield development which is not aligned with local authority statutory and non-statutory plans and policies, proposed Policy 6 doesn’t. Depending on local context and the nature of the application, some of the proposed information requirements for a consent application (eg b. and e.) may well be disproportionately onerous. The Council supports the Future Proof submission suggestion that consideration be given to the strengthening of the ‘have regard to’ wording in these two policies. It is more helpful to local authorities having more specificity on aspects they have to give effect to.

5.13 Implementation The Council supports the intention of the Government to establish an implementation programme that includes guidance, targeted training and monitoring. It is noted that the timeframe for Councils to implement the NPS will be challenging to meet. With the proposed interim effect of the NPS, consideration of a longer timeframe in circumstances where an RPS or district plan has only recently been adopted, may be appropriate.

Much of the baseline information, tools and methodology required could be provided at a national level, rather than being undertaken region-by region. The Government could procure the baseline LUC mapping across New Zealand to ensure a national level of consistency that would also provide for alignment with National Planning Standards.

Submission on National Policy Statement on Highly Page 7 of 9 Productive Land

104

TE AWAMUTU - HEAD OFFICE 101 Bank Street, Private Bag 2402, Te Awamutu Ph 07 872 0030

CAMBRIDGE - SERVICE CENTRE 23 Wilson Street, Cambridge Ph 07 823 3800

/WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC

Submission on National Policy Statement on Highly Page 8 of 9 Productive Land 105

APPENDIX 3: SUBMISSION ON THE ACTION FOR HEALTHY WATERWAYS DOCUMENTATION (document number 10118852)

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 13 of 30 10111702 106 Postal Address Head Office Cambridge Office Private Bag 2402 07 872 0030 07 823 3800 Te Awamutu 3840 101 Bank Street 23 Wilson Street New Zealand Te Awamutu 3800 Cambridge 3434

31 October 2019

Ministry for Environment Action for Healthy Waterways Digitally Delivered PO Box 10362 Wellington 6143

Email: [email protected]

Dear Madam/Sir

SUBMISSION ON MFE AND MPI’S PROPOSED ACTION FOR HEALTHY WATERWAYS – A DISCUSSION DOCUMENT ON NATIONAL DIRECTION FOR OUR ESSENTIAL FRESHWATER

Waipa District Council appreciates the opportunity to make a submission on the Ministry’s proposed Action for Healthy Waterways discussion document. Please find attached a copy of the Council’s submission electronically submitted on 31 October 2019. Key aspects of the Government’s proposals for freshwater management in New Zealand, were discussed at a Council workshop on 17 September 2019 and authority was delegated to the Chief Executive to lodge Council’s submission at the final Council meeting on 24 September 2019.

You are welcome to make contact with Waipa District Council with regards to any of the points made in our submission. In this regard and in the first instance David Totman can be contacted either via email at [email protected] or telephone at 07 872 0048.

Yours sincerely

Garry Dyet Chief Executive

Attachment: Waipa District Council Submission on the proposed Action for healthy waterways – A discussion document on national direction for our essential freshwater

0800 WAIPADC (924 723) /WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC www.waipadc.govt.nz 31 October 2019 107

SUBMISSION ON THE ACTION FOR HEALTHY WATERWAYS – A DISCUSSION DOCUMENT ON NATIONAL DIRECTION FOR OUR ESSENTIAL FRESHWATER 2019

By: Waipa District Council

INTRODUCTION

Waipa District Council (the Council) welcomes the opportunity to provide comment on Ministry for the Environment and Ministry for Primary Industries proposed Action for Healthy Waterways document.

GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Waipa District Council is supportive of the broad proposals for freshwater and waterways as outlined in the discussion document on national direction for our essential freshwater. The Council notes that document is comprehensive and packages proposals for an amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management, a new National Environment Standard for Freshwater, and regulations for both water takes and stock exclusion.

2. The Council recognises the importance of upholding and strengthening the concept of ‘Mana O te Wai’ and reversing the deterioration of the ecosystem health of our waterways.

3. The Council notes that in addition to the current freshwater proposals, the document indicates the intention of Government to develop and introduce further proposals for drinking water, wastewater and stormwater as part of the Department of Internal Affairs’ ‘Three Waters Review’.

4. The Council is supportive of the submission of LGNZ. As pointed out in the LGNZ submission, assessing how the impact of the proposed national directions will impact on communities and councils across the country is extremely complex. The LGNZ’s supporting report on regional case studies concludes that in order to get a national level understanding of the costs and benefits of these proposed new policy directions, the regional variation of the likely impact of these new policies needs to be taken into account. As mentioned in the case studies report, a useful indication of the regional variation in the local ‘receiving environment’ of these proposals is the Ministry of Health’s Index of Deprivation, which estimates the relative socioeconomic deprivation of an area.

5. The Council is also supportive of the submission of the Waikato Regional Council. The Council has worked with the other territorial authorities in the Waikato River catchment to ensure that the interests of local councils and rural communities are fully taken into account in the Waikato Regional Plan Change 1. This plan change seeks to address critical water

0800 WAIPADC (924 723) /WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC www.waipadc.govt.nz

31 October 2019 108

quality issues and give effect to the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River in a way and over a time period that is appropriate, achievable and affordable. Plan Change 1 is regarded by the Regional Council as a first step in this process of improving the quality of the river water and focuses on nutrients, sediment and bacterial contaminants. It’s aim is to achieve a 10% improvement in 10 years.

6. The Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River is crucially important to the district and wider region, in that it gives effect to legislation associated with treaty settlements in respect of the Waikato River. As such, it prevails over any national policy statement where there are inconsistencies. It requires more stringent water quality conditions than those stated in the current National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2017 (NPSFM). The vision for the Waikato River is for a future where a healthy Waikato River sustains abundant life and prosperous communities who, in turn, are all responsible for restoring and protecting the health and wellbeing of the Waikato River.

7. The Council shares the concern of LGNZ and Waikato Regional Council that a large implementation and monitoring burden falls on farm advisors, rural landowners and regional councils and there will be acute capacity and funding constraints produced as a result.

8. Section 11 of the discussion document provides a brief overview of the overlap between proposals in the discussion document on freshwater with proposals in other national direction currently proposed, more particularly for the Council, with Government’s proposed NPS for Highly Productive Land and NPS on Urban Development as well as National Planning Standards and imminent comprehensive RMA reforms. The Council submits that it is vital for Government to more fully consider the many unintended overlapping, as well as cumulative, implications of all the proposed concurrent policy direction changes on local government, and smaller local councils and rural communities in particular. The timing, resource and capacity implications for the Waipa District is considered onerous. Particularly given the common requirement for substantive plan and practice change to be made in the next five years. Unless there is better consideration of a more collaborative and partnered approach to achieving these proposals, it is difficult to see a way of meeting the various requirements within the timeframes envisaged.

0800 WAIPADC (924 723) /WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC www.waipadc.govt.nz

31 October 2019 109

SPECIFIC COMMENTS

1. Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM)

These proposals are contained in Section 4 of the discussion document.

Proposal Comment 4.2 Clarify and strengthen The Council supports the recommendations in the the concept and value of Te discussion document and notes the intention to retain local mana o te wai flexibility in how the concept is applied regionally in consultation with tangata whenua and communities. The principle of a hierarchy of obligations is also supported. 4.4 New planning process The Council supports the proposal in principle. for freshwater plan changes There will need to be sufficient capacity and skills in the government appointed commissioners as well as with regional councils and iwi, to manage multiple concurrent plan changes should this occur. The Council recommends consideration be given to applying the proposed new process more generally. It could be incorporated into Schedule 1 of the RMA relating to streamlined planning processes. It recommends removing the requirement for further submissions as these provide little value in practice. The Council recognises that could play an influential and supportive role to regional councils with already established community and iwi relationships. They could also help in proactively identifying water ways and water bodies of priority importance. 4.5 New policies directing The Council supports these proposals in principle. district councils to support Clarification will be required regarding potential overlaps or Integrated management of inconsistencies with the NPS-UD and which NPS would take freshwater and manage the precedence in this event. The policies should also consider effects of urban the role that district councils can play in rural areas by development (see Section leading best practice on council administered land such as 3.4 (6) of the draft NPS FM) esplanade reserves and strips alongside waterways and water bodies.

0800 WAIPADC (924 723) /WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC www.waipadc.govt.nz

31 October 2019 110

2. Raising the bar on ecosystem health

The proposals on ecosystem health are contained in Section 5 of the discussion document.

Proposal Comment 5.2 & 5.3 General proposals The Council anticipates that making the land use changes for regional councils to set required to achieve the proposed objectives for ecosystem objectives for ecosystem health will vary considerably over the country. Similarly, the attributes to ensure that economic burden will fall unevenly between different national bottom lines are areas. Making the required changes will require a very met. carefully and comprehensively thought through process particularly regarding the timing and practicalities of change at regional and local levels. 5.5 Proposals for fish The Council broadly supports these proposals. District passage, wetlands and councils will need to work collaboratively with regional streams, sediment and councils regarding implementing these and again a sensible water quality programme is needed for the timing and resourcing required for these changes. With regard to water quality, the Council supports the principle of limiting nutrient pollution of water ways and water bodies rather than attempting remediation after degradation of the water quality has occurred. In this regard it would be helpful to remove the overlap and duplication between the RMA and Reserves Act in managing natural water bodies on reserve land under the control of district councils. 5.11 Proposals for clarifying The Council supports these proposals in principle. minimum flow requirements Clarification will be required regarding potential overlaps or inconsistencies with the NPS-UD and which NPS would take precedence in this event. The policies should also consider the role that district councils can play in rural areas by leading best practice on council administered land such as esplanade reserves and strips alongside waterways and water bodies. 5.12 Proposals for real time Council supports this initiative which is proposed to be reporting of water use introduced progressively over time. mandating using telemetry

0800 WAIPADC (924 723) /WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC www.waipadc.govt.nz

31 October 2019 111

3. Proposed amendments to the NES for Sources of Human Drinking Water

These proposals are contained in Section 6 of the discussion document.

Proposal Comment 6.2 Strengthen requirements The Council supports the proposals in principle and to assess and control risks to considers that they help provide greater clarification, drinking water sources though the application of the proposal to sources for 25 people or more may well apply to farms and rural based institutions, such as schools. Further clarification is required on implementation timeframes and consideration should be given to enabling changes to regional and district plans without going through a Schedule 1 RMA process. Consideration of appropriate timeframes for implementing upgrades to water supply infrastructure and providing financial assistance, would also be helpful.

4. Proposed NES for Wastewater Discharges and Overflows

These proposals are contained in Section 7 of the discussion document.

Proposal Comment 7.2 Proposed new NES for The Council supports the proposed new Wastewater NES in Wastewater that requires principle. It does however question whether the proposals operators to a prepare risk could have been incorporated into the proposed new management plan (RMP) Freshwater NES to better integrate wastewater and and adopt nationally freshwater ecological standards and avoid inconsistencies. consistent set of measures It is noted that both NESs have the same end goal. to monitor wastewater The proposed requirement for risk management plans is networks. supported and for wastewater, consideration should be given to having appropriate levels of standardisation to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort across regions and the country. Implementation timeframes should be considered for alignment with LTP cycles to better synchronise implementation and recognising that upgrades will need to factor in time, finance and capability.

0800 WAIPADC (924 723) /WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC www.waipadc.govt.nz

31 October 2019 112

5. Proposals for Stormwater management

These proposals are contained in Section 7 of the discussion document.

Proposal Comment 7.3 Proposed requirement The proposed requirement for risk management plans is for operators to a prepare supported and consideration should be given to having risk management plan appropriate levels of standardisation to avoid unnecessary (RMP). duplication of effort across the different parts of the country. Implementation timeframes should be considered for alignment with LTP cycles to better synchronise implementation and recognise that upgrades will need to factor in time, finance and capability. 7.3 Nationally consistent Proposals for introducing nationally consistent measures for stormwater environmental performance measures and the monitoring and reporting on these will add to current monitoring undertaken by councils. Ease of implementing these will be important and should be aligned with current methods and practices of required national environmental monitoring. 7.3 National guidance on The Council supports the proposal for national guidance in stormwater policy principle. It is noted that the Council, along with many other councils in the Waikato region, has adopted the regional Infrastructure Technical Specifications (RITS). Any national guidance should incorporate existing regional guidance. Consider whether NZS 4404 should be updated to become the national guidance.

0800 WAIPADC (924 723) /WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC www.waipadc.govt.nz

31 October 2019 113

6. Proposals for farm practices

These proposals are contained in Section 8 of the discussion document. These proposals are seen as being implemented by regional councils and impacting on farmers and farming practice.

Proposal Comment 8.2 Proposals to restrict land The Council supports the intent of the proposals that all use intensification on rural farms operate above good management practice levels. land. The Council also supports the intent of the proposal that further land intensification be restricted unless there is evidence that it will not increase water pollution. Implementation timeframes should be considered for alignment with LTP cycles to better synchronise implementation and recognise that upgrades will need to factor in time, finance and capability. 8.3 Proposal that all farms The Council supports the role of farm plans in helping have a farm plan with a farmers understand and improve environmental freshwater component management practices on their farms. The Council already provides funding assistance in the Waikato Regional Council’s proposed Plan Change 1 already contains requirements for all commercial vegetable growers and farms greater than 20ha to have farm environment plans to help farmers manage environmental risks. 8.4 Proposals to reduce The Council supports the proposals for a catchment and nitrogen contamination of farm plan based approach to managing nitrogen-nitrate freshwater contamination of freshwater. It notes that the proposals take into account the Waikato Regional Council’s existing proposals for managing nitrogen-nitrate contamination in the Waikato River catchment. 8.5 Proposal to exclude The Council notes that these are not new proposals. It stock from waterways supports the proposal to exclude stock from waterways through regulations more than one metre wide and for them to have an introduced under Section average five metre fenced-off riparian margin. It is noted 360 of the RMA that the Waikato Regional Council has recommended that in order to; better enable enforceability, give consideration to possible exemptions, and provide for cost recovery, these regulations would be better placed in the proposed new NES-FW than included as Section 360 Regulations.

0800 WAIPADC (924 723) /WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC www.waipadc.govt.nz

31 October 2019 114

7. Alignment with other national direction under the RMA

The issue of alignment of the freshwater proposals with other current national direction proposals is discussed in Section 11

Proposal Comment 11.2 Alignment with other 1. The Council notes that although this section is national direction under the concerned with other RMA national direction RMA instruments issued in 2019, it will be essential that there is alignment with treaty settlement legislation and not leave alignment to be ‘tested in the courts’ and for councils to resolve. 2. The Council recommends that there is a cross-ministry oversight group to provide technical alignment between all the national directions. Where there is doubt, provide for a government funded, centralised Environment Court declaration process to ensure certainty of implementation, cost minimisation and unnecessary litigation. 3. The provision of government support to local government implementation of the national directions, including which ones are priority, will be critical to successful implementation. 4. Consideration should be given to simplifying implementation through RMA plans by minimising the first schedule requirements.

0800 WAIPADC (924 723) /WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC www.waipadc.govt.nz

115

APPENDIX 4: SUBMISSION ON THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT AMENDMENT BILL 2019 (document number 10116078)

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 14 of 30 10111702 116

Submission

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL

November 2019

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 1 of 20 10116078 117

SUBMISSION ON RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL 2019

By: Waipa District Council

Submission deadline: November 7 2019

Authority: Made under delegated authority by the CEO

Format: Submitted electronically, 2 hard copies to follow

Hearing: We do not wish to be heard

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 2 of 20 10116078 118

INTRODUCTION

Waipa District Council (our Council) welcomes the opportunity to provide comment on the Resource Management Amendment Bill 2019.

Resource management, statutory planning and resource consenting are core functions of the Council. With these processes, our Council is seeing increased expectation on councils becoming “agents of the Crown”, more so than any time since the Resource Management Act (RMA) was promulgated in 1991. We are also noting that the suite of national directions and legislative change around council functions is coalescing into a condensed implementation period. As the “first stage” of proposed RMA reform, our Council has a keen interest in RMA amendments, in particular the increased role of central government in local decision-making.

Aside from the technical components of this Bill, we would encourage Parliament to give due consideration to the implementation of the suite of national direction, particularly: a) The capacity and ability of councils to implement effectively. b) The implementation costs falling to councils and ratepayers in rolling out a more centralised and nationalised planning system. c) The inter-relationships between the RMA, the LGA, Treaty Legislation, National Policy Statements, National Environmental Standards and National Planning Standards.

We, like other councils, are particularly concerned about how the various directions and RMA reform work together, and the very real risk of conflicts, inconsistency, duplication and tensions between the different and often complex national directions and the presiding legislation.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 3 of 20 10116078 119

PART 1: GENERAL POSITION

SUBMISSION POINT 1.1

Our Council is overall neutral on the repealing parts of the 2017 Resource Legislation Amendment Act. We are unsure there is any functional need to change these parts, at this point in time, ahead of the comprehensive review of the RMA. There is some risk of public confusion, so we encourage succinct and clear communications from Parliament and the Minister, to assist councils in implementing and communicating these changes.

SUBMISSION POINT 1.2

Our Council supports the intent of the Bill to improve RMA processes. We note that previous amendment bills have also purported to do the same, with questionable effect.

SUBMISSION POINT 1.3

We cautiously support the additional powers to the EPA, which will complement the powers already held by Councils. This will only be effective is there is close coordination between existing enforcement agencies.

SUBMISSION POINT 1.4

Finally, our Council generally supports the proposed new freshwater planning process. While, as a district council we are not directly affected, we see an opportunity to broaden the scope of this new process to include non-freshwater topics. This expanded scope, using the proposed process, could provide a viable alternative pathway for plan-making. We also support removing the collaborative pathway for plan making, which was too complex to have been workable.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 4 of 20 10116078 120

PART 2: SPECIFIC COMMENTS

SUBMISSION POINT 2.1 NEW CHANGE

Submission

There is a missed opportunity in this stage 1 amendment to also clarify the implementation of National Directions.

Currently implementing National Directions under the RMA mandates “direct implementation” (changing plans without using schedule 1 processes). There is limited provision of “consequential amendments”. We consider there is an opportunity, in the interests of the Bill’s purpose to improve RMA processes, to clarify and expand the ability for Councils to implement national direction, without needing to follow a full consultative process. We consider there are specific circumstances where this could occur, and where this would not prejudice the public or plan users, which would have the following benefits: a) Improved efficiency of process. b) Faster implementation of national directions. c) Plans are more up to date. d) Avoid needing to hold off implementation until budgeted plan changes.

We propose some additional changes below which would better fulfill Parliament’s intent with the Bill.

If these changes are not accepted for this Bill, we would encourage them to be considered in the stage 2 comprehensive review of the RMA.

Decision sought a) Request that s58I(3)(d) - consequential amendments to implement National Planning standards - is expanded so that councils can make plan changes beyond duplication or conflict, to implement national directions, without having to undertake a Schedule 1 process. Suggested wording:

(d) Include any consequential amendments to any document as necessary to: i. Avoid duplication with the amendments or ii. Avoid conflict or inconsistency with the amendments or

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 5 of 20 10116078 121

iii. Otherwise implement the National Planning Standards where such amendments are necessary to fully implement the National Planning Standards, and these amendments do not materially alter the impact of how the provision is implemented. b) Amend S44A such that councils can fully implement National Environmental Standards without the need to undertake a Schedule 1 process. Suggested wording:

Amend s44A(5) to read: In every other case or duplication or conflict, or where amendments are necessary to give effect to national environment standard and do not materially alter the impact of how the provision is implemented, the local authority must amend the plan or proposed plan: i. Without using the process in Schedule 1 and ii. After the date on which the standard comes into force. c) Amend s55 such that councils can fully implement National Policy Statements without the need to undertake a Schedule 1 process. Suggested wording:

Add to section 55(2): (d) Where amendments are necessary to fully implement the National Policy Statement and the amendments do not materially alter the impact of how the provision is implemented.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.2 CLAUSE 5

Amends section 4 to include the EPA as one of the bodies that may bring certain proceedings against an instrument of the Crown. This is a result of the new enforcement functions of the EPA conferred by this Bill.

Submission

Support. This complements a core council function and will enhance enforcement capability and capacity.

Decision sought

Retain.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 6 of 20 10116078 122

SUBMISSION POINT 2.3 CLAUSE 6

Amends section 11 to reinstate the restrictions in the Act relating to subdivisions before it was amended by the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017. Currently, a person may subdivide land if— • the subdivision— • is expressly allowed by a resource consent; or 6 Resource Management Amendment Bill Explanatory note • does not contravene a national environmental standard, a rule in a district plan, or a rule in a proposed district plan for the same district (if any); and • the subdivision is shown on specified survey plans. New section 11(1)(a) permits a person to subdivide land if— • the subdivision is expressly allowed by a national environmental standard, a rule in a district plan, a rule in a proposed district plan for the same district (if this is a proposed plan), or a resource consent; and • the subdivision is shown on specified survey plans.

Submission:

Neutral, no impacts, no loopholes.

Decision sought.

Neutral.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.4 CLAUSE 8

Amends section 38 to reflect that enforcement offers may also be authorised by the EPA under new section 343I.

Submission

Support. This amendment complements a core council function.

Decision sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.5 CLAUSE 9

Amends section 42C to provide that the EPA’s functions include the enforcement functions conferred by new section 343F.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 7 of 20 10116078 123

Submission

Support. This amendment complements a core council function.

Decision sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.6 CLAUSE 13

Repeals subpart 4 of Part 5, which relates to the collaborative planning process, and replaces it with a new subpart that establishes the freshwater planning process. Regional councils must comply with the freshwater planning process when preparing a freshwater planning instrument. A freshwater planning instrument means a proposed regional plan, regional policy statement, or change or variation that— • gives effect to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020; or • otherwise relates to freshwater. No later than 6 months after a regional council publicly notifies a freshwater planning instrument, it must submit certain documents to the Chief Freshwater Commissioner to commence the freshwater planning process. The public hearing of submissions on the freshwater planning instrument will be conducted by a freshwater hearings panel convened by the Chief Freshwater Commissioner. The panel will comprise 5 freshwater hearings commissioners of which 2 are appointed by the Minister, 2 are appointed on the nomination of the regional council, and 1 appointed on the nomination of local tāngata whenua. (New clause 57 of Schedule 1 allows the Chief Freshwater Commissioner to adjust the size of the panel in certain circumstances.) The freshwater hearings panel must conduct the public hearing of submissions in accordance with its powers and the procedures set out in new Part 4 of Schedule 1. After the hearing of public submissions is finished, the panel must make recommendations to the regional council on the freshwater planning instrument. The regional council may accept or reject any recommendation. A person who made a submission may appeal (in accordance with new Part 4 of Schedule 1) in respect of the regional council’s decision to reject or accept a recommendation.

Submission

Support clause 13 the repeal of the overly complex collaborative plan change pathway. Support clause 13 the new water plan change panel.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 8 of 20 10116078 124

Decision requested

Request the powers of the panel could be extended in certain circumstances to include topics broader than water plans.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.7 CLAUSE 17(2)

Amends section 88B to provide that any time period that the consent authority decides to exclude under new section 88H must be excluded from the time limit described in section 95.

Submission

Support, implements clause 19.

Decision sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.8 CLAUSE 18

Makes a minor amendment to section 88E.

Submission

Support the change.

Decision sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.9 CLAUSE 19

Inserts new sections 88G and 88H. New section 88G prescribes the period that must be excluded from every applicable time limit under section 88B, if the processing of a non-notified application is suspended under new section 91D. New section 88H relates to administrative charges (fixed under section 36) that an applicant must pay on lodgement or on notification of a resource consent application. New section 88H enables the consent authority to exclude

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 9 of 20 10116078 125

from the time limit described in section 95 the period during which an applicant has failed to pay an administrative charge.

Submission

Support. The change will improve administration efficiencies and enable better debt recovery.

Decision sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.10 CLAUSES 20 TO 22

Amend sections 91A to 91C to clarify that those provisions apply to notified applications in contrast to new sections 91D to 91F, which apply to non-notified applications.

Submission

Support the clarification, which will improve reporting and admin.

Decision sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.11 CLAUSE 23

Inserts new sections 91D to 91F, which relate to the suspension of processing by a consent authority of a non-notified application at the request of an applicant. New sections 91D to 91F are based on the provisions in sections 91A to 91C in relation to notified applicants. However, if the processing of a non-notified application has been suspended for a total of 20 working days, the consent authority must either return the application to the applicant or continue to process the application. The period of any suspension must be excluded from every applicable time limit in section 88B.

Submission

Support the change.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 10 of 20 10116078 126

Decision sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.12 CLAUSE 24

Amends section 95A, which states how a consent authority must determine whether to publicly notify an application for a resource consent. Currently, an application for a restricted discretionary or discretionary activity is precluded from public notification if the activity is a subdivision of land or a residential activity. The amendment removes that preclusion. Section 95A(5)(b)(iv) is repealed because section 360H is repealed.

Submission

Oppose. We do not consider the change necessary and the existing provisions are workable.

Decision sought

Reject the change.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.13 CLAUSE 26

Amends section 120 by removing— • the restrictions on appeals against decisions relating to subdivisions and residential activities; and • the requirement that submitters may appeal only on matters raised in their submission.

Submission

Support. The change reduces perverse outcomes around applicants designing applications or amending them to non-complying in order to allow the right of appeal.

Decision sought

Retain

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 11 of 20 10116078 127

SUBMISSION POINT 2.14 CLAUSE 29

Amends section 149P to restrict conditions that a board of inquiry may impose when considering a notice of requirement for a designation. If the requiring authority is the Minister of Education or the Minister of Defence, a board may not impose a condition requiring a financial contribution.

Submission

Oppose. MoE and MoD should not be exempt from financial contributions, and it is unreasonable to effectively burden local ratepayers through subsidising central government functions.

Our Council’s position on financial contributions is that similar to our position on development contributions, as submitted (23 October 2019) to DIA on the information paper Infrastructure Funding and Financing: development Contributions and Targeted Rates.

It is a matter of fairness and equity that householders and ratepayers should not be subsidizing costs which are the result of the activities of Government Ministries. Based on the principle that “growth should fund growth”, Councils would need to increase both financial and development contributions, to off-set the loss of Government’s contribution.

In one Waipā district example, a school will not pay DC’s resulting in householders needing to pick up the cost. This adversely affects the affordability of housing and conflicts with Government’s and MinHUD’s policy position of increased access to affordable housing. In our case this may result in about $5 million needing to be recovered from householders, equating to a 5% increase in DC’s. We anticipate that increased development (and financial) contributions, to offset Government’s unfunded contributions, would lead to judicial reviews from the development community, further placing Councils in a difficult, no-win position.

Decision Sought

Delete

SUBMISSION POINT 2.15 CLAUSE 32

Amends section 171 to provide that if the requiring authority is the Minister of Education or the Minister of Defence, a territorial authority may not recommend a condition requiring a financial contribution.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 12 of 20 10116078 128

Submission

Oppose. MoE and MoD should not be exempt from financial contributions, and it is unreasonable to effectively burden local ratepayers through subsidising central government functions.

Our Council’s position on financial contributions is similar to our position on development contributions, as submitted (23 October 2019) to DIA on the information paper Infrastructure Funding and Financing: development Contributions and Targeted Rates.

Decision sought

Delete.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.16 CLAUSES 33 TO 35

Amend sections 174, 198E, and 198K to provide that if the requiring authority is the Minister of Education or the Minister of Defence, the Environment Court may not impose a condition requiring a financial contribution.

Submission

Oppose. MoE and MoD should not be exempt from financial contributions, and it is unreasonable to effectively burden local ratepayers through subsidising central government functions.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 13 of 20 10116078 129

Decision sought

Delete.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.17 CLAUSES 53 TO 58

Amend sections 311, 316, 324, 325, 325A, and 325B as a consequence of the EPA’s new enforcement functions. The amendments enable the EPA to carry out certain enforcement activities that a local authority is permitted to carry out.

Submission

Cautious support. The intent of extending enforcement powers to the EPA is supported. However further clarification is needed around multi-agency enforcement coordination (EPA, Regional, District). Coordination of enforcement effort should be prescribed in the amendments (refer submission on clause 66).

Decision sought

Retain, with amendments that require coordination between enforcement agencies, identification of a lead agency, and information sharing.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 14 of 20 10116078 130

SUBMISSION POINT 2.18 CLAUSE 59

Amends section 330B, which allows certain activities (which would otherwise contravene sections 9, 12, 13, 14, and 15) to be carried out during a state of emergency declared under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002. The amendment enables the person authorising the activity to apply to the appropriate consent authority within 60 working days (instead of 20 working days) to obtain the necessary resource consents for the activity.

Submission

Support.

Decision Sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.19 CLAUSES 60 AND 61

Amend sections 332 and 336 as a consequence of the EPA’s new enforcement functions. The amendments enable the EPA to carry out certain enforcement activities that a local authority is permitted to carry out.

Submission

Decision sought

Retain, with amendments that require coordination between enforcement agencies, identification of a lead agency, and information sharing.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 15 of 20 10116078 131

SUBMISSION POINT 2.20 CLAUSES 63 AND 64

Amend sections 339C and 342, which relate to the payment of fines when the EPA is assisting a local authority in a proceeding.

Submission

Support the change to section 342 (fines, where the EPA supports a local authority, being credited to the local authority that the EPA is assisting).

Decision sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.21 CLAUSE 66

Inserts new Part 12A, which provides for the EPA’s new enforcement functions. New section 343E defines terms used in new Part 12A. A key term is the definition of enforcement action, which means— • an inspection, investigation, or other activity carried out in accordance with the Act for the purpose of determining whether there is or has been— • a contravention of a provision of the Act, any regulations, a rule in a plan, a national environmental standard, or a resource consent; or • a failure to comply with a requirement of an enforcement order or abatement notice; or • an application for an enforcement under section 316 or an interim enforcement order under section 320; or • the service of an abatement notice under section 322; or • the laying of a charge relating to an offence described in section 338; or • the issuing of an infringement notice under section 343C; or • an inspection, investigation, other activity carried out in accordance with this Act for the purpose of an application, an abatement notice, a charge, or an infringement notice described above. New section 343F enables the EPA to perform any of the following enforcement functions if satisfied that performing the function is necessary or desirable to promote the purpose of the Act: • the EPA may take enforcement action and any subsequent action in relation to an incident if the local authority has not commenced taking any enforcement action in relation to the same incident: • the EPA may, with the agreement of a local authority, assist the local authority with an enforcement action in relation to an incident and any subsequent action: • the EPA may intervene in an enforcement action of a local authority in relation to an incident by taking over the enforcement action and taking any subsequent action. New section 343G applies when the EPA intervenes in an enforcement action of a local authority. The EPA may not intervene in an enforcement action that has already been executed by a local authority in respect of a person. New section 343H enables the EPA to change its enforcement function in relation to an incident if it considers that the circumstances require the change in function. New section 343I Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 16 of 20 10116078 132

provides for the appointment of EPA enforcement officers. New section 343J enables the EPA to require information from a local authority that the EPA requires for an enforcement action. Explanatory note Resource Management Amendment Bill 11 New section 343K states matters that the EPA must provide in its annual report required under section 150 of the Crown Entities Act 2004. New section 343L enables the court to order a person convicted of an offence under the Act to pay the EPA’s costs relating to the prosecution.

Submission

Cautious support. Then intent of extending enforcement powers to the EPA is supported. This clause sets out the circumstances when the EPA may intervene or initiate enforcement. This includes where a local authority has not commenced enforcement; where the local authority agrees, or by “taking over” an existing enforcement. The changes refer to “a” local authority.

Two additional circumstances need to be provided for: a) Where the local authority requests EPA assistance or where local / regional enforcement is beyond the capacity of the local authority. b) Where there is a multi-agency approach (e.g. EPA, region and district)

Further clarification is needed around multi-agency enforcement coordination (EPA, Regional, District). Coordination of enforcement effort should be prescribed in the amendments.

Decision sought

Retain, with amendments to s343F that provide for: a) EPA enforcement to be initiated at the request of a local authority where enforcement is beyond the council resources. b) Multi-agency enforcement between the EPA and more than one local authority. c) Clarifies which is the lead agency in the case of a multi-agency enforcement.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.22 CLAUSE 70

Amends section 360(1) in relation to infringement fees and notices for infringement offences prescribed under that section. Currently, section 360(1)(bb) enables regulations to prescribe an infringement fee not exceeding $2,000 for infringement offences prescribed under section 360(1)(ho) (exclusion of stock from water bodies). An infringement fee not exceeding $1,000 may be prescribed for other infringement offences. Section 360(1)(bb) is replaced with a provision that enables

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 17 of 20 10116078 133

regulations to prescribe, in respect of any infringement offence prescribed under that section, an infringement fee— • not exceeding $2,000, in the case of a natural person; and • not exceeding $4,000, for a person other than an natural person.

Submission

Support.

Decision sought

Retain.

SUBMISSION POINT 2.23 CLAUSE 72

Amends Schedule 1 by— • repealing clauses 4(2) to (2B) and 21(3A); and • replacing Part 4 with a new Part 4, which relates to the freshwater planning process that all freshwater planning instruments must undergo. New Part 4 of Schedule 1, among other things— • requires that a regional council must, no later than 6 months after it has publicly notified a freshwater planning instrument, submit specified documents to the Chief Freshwater Commissioner; and • requires the Chief Freshwater Commissioner to convene a freshwater hearings panel to hear public submissions on the freshwater planning document; and 12 Resource Management Amendment Bill Explanatory note • provides for the composition of a freshwater hearings panel, including nominations for appointment of freshwater hearings commissioners to the panel from the regional council and local tangata whenua; and • provides for the functions and powers of the freshwater hearings panel; and • requires the freshwater hearings panel to make recommendations to the regional council after the hearing of public submissions on the freshwater planning instrument; and • requires the regional council to publicly notify its response to those recommendations; and • sets out appeals that may be made in relation to the freshwater planning instrument; and • provides for the appointment by the Minister of freshwater hearings commissioners, including the Chief Freshwater Commissioner.

Submission

Support clause 72 the repeal of the overly complex collaborative plan change pathway. Support clause 72 of the new part 4.

We support new part 4, and suggest there is an opportunity for new part 4 to be extended to include plan topics other than freshwater. While freshwater is Government’s focus, a National Planning Process may be a viable plan-making pathway for other topics where they meet certain criteria. This could be applied, for instance, where the topic is in the national interest, resourcing is beyond the capacity of the council to address; or a national process is necessary to resolve an issue between 2 or more adjoining councils.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 18 of 20 10116078 134

A regional nationally significant example where such a process might be applied, beyond freshwater, is in relation to the Hamilton to Auckland Metro Plan and transport corridor, of which our Council is a partner, along with Ministries of the Crown (refer Future proof submission to MfE on Action for Healthy Waterways – October 2019). As a project of regional and national significance, it would be desirable to have the option to at least consider a National Planning Process for this project. For this example, a National Planning Process would enable: • better integration of different technical considerations (e.g. integration of land use, infrastructure, and environmental considerations); • improved integration of decision making across different jurisdictions including representation of the interests of the Crown (through one single hearings panel); • streamlined and reduced-cost process for all participants (through avoiding duplication of submission, hearings and appeals process across multiple councils); • and greater certainty of outcome (one decision rather than several, potentially competing decisions).

Decision sought a) Duplicate new part 4 and amend the title to “National planning process”. b) Delete or replace specific freshwater references as appropriate, so that the process can be applied to non-freshwater topics, in special circumstances. c) Amend so that the process is non-mandatory as follows: i. Councils collectively or singly may request a national planning process. ii. Minister must consider a request. iii. If the request is accepted, the Minister may establish a national planning process along the same lines as new part 4. d) Include new criteria where a national planning process may / will be considered / established, such as: - The topic is in the national interest. - The process is beyond the capacity or ability of the requesting council to resource. - The process is necessary to address a significant regional-scale or national-scale resource management issue between 2 adjoining councils, or between a territorial authority and its regional council, or to representing the interests of the Crown.

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 19 of 20 10116078 135

TE AWAMUTU - HEAD OFFICE 101 Bank Street, Private Bag 2402, Te Awamutu Ph 07 872 0030

CAMBRIDGE - SERVICE CENTRE 23 Wilson Street, Cambridge Ph 07 823 3800

/WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC

Waipa District Council submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill Page 20 of 20 10116078 136

APPENDIX 5: QUARTERLY STATISTICS FOR THE 2019/20 FINANCIAL YEAR

1 Jul - 30 Sep 1 Oct – 31 Dec 1 Jan – 31 Mar 1 Apr – 30 Jun Total Resource consents Number of complaints 29 29 Number of compliance 44 44 investigations Number of breaches detected 12 12 Number of abatement notices 0 0 issued Number of infringement notices 0 0 issued Number of warning letters 12 12 issued District Plan Number of complaints 87 87 Number of compliance 87 87 investigations Number of breaches detected 30 30 Number of abatement notices 0 0 issued Number of infringement notices 0 0 issued Number of warning letters 8 8 issued Bylaw – vehicle parking Parking complaints 95 95 Infringement tickets 15 15 Warning letters 25 25 Bylaw – illegal dumping Dumping complaints 25 25 Infringement notices 0 0 Warning letters 0 0 Bylaw – trees overhanging footpath Tree complaints 1 1 Warning letters 1 1 Bylaw – long grass (fire hazard) Long grass complaints 1 1 Warning letters 1 1 Resource Management Act / Bylaw - signs Illegal signs removed 0 0 0 Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 15 of 30 10111702 137 1 Jul - 30 Sep 1 Oct – 31 Dec 1 Jan – 31 Mar 1 Apr – 30 Jun Total Noise Total (all wards) 143 143 Excessive CB/Maungatautari 61 61 noise complaints TA/Kakepuku 70 70 Pirongia 12 12 Unreasonable noise complaints 10 10 Abatement notices issued 0 0 Infringement notices issued 0 0 Written noise directives issued 12 12 Verbal noise directives issued 14 14 Stereo equipment seizures 0 0 Bylaw – fire and smoke Fire and smoke complaints 7 7 Bylaw – other nuisance complaints Nuisance complaints 12 12 Animal control Total complaints and requests 1137 1137 for service Aggression complaints 16 16 Attack or bite on animal 15 15 Attack or bite on child 0 0 Attack or bite on adult 4 4 Barking 96 96 Dog off lead 8 8 Fouling in public 2 2 place Breach of bylaw Dog in prohibited 0 0 area Multi dogs on 0 0 property Bin or sign requests / 2 2 maintenance Rushing in public 6 6 Dog worrying stock 1 1 General info / admin 634 634 Lost / found dog notifications 63 63 Welfare 13 13 Unregistered 11 11 Wandering 237 237

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 16 of 30 10111702 138 1 Jul - 30 Sep 1 Oct – 31 Dec 1 Jan – 31 Mar 1 Apr – 30 Jun Total Stock on roads / trespassing 32 32 Other (e.g. classified dogs) 0 0 Animal control - Dogs Registered (total) 8132 8132 Un-registered (total) 417 417 Impounded 108 108 Re-homed1 4 4 Claimed1 78 78 Euthanized1 11 11 Stolen / escaped 0 0 In pound / foster care at end of 15 quarter 15 Menacing dog classification 119 (total) 119 Dangerous dog classification 8 (total) 8 Infringement notices issued 22 22 Food and health premises Food / premises complaints 8 8 Registered food control plans 246 246 (total) Registered national programs 30 30 (total) Outstanding food and health 4 4 premises registrations / inspection fees (total) Food Act audits 61 61 Non-compliances 0 0 Infringements 0 0 Improvement notices 4 4 Registered health premises 80 80 Health premises inspections 5 5 Alcohol licensing Inspections of Licensed 1 1 Premises Controlled purchase operations (CPO)2 - Premises visited 0 0

1 Provisional figures pending outcome of dog registration process /dogs currently impounded. 2 Operations in conjunction or undertaken by NZ Police and/or DHB. Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 17 of 30 10111702 139 1 Jul - 30 Sep 1 Oct – 31 Dec 1 Jan – 31 Mar 1 Apr – 30 Jun Total - Premises with breaches 0 0 detected (selling alcohol to minors) Check food availability operators - Premises visited 0 0 - Premises with breaches 0 0 detected Number of current on-licences 0 0 Number of current off-licences 0 0 Number of current club licenses 68 68

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 18 of 30 10111702 140 APPENDIX 6: YEAR ON YEAR STATISTICS

2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 YTD Resource consents Number of complaints 63 121 120 29 Number of compliance 104 171 160 44 investigations Number of breaches detected 9 35 51 12 Number of abatement notices 1 2 0 0 issued Number of infringement notices 0 0 0 0 issued Number of warning letters 9 33 51 12 issued District Plan Number of complaints 250 319 376 87 Number of compliance 195 319 376 87 investigations Number of breaches detected 50 44 122 30 Number of abatement notices 0 4 2 0 issued Number of infringement notices 0 0 0 0 issued Number of warning letters 50 40 32 8 issued Bylaw – vehicle parking Parking complaints 285 368 347 95 Infringement tickets 96 291 173 15 Warning letters 101 211 181 25 Bylaw – illegal dumping Dumping complaints 134 120 112 25 Infringement notices 2 4 2 0 Warning letters 1 0 0 0 Bylaw – trees overhanging footpath Tree complaints 58 33 24 1 Warning letters 33 14 23 1 Bylaw – long grass (fire hazard) Long grass complaints 27 56 3 1 Warning letters 25 23 2 1 Resource Management Act / Bylaw - signs Illegal signs removed 9 0 0 0

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 19 of 30 10111702 141 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 YTD Noise Total (all wards) 888 928 789 143 Excessive CB/Maungatautari 459 478 364 61 noise complaints TA/Kakepuku 379 415 375 70 Pirongia 52 35 53 12 Unreasonable noise complaints 77 92 56 10 Abatement notices issued 0 0 0 0 Infringement notices issued 0 0 0 0 Written noise directives issued 39 20 73 12 Verbal noise directives issued 192 109 67 14 Stereo equipment seizures 0 1 4 0 Bylaw – fire and smoke Fire and smoke complaints 157 83 90 7 Bylaw – other nuisance complaints Nuisance complaints 63 104 72 12 Animal control Total complaints and requests 4837 5009 4295 1137 for service Aggression complaints 91 91 64 16 Attack or bite on animal 59 15 Attack or bite on child 46 85 2 0 Attack or bite on adult 14 4 Barking 80 546 476 96 Dog off lead 37 15 11 8 Fouling in public 11 8 3 2 place Breach of bylaw Dog in prohibited 8 3 2 0 area Multi dogs on 3 8 6 0 property Bin or sign requests / 12 24 18 2 maintenance Rushing in public 10 38 47 6 Dog worrying stock 48 13 5 1 General info / admin 2556 2514 2038 634 Lost / found dog notifications 307 354 321 63 Welfare 27 48 37 13 Unregistered 71 57 48 11 Wandering 1049 1080 989 237

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 20 of 30 10111702 142 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 YTD Stock on roads / trespassing 134 161 124 32 Other (e.g. classified dogs) 0 1 5 0 Animal control – Dogs Registered (total) 4837 8229 8561 8132 Un-registered (total) - 76 135 417 Impounded 440 477 466 15 Re-homed3 32 28 35 4 Claimed3 342 359 389 78 Euthanized3 45 53 35 11 Stolen / escaped 2 0 1 0 In pound / foster care at end of 15 4 4 15 year Menacing dog classification 95 113 118 119 (total) Dangerous dog classification 5 6 8 8 (total) Infringement notices issued 133 148 121 22 Food and health premises Food / premises complaints 34 19 15 8 Registered food control plans 241 246 (total) 118 264 Registered national programs 54 30 (total) Outstanding food and health 9 4 premises registrations / 0 12 inspection fees (total) Food Act audits 177 91 224 61 Non-compliances Not recorded Not recorded 7 0 separately. separately. Infringements Not recorded Not recorded 2 0 separately. separately. Improvement notices Not recorded Not recorded 3 4 separately. separately. Registered health premises 261 744 80 80 Health premises inspections 39 6 15 5 Alcohol licensing Inspections of Licensed Not recorded 80 63 1 Premises separately.

3 Provisional figures pending outcome of dog registration process /dogs currently impounded. 4 This figure is reduced due to changes in reporting. Food and health premises are now recorded separately. Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 21 of 30 10111702 143 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 YTD Controlled purchase operations (CPO)5 - premises visited 20 18 16 0 - premises with breaches 1 0 3 0 detected (selling alcohol to minors) Food availability operators - Premises visited 0 0 0 0 - Premises with breaches 0 0 0 0 detected Number of current on-licences 62 63 254 0 Number of current off-licences 31 31 123 0 Number of current club licenses 29 29 123 68

5 Operations in conjunction or undertaken by NZ Police and/or DHB. Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 22 of 30 10111702 144

APPENDIX 7: APPLICATIONS DETERMINED BY THE DISTRICT LICENSING COMMITTEE

Applicant name Associated premises Licence type MCPHERSON Jessica Gail New World Cambridge Manager Renewal MASSEY Fiona Mary Alpha Street Kitchen & Bar Managers Renewal CAMINATI Riccardo Alpino Cucina E Vino Managers Renewal SUNNER Harkamal Singh Blackbull Liquor Managers Renewal ANDERSON Janice Alecia Cosana Managers Renewal HUNT- HOBY Courtney-Ann Naressa Fahrenheit Managers Renewal Alice HAMILTON-VITTLE Amber Jayne Five Stags Leamington Tavern Managers Renewal HUNTER Tuesday Ariel Rauhuia Fresh Choice Managers Renewal HUNTER Tuesday Ariel Rauhuia Fresh Choice Managers Renewal JOHNSTON Maria Elizabeth Fresh Choice Leamington Managers Renewal JACOBSEN Richard Warwick Fresh Choice Leamington Managers Renewal DRUMMOND Christine Mary Fresh Choice Te Awamutu Managers Renewal VAN NIEKERK Susara Maira Good Union Cambridge Managers Renewal BENNETT Donna Maria Group One Turf Bar Managers Renewal KAUR Mandeep Hello India Restaurant Managers Renewal LOKARE Pranay Prabhakar Jet Park Hamilton Hotel and Conference Centre Managers Renewal GILL Harpreet Singh Joy's Place Managers Renewal REHUA Taurene Karanga Kihikihi Rugby Sports Club Incorporated Managers Renewal CRANSHAW Kiri Monique Lily Pad Managers Renewal HARRIS Sydney Stewart Liquorland Te Awamutu Managers Renewal HARRIS Sydney Stewart Liquorland Te Awamutu Managers Renewal JENKIN Sandra Joy Mystery Creek Events Centre Managers Renewal REUBEN Sharon Ohaupo Dart Club Managers Renewal REUBEN Sharon Ohaupo Dart Club Managers Renewal MAMGAIN Neeraj Onyx Cafe and Bar Managers Renewal HODGSON Lance Thomas Out In The Styx Managers Renewal CAMBRIDGE Iain Peter Pak n Save Te Awamutu Managers Renewal ADITI Bajaj Shakespeare Liquor Managers Renewal ADITI Bajaj Shakespeare Liquor Managers Renewal GUPTA Ayush Station 32 Managers Renewal GUPTA Ayush Station 32 Managers Renewal HANCOCK Murray William Te Awamutu Golf Club Managers Renewal HANCOCK Murray William Te Awamutu Golf Club Managers Renewal DAVISON Valda Surinder Te Awamutu Returned Services Association Managers Renewal

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 23 of 30 10111702 145 Applicant name Associated premises Licence type FLINTOFF Kerry Mark Te Awamutu Returned Services Association Managers Renewal SPRANGERS Linda Kararaina Te Awamutu Rugby Sports & Recreation Club Managers Renewal SCHICK Kate Louise The Boatshed Cafe Managers Renewal THOMSON Thomas Michael The Clubhouse café and Sports Bar Managers Renewal SEKHON Lovepreet Kaur The Redoubt Bar & Eatery Managers Renewal MILLS Darren Christopher Waikato River Explorer Managers Renewal TAYLOR Victoria Clare Waipa Workingmens Club Managers Renewal TAYLOR Victoria Clare Waipa Workingmens Club Managers Renewal FLAY Daniel James Alpino Cucina e Vino New Managers GUGULOTH Bhagat Singh Big Barrel New Managers GUGULOTH Bhagat Singh Big Barrel New Managers BROEKMANS Franciscus Josephus Central Bowling club Cambridge New Managers Alphonse ADLER Ethan John Countdown Te Awamutu New Managers GRAHAM Sarah Katie Liquorland Cambridge New Managers Gemma Charlie Metcalf Mavis and Co New Managers PRASAD Sambhav Sreenivas Merchants Liquor Store New Managers PEACOCK Cameron Lee New World Cambridge New Managers SINGH Rajinder Pirongia Four Square New Managers MUTHUWAHANDI Upeksha Kalpani De Sahara Indian Restaurant New Managers Silva FARNUM Franchesca Elizabeth St Kilda Cafe and Bistro New Managers JOHNSON Anthony James Super Liquor Te Awamutu New Managers SEAGER David Alan Te Awamutu Golf Club Incorporated New Managers SEAGER David Alan Te Awamutu Golf Club Incorporated New Managers TAYLOR-WERAHIKO Alison Elizabeth Te Awamutu Rugby Sports and Recreation Club New Managers Incorporated KUMAR Sandeep The Bottle O New Managers PRUDEN Jamie Thomas The Clubhouse Cafe and Sports Bar New Managers BALL Kate Sarah Tivoli Cinema Cambridge New Managers BALL Kate Sarah Tivoli Cinema Cambridge New Managers WEST Wayne Michael Tom Voyle Sports park New Managers Shivam and Nilesh Limited Sahara India New On Licence Shivam and Nilesh Limited Sahara India New On Licence General Distributors Limited Countdown Cambridge Off Licence Owen Bryden Swan The Woolshed Off Licence Leamington Supermarket Limited Fresh Choice Leamington OFF renewal Waikato Regional Airport Hotel Limited Jet Park Hamilton Airport Hotel and Conference On Licence Centre CAS (2019) Limited Pony Bar and Provisions On Licence Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 24 of 30 10111702 146 Applicant name Associated premises Licence type Owen Bryden Swan The Woolshed On Licence JJ'S Hospitality Group Limited Peach and Porker On Licence Renewal Cambridge Golf Club Inc Cambridge Golf club special Te Awamutu Rugby Sports and Bayleys At Five Special Licence Recreation Club Incorporated Cambridge Golf Club Cambridge Golf club Special Licence Joel Edward Baker on behalf of Cambridge High School Hall Special Licence Cambridge High School Kathy O'Dywer Goodwood school Special Licence Kihikihi Rugby Sports Club Incorporated Kihikihi Rugby Sports Club Special Licence Kihikihi Speedway Incorporated Kihikihi Speedway Special Licence Melville Rugby and Sports Club Melville Rugby and Sports Club Funeral Special Licence Melville Rugby and Sports Club Melville Rugby and Sports Club Funeral Special Licence Tirau Limited Mystery Creek Events Centre Special Licence Maurice Hickford Pirongia Craft Market Special Licence Yolanda Floor - Cambridge High School Ross Bros Muscle car garage Special Licence Educational Trust Inc. Te Awamutu Club Incorporated TA Club (Birthday Celebrations) Special Licence Jill Shaw Te Awamutu Intermediate PTA Special Licence Te Awamutu Rugby Sports and Te Awamutu Rugby Sports Club (Branded Spring Special Licence Recreation Club Incorporated Hoe-Down) Corrie and Her Limited The Bikery Cafe and Catering Special Licence Half & Half Hospitality Limited Half & Half Temporary Authority Waikato Regional Airport Hotel Limited Jet Park Hamilton Airport Hotel and Conference Temporary Authority Centre Redberry (Cambridge) Limited Redberry Supermarket Temporary Authority Redberry (Cambridge) Limited Redberry Supermarket Temporary Authority

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 25 of 30 10111702 147

APPENDIX 8: BUILDING CONSENTS ISSUED

July 2019 Project Type* Cambridge # Kakepuku # Maungatautari # Pirongia # Te Awamutu # Total Value Total No Dwelling $1,427,000 4 $2,172,000 3 $378,000 3 $3,977,000 10 Implement Shed $160,000 1 $160,000 1 Commercial - $1,084,000 11 $314,000 2 $92,000 2 $202,500 6 $1,692,500 21 Industrial Re-Sited Dwelling $35,000 1 $170,000 1 $95,000 1 $185,000 3 $485,000 6 Solid Fuel Heater $1,785,571 8 $450,000 2 $2,235,571 10 Deck/Pergola $18,953 1 $18,953 1 Pool $4,866 1 $10,500 2 $33,250 5 $20,580 5 $13,500 3 $82,696 16 Alterations and $140,700 3 $70,000 1 $39,500 1 $250,200 5 Additions Transportable $16,560 1 $16,560 1 Dwelling Retaining Wall $6,487,958 11 $580,000 1 $1,387,192 4 $1,158,424 4 $3,769,177 12 $13,382,751 32 Garage $70,000 1 $70,000 1 Carport $129,957 3 $31,000 1 $282,864 6 $443,821 10 Grand Total $75,583 3 $31,000 2 $10,000 1 $30,990 1 $105,975 4 $253,548 11

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 26 of 30 10111702 148 August 2019 Project Type* Cambridge # Kakepuku # Maungatautari # Pirongia # Te Awamutu # Total Value Total No Dwelling $6,848,652 15 $602,000 1 $335,000 1 $2,934,929 6 $4,622,400 13 $15,342,981 36 Implement Shed $77,392 1 $310,029 2 $100,000 2 $260,500 6 $747,921 11 Commercial - $12,640,000 3 $4,330,000 4 $100,000 1 $17,070,000 8 Industrial Re-Sited Dwelling $125,000 2 $15,000 1 $150,000 1 $290,000 4 Solid Fuel Heater $17,000 3 $19,362 3 $2,000 1 $8,600 1 $46,962 8 Deck/Pergola $45,000 1 $45,000 1 Pool $100,000 2 $39,500 1 $55,000 1 $194,500 4 Alterations and $530,000 2 $185,000 2 $130,000 2 $845,000 6 Additions Transportable $418,092 3 $160,000 1 $578,092 4 Dwelling Retaining Wall $215,000 2 $215,000 2 Garage $112,000 2 $38,837 1 $150,837 3 Carport $5,000 1 $5,000 1 Grand Total $20,918,136 35 $931,391 6 $489,500 5 $7,927,429 21 $5,264,837 21 $35,531,293 88

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 27 of 30 10111702 149 September 2019 Project Type* Cambridge # Kakepuku # Maungatautari # Pirongia # Te Awamutu # Total Value Total No Dwelling $4,931,437 13 $2,789,426 4 $855,206 2 $3,856,200 7 $5,996,800 16 $18,429,069 42 Garage $38,500 2 $98,190 3 $72,068 3 $208,758 8 Commercial - $34,525,900 8 $300,000 1 $5,850,000 3 $40,675,900 12 Industrial Solid Fuel Heater $17,500 4 $16,000 2 $4,500 1 $38,000 7 Pool $409,500 4 $85,000 1 $40,000 1 $534,500 6 Alterations and $395,000 4 $570,000 3 $510,000 3 $6,500 1 $1,481,500 11 Additions Retaining Wall $200,000 1 $200,000 1 Transportable $896,460 3 $896,460 3 Dwelling Implement Shed $188,036 2 $43,995 2 $61,584 2 $6,000 1 $299,615 7 Plumbing/Draina $2,000 1 $2,000 1 ge Grand Total $41,404,333 41 $2,789,426 4 $1,554,201 8 $4,881,974 19 $12,135,868 26 $62,765,802 98

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 28 of 30 10111702 150 APPENDIX 9: MAJOR RESOURCE CONSENT APPLICATIONS

Lodged and in progress Number Applicant/agent Address Proposal Status/key points Planning/engineering contacts LU/0239/19 Taotaoroa Quarry Buckland Road (MMP DC)/ Extension of pit area and S37 Issued Hayley Thomas Taotaoroa Road (WDC) overburden area to expand quarry Concurrent for 35 years application Waikato Regional Council and Matamata-Piako DC SP/0100/19 Trinity Green Estate 80 Laurent Road Boundary relocation resulting in On hold pending Hayley Thomas landlocked parcels further information request RC/4192.01 & Whitehall Fruit Packers Gorton Road Extension to cool store & Section On hold pending Hayley Thomas 127 to make changes to existing further information LU/0239/19 consent conditions request LU/0165/19 Rural Connectivity Group 62 Griggs Road Erect telecommunications facility & Limited Notified BBO – Kathryn Drew 15m pole with associated cabinets Submissions close and power poles within the rural 16/12/2019 zone

LU/0215/18 Fonterra Limited 168 Laurent Road and 185- To use land for irrigation of dairy Lodged 10/8/18 BCD Group 195 Swayne Road manufacturing and all associated S37 issued wastewaters SP/0041/18 & Thorncombe Park Holdings Limited 1/1859 Cambridge Road Subdivision of 2 lots into 85 lots in On hold at applicants Hayley Thomas LU/0098/18 conjunction with land use consent request for minimum lot area LU/0190/19 Gull New Zealand Limited 88 Kihikihi Road, TA Proposed Gull Service Station Further information BBO – Kathryn Drew request LU/0233/19 Southpark Agri Development Ltd Higgins Road, Hamilton Landuse consent to relocate & Further information BBO – Kathryn Drew expand existing rural based industry request in the Rural Zone LU/0235/19 Charkana Properties 22 Williamson Street Construct 16 Unit Retirement Further information Hannah Divehall Cambridge 3434 Village Complex request Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 29 of 30 10111702 151

Approved Number Applicant/agent Address Proposal Status/key points Planning/engineering contacts SP/0051/19 Haultain Street Properties Limited 6 Hautain Street, Kihikihi Staged subdivision – 1 residential Issued 19/07/2019 Rebecca Steenstra into 63 LU/0152/19 MEIT 99 Tari Road Establish and operate Education Issued 12/08/2019 Victoria Gorter Centre and Biodiversity Laboratory LU/0129/18 Meridian 37 Ltd / Mitchell Daysh 353 Raynes Road Comprehensive Development Plan Commissioner Craig Inskeep - Beca Hearing Held Decision issued 12/09/2019 LU/0001/19 Lauriston Park / BBO 91 Coleridge Street Construct and operate care facility Issued 16/10/2019 Hannah Divehall LU/0330/18 Meridian 37/ Mitchell Daysh 353 Raynes Road Erect building and undertake Issued 18/10/2019 Craig Inskeep - Beca earthworks for industrial purposes SP/0042/19 & RAD Surveying Vogel Street Subdivide 3 into 30 lots, and 11 Issued 12/09/2019 Hayley Thomas LU/0066/19 dwelling apartments within compact housing overlay. LU/0089/19 Cambridge Resthaven Trust Board 6 Vogel Street, Cambridge Resthaven Retirement village Issued 18/11/2019 Hayley Thomas Incorporated redevelopment SP/0164/19 & Holmwood Subdivision Ltd 60 Reid Road, Four Stage Subdivision to create 46 Issued 21/11/2019 Hayley Thomas LU/0259/19 Ngahinapouri lots, a road to vest and local purpose reserves, including a boundary relocation in the Large Lot Residential Zone in conjunction with LU/0259/19 - Contaminated Soils (NES)

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 District Growth and Regulatory Services quarterly report Page 30 of 30 10111702 152

To: The Chairperson and Members of the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee From: Strategic Projects Driver Subject: Report to amend the Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2015 Meeting Date: 3 December 2019

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw (attached as Appendix 1) was last reviewed in 2015. The Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 has removed from the jurisdiction of local authorities most of the responsibilities contained within the Bylaw. Council is therefore required to determine whether a bylaw remains the most appropriate way of addressing the remaining issues (sections 155(1) and 160 LGA).

A draft of a new bylaw has subsequently been prepared and is attached to this report for Elected Member determination.

The following documents are included as appendices to this report: . Appendix 1 Draft Fire Control Bylaw 2019 (document number 10087909).

10122198 153

2 RECOMMENDATION

That the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee: a) RECEIVES the report of Graham Pollard, Strategic Projects Driver [document number 10122198]; and b) DETERMINES that a new Fire Control Bylaw is the most appropriate method for addressing Council’s remaining fire control responsibilities; and c) AGREES that the draft Fire Control Bylaw 2019 as set out in Appendix 1 [document number 10087909] is in the most appropriate form for addressing Council’s fire control responsibilities and does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill Of Rights Act 1990; and d) RECOMMENDS that Council adopts the draft Fire Control Bylaw 2019 as set out in Appendix 1 [document number 10087909] and thereby makes a new Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2019, effective from 1 January 2020.

3 BACKGROUND

The Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw was made in 2015. Its purpose is to: . manage and control fires in urban and rural fire districts . manage and control fires in buildings . prevent nuisance caused by fire . permit the extinguishing of illegal fires on private property . manage or control the storage and disposal of flammable material . provide for fire permits . provide guidelines for the storage of vehicle tyres in urban and rural fire districts. . Subsequently, the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 has removed most of the functions contained within the Fire Control Bylaw 2015 from Council’s jurisdiction, so that Council now only has responsibility for: . prevention of nuisance caused by fires; and . permitting the extinguishing of nuisance fires on private property.

Legislative requirements

Section 155 of the LGA sets out the following three-step process requirements for the making and reviewing of bylaws:

1. Identify what the problem is and determine if a bylaw is the most appropriate way to deal with the problem; 2. Decide the most appropriate form for the bylaw and consider whether the bylaw gives rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990;

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Report to amend the Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2015 Page 2 of 9 154

3. No bylaw may be made that is inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Determination

Following the enactment of the FENZ Act 2017 Council is left with two remnant parts of the Bylaw: preventing nuisance caused by fire, and authority to extinguishing nuisance fires.

The options for Council are: a. Retain the parts relating to nuisance fires in an updated Fire Control Bylaw; or b. Utilise an alternative method of dealing with nuisance fires; or c. Discontinue dealing with nuisance fires.

Options analysis a. The legislative environment in which the Fire Control Bylaw 2015 was determined and made has not changed other than the passing of the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017; this has had the effect of removing most of the content of the bylaw, leaving only two substantive parts plus those sections necessary to administer it. It has previously been appropriate for Council to deal with nuisance fires, and in 2005 Council successfully prosecuted for a failure to extinguish nuisance fires as directed under a previous version of the bylaw. That case confirmed the legitimacy of Council’s bylaw. There remains a need to be able to deal with nuisance fires and therefore, it is appropriate to continue with the Fire Control Bylaw. b. The alternative to Council dealing with nuisance fires is for them to be managed by FENZ. However, this has been excluded from the FENZ Act 2017 indicating an expectation that FENZ will not be the agency of first response in these circumstances. During pre-consultation correspondence FENZ confirmed that nuisance fires are not within their remit unless there is an imminent threat to life and/or property The responsibility for responding to complaints about small, nuisance fires has been left with local authorities. However FENZ advised including clause 9 regarding the ability of an Environmental Health Officer to authorise agents such as FENZ to assist with extinguishing nuisance fires. c. If Council were to rescind the Fire Control Bylaw and not replace it, officers would need to rely on the provisions of the Health Act 1956. Under section 34, Council has the power to deal with nuisance fires through an “engineer or environmental health officer”. Council could rely solely on the Health Act 1956 for dealing with nuisance fires and authorise in writing anyone (including contractors) to enter premises under section 128. However, these people duly authorised would have limited power to act if they were not also an engineer or Environmental Health

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Report to amend the Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2015 Page 3 of 9 155

Officer who could apply section 34. By retaining the Fire Control Bylaw, Council could warrant a broader range of enforcement staff to enter premises and direct people to take action. Both a bylaw and the Health Act 1956 allow for prosecutions only in respect of offences.

A bylaw, therefore, would enable Council to better respond to nuisance fires by having more authorised officers duly warranted. It is recommended, following discussion with FENZ, an amended Fire Control Bylaw remains the appropriate mechanism for dealing with nuisance fires.

Form of the bylaw

Council is faced with two options: 1. Retain and mark-up as “deleted” - the relevant sections of the Fire Control Bylaw 2015; this would obscure the parts of the bylaw that remain relevant, making the bylaw less easy to read. 2. Redraft the remaining parts of the bylaw and thereby make a new Fire Control Bylaw 2019; this would ensure the bylaw is short and easy to read. As required by the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017, Council has consulted with FENZ and taken advice on the form of the draft bylaw. Feedback from FENZ has been incorporated into the draft bylaw. Therefore, Council can be confident that option 2 is an appropriate form of a Fire Control Bylaw.

New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

The Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 has removed responsibilities from Council and few remain. The Fire Control Bylaw 2015 was consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 as a legal necessity. The current draft bylaw merely retains clauses from the Fire Control Bylaw 2015 and has no additional responsibilities. The draft bylaw has been assessed against the provisions of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and no inconsistencies were identified. Therefore, Council can be confident that the draft Fire Control Bylaw remains consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Consultation

Section 156 of the Local Government Act requires local authorities to give consideration to the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by, or who may have an interest in, the subject matter at every stage of the process.

However, the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 inserted a new section 152B into the Local Government Act 2002. This enables Council to amend a relevant fire bylaw by resolution publicly notified without being required to consult in accordance with sections 82 or 83 of the Local Government Act. However, there is a requirement in section 152B for Council to consult with FENZ. Consultation with FENZ has been

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Report to amend the Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2015 Page 4 of 9 156

sought and feedback from FENZ has been received and has been incorporated into the draft bylaw attached. Therefore, Council can be confident that it can amend the Fire Control Bylaw 2015 without further public consultation.

Graham Pollard STRATEGIC PROJECTS DRIVER

Reviewed by Kirsty Downey MANAGER – STRATEGY

Approved by Debbie Lascelles GROUP MANAGER – STRATEGY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Report to amend the Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2015 Page 5 of 9 157

SUPPORTING INFORMATION: ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSAL

1 Statutory and policy requirements

Local Government Act 2002 In accordance with section 145 of the LGA territorial authorities are authorised to make bylaws. The LGA sets out requirements for the creation and review process for bylaws in sections 155, 156 and 158. Sections 83 and 86 outline the special consultative procedure used to draft or review bylaws. The purpose of local government is defined in section 10 of the LGA, as follows:

“10 Purpose of local government 1 The purpose of local government is— a to enable democratic local decision-making and action by, and on behalf of, communities; and b to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

“Section 145 General bylaw making power for territorial authorities A territorial authority may make bylaws for its district for 1 or more of the following purposes: a protecting the public from nuisance: b protecting, promoting, and maintaining public health and safety: c minimising the potential for offensive behaviour in public places.”

“Section 152B Effect of Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 on bylaws 1 If a territorial authority is satisfied, after consultation with Fire and Emergency New Zealand, that it is appropriate to amend or revoke a relevant fire bylaw, the territorial authority may, despite anything in this Act, amend or revoke the bylaw by resolution publicly notified without being required to— a consult in accordance with section 82; or b use the special consultative procedure set out in section 83. 2 In subsection (1), relevant fire bylaw means a bylaw that— a relates to the removal of fire hazards; or b declares prohibited or restricted fire seasons; or c prohibits or otherwise regulates or controls the lighting of fires in open air; or d relates to the prevention of the spread of fires involving vegetation.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Report to amend the Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2015 Page 6 of 9 158

3 If any bylaw made by a territorial authority is inconsistent with the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 or any regulations or notice under that Act,— a the Act, regulations, or notice prevails and the bylaw has no effect to the extent of the inconsistency; and b the territorial authority must amend or revoke the bylaw to remove the inconsistency. 4 The territorial authority may, despite anything in this Act, amend or revoke the bylaw to remove the inconsistency by resolution publicly notified, without being required to— a consult in accordance with section 82; or b use the special consultative procedure set out in section 83. 5 A territorial authority must not make a bylaw that is inconsistent with the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 or any regulations or notice under that Act.”

“Section 155 Determination whether a bylaw made under this Act is appropriate 1AA This section applies to a bylaw only if it is made under this Act. 1 A local authority must, before commencing the process for making a bylaw, determine whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem. 2 If a local authority has determined that a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem, it must, before making the bylaw, determine whether the proposed bylaw— a is the most appropriate form of bylaw; and b gives rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.” 3 No bylaw may be made which is inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, notwithstanding section 4 of that Act.

“Section 160 Procedure for and nature of review 1 A local authority must review a bylaw to which section 158 or 159 applies by making the determinations required by section 155. 2 For the purposes of subsection (1), section 155 applies with all necessary modifications. 3 If, after the review, the local authority considers that the bylaw— a should be amended, revoked, or revoked and replaced, it must act under section 156: b should continue without amendment, it must— i consult on the proposal using the special consultative procedure if—

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Report to amend the Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2015 Page 7 of 9 159

A the bylaw concerns a matter identified in the local authority’s policy under section 76AA as being of significant interest to the public; or B the local authority considers that there is, or is likely to be, a significant impact on the public due to the proposed continuation of the bylaw; and ii in any other case, consult on the proposed continuation of the bylaw in a manner that gives effect to the requirements of section 82.” 4 For the purposes of subsection (3)(b), the local authority must make available a a copy of the bylaw to be continued; and b the reasons for the proposal; and c a report of any relevant determinations by the local authority under section 155. 5 This section does not apply to any bylaw to which section 10AA of the Dog Control Act 1996 applies.”

Health Act 1956

“Section 34 Power to abate nuisance without notice 1 Where by reason of the existence of a nuisance on any premises within the district of any local authority immediate action for the abatement of the nuisance is necessary in the opinion of the engineer or environmental health officer of the local authority, the engineer or environmental health officer, with such assistants as may be necessary, and without notice to the occupier, may enter on the premises and abate the nuisance. 2 All expenses incurred in the abatement of a nuisance under this section shall be recoverable from the owner or the occupier of the premises in respect of which they are incurred, as a debt due to the local authority.”

“Section 128 Power of entry and inspection For the purposes of this Act any medical officer of health, or any health protection officer, or any other person authorised in writing in that behalf by the medical officer of health or by any local authority, may at all reasonable times enter any dwelling, house, building, land, ship, or other premises and inspect the same, and may execute thereon any works authorised under or pursuant to this Act.”

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Report to amend the Waipa District Fire Control Bylaw 2015 Page 8 of 9 160

APPENDIX 1 Draft Fire Control Bylaw 2019 (document number 10087909).

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 September 2019 T6 Structure Plan and T11 Structure Plan– Approval to Consult Page 9 of 9 XXXXXXX 161

FIRE CONTROL BYLAW

2019

10087909 162

Waipa District Council Fire Control Bylaw 2019 Page 2 of 6 10087909 163

Table of Contents

Part One - Introduction ...... 4 Definitions ...... 4

Part Two - Prevention of Nuisance Caused by Fire ...... 5

Part Three – Authorised Officer May Extinguish Fires ...... 5

Part Four - Offences and Penalties ...... 5

Part Five - Revocation ...... 6

First adopted: 2007 Revision dates/version: 2011, 2015, 2019 Next review date: 2029 Engagement required: (generally) Sec 82 LGA2002; Sec 152B LGA2002 in 2019 Document number: 10087909 Associated documents: Operative District Plan Policy Owner: Manager Compliance

Waipa District Council Fire Control Bylaw 2019 Page 3 of 6 10087909 164

In pursuance and exercise of the Powers and Authorities vested in it by the Local Government Act 2002 and the Health Act 1956 and of each and every other Power and Authority thereto enabling it, the Waipa District Council makes and ordains this Bylaw.

Part One - Introduction

1 This Bylaw shall be cited and referred to as the "Waipa District Council Fire Control Bylaw 2019.”

2 This Bylaw shall apply within the boundaries of the Waipa District. All provisions shall apply to the entire Waipa District unless otherwise stated at the beginning of the section or within the clause.

3 This Bylaw is in addition to the following: (a) Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017; (b) Waipa District Plan.

Definitions

4 For the purposes of this Bylaw the following definitions shall apply:

Term Definition Authorised Officer any person, authorised under the Local Government Act 2002, or under the Health Act 1956, or authorised by Council to administer and enforce its Bylaws. Barbeque any outdoor fixed or portable solid fuel or gas fired equipment designed and used exclusively for the cooking of food. Brazier any fixed or portable solid fuel or gas fired equipment or appliance designed for heating and used outdoors. Bylaw refers to the Waipa District Council Fire Control Bylaw 2019. Council refers to the Waipa District Council.

FENZ refers to Fire and Emergency New Zealand Nuisance any smoke, odour, debris or fumes produced by a fire (including a barbeque, brazier or traditional cooking fire) in such quantity or of such nature or in such manner as to be offensive or likely to be injurious to the health of anyone. Occupier includes an owner, tenant, licensee or any agent, manager, foreperson or other person apparently acting in the general management of any premises. Person has the same meaning as in the Interpretation Act 1999. Premises means and includes both land and buildings. Traditional Cooking Fire any hangi or similar fire in the open air for the sole purpose of food preparation using traditional cooking methods.

Waipa District Council Fire Control Bylaw 2019 Page 4 of 6 10087909 165

Part Two - Prevention of Nuisance Caused by Fire

5 No person shall burn, or permit, or suffer to be burnt (including on a barbeque, in a brazier or in connection with a traditional cooking fire) any matter or thing in such a manner as to cause a nuisance, whether the holder of a permit or not.

6 No person shall allow any fire to cause smoke of such a nature or extent as to interfere with the operation of any road way, airport, railway or other similar public facility.

7 Where any Authorised Officer considers that a nuisance is being caused by smoke, odour, debris or fumes, or that a breach of clause 5 or 6 exists, that Authorised Officer may require the occupier of the premises or the person otherwise responsible for the fire to immediately take all practicable steps to abate the nuisance.

Part Three – Authorised Officer May Extinguish Fires

8 Where a fire (including a barbeque, brazier or traditional cooking fire) has been lit or allowed to burn in contravention of any part of this Bylaw, any Authorised Officer may enter the premises (excluding a dwelling) and do any or all of the following things:

a) extinguish the fire, and/or

b) direct the occupier of the premises on which the fire is located or the person who lit the fire, to extinguish the fire; and/or

c) take all practicable steps to abate any nuisance which, in the reasonable opinion of the Authorised Officer is being caused by that fire.

9 Where any person disregards a direction to extinguish a fire, and an Authorised Officer considers that immediate action is necessary to extinguish the fire, an Authorised Officer who is also an Environmental Health Officer may, under section 34 of the Health Act 1956, extinguish that fire, or authorise an agent of the Council (including FENZ) to extinguish the fire and to take such other steps as may be reasonably necessary to abate any nuisance which, in the reasonable opinion of the Authorised Officer, is being caused by the fire.

Part Four - Offences and Penalties

10 Every person who: (a) Fails to comply with or acts in contravention of any provision of this Bylaw; or (b) Fails to comply with a notice served under this Bylaw.

Waipa District Council Fire Control Bylaw 2019 Page 5 of 6 10087909 166

COMMITS AN OFFENCE under the Local Government Act 2002, and is liable to a fine not exceeding $20,000 (twenty thousand dollars).

11 In addition to any fine imposed pursuant to clause 10 of this Bylaw, the Council may recover from the occupier of the premises, the person who lit the fire or the person who is responsible for the fire, any costs incurred by it as a result of its officer or agents taking any action authorised under any Part of this Bylaw, including but not limited to the costs of extinguishing the fire.

Part Five - Revocation

12 The Waipa District Council Fire Control Bylaw 2015 is hereby revoked.

The foregoing Bylaw was made by the WAIPA DISTRICT COUNCIL by resolution publicly notified at a meeting of Council held on 17 December 2019. This Bylaw becomes operative on 1 January 2020.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Common Seal of the WAIPA DISTRICT COUNCIL was hereunto affixed pursuant to a resolution of Council passed on 17 December 2019 in the presence of:

……………………………………….Mayor ……………………………………………Chief Executive

Waipa District Council Fire Control Bylaw 2019 Page 6 of 6 10087909 167

To: The Chairperson and Members of the Strategic Planning & Policy Committee From: Strategic Projects Driver Subject: Amendments to the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy Meeting Date: 3 December 2019

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of the Policy is to: (a) Monitor and manage traffic at specific intersections and to investigate incidents that occur in those locations. (b) Improve road user safety by monitoring traffic flow patterns and investigating traffic incidents. (c) Increase public safety by discouraging public disorder and anti-social behaviour. (d) Detect and capture evidence of offending to allow for a quick response from the Police, emergency services or Council and assist with investigations and prosecutions of offending in the Waipa District. (e) Actively deter offending in the Waipa District, including that which relates to Council assets or facilities. Work has continued during 2019 to install, configure and test the system hardware; and to recruit and train volunteers to monitor the live camera images. In doing so, a significant Policy omission has been identified. New Zealand Police has requested that this omission be rectified as it potentially affects the efficiency of Police operations and their ability to respond more effectively to incidents. In proposing this amendment, the opportunity is being taken to ask the Committee to adopt a number of minor amendments arising from changes to organisational titles.

The following appendix/appendices accompanies this report:

10122204 168

. Appendix 1 – Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy for Community Safety in Public Places (document number 10121548)

2 RECOMMENDATION

That the Strategic Planning & Policy Committee:

a) RECEIVES the Amendments to the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy report (document number 10122204) of Graham Pollard, Strategic Projects Driver; and

b) ADOPTS the minor amendments to policy clause 4.4.2 of the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy, as shown in Appendix 1 of this report; and

c) ADOPTS the new amendments to policy clause 4.8 of the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy, as shown in Appendix 1 of this report.

3 PROPOSALS AND ASSESSMENT

Proposed amendments

1. A significant amendment is proposed to Policy clause 4.8:

• 4.8.4A Volunteer monitors may view images recorded during their current monitoring session for the sole purpose of providing operational information to Police Officers who are responding to specified incidents.

The ability of monitoring staff to view images recorded within the past two hours has been shown by other councils and Police stations to be invaluable in providing essential incident knowledge and person descriptions to responding Police Officers. This information can help Police Officers locate individuals, vehicles, property etc that may have been involved in an earlier incident.

Without this amendment, volunteers would have to note every description of every vehicle or person etc on every camera just in case that information may prove to be useful later. The level of detail required would be impossible to collect.

Without this amendment, Police Officers responding to an incident would be less likely to know who or what they sought, or what had occurred. The Police ability to respond to incidents after the fact would be restricted; it would not be an improvement on their present ability to respond and would therefore lessen the effectiveness of the CCTV camera system.

2. Three minor amendments are proposed to Policy clause 4.4:

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Amendments to the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy Page 2 of 5 10122204 169

• 4.4.2(a) Council’s “Group Manager, Planning and Community Relations” should be amended to “Group Manager, Strategy and Community Services”. Since March 2019 Council has undertaken an internal restructuring at the Executive tier resulting in a change of job title;

• 4.4.2(g) “Community Patrol New Zealand” should be amended to “CommSafe” which is the organisation which is actually providing the volunteers to monitor cameras;

• 4.4.2(h) “Community Patrol New Zealand” should be amended to “Cambridge Safer Communities Trust”.

In Appendix B one amendment is proposed to clause 3:

• “Community Patrol NZ” should be amended to “CommSafe” for the same reasons as above.

These five amendments correct the Policy and reflect the current reality.

Financial/risk considerations

The proposed amendments to the Policy carry no additional risks for Council. They may reduce the risk or likelihood of the Policy being breached inadvertently by volunteers searching for recent images in order to help a Police operational response. By amending the Policy, such actions would be foreseeable and allowed and therefore would not be breaches of the Policy.

There are no costs associated with the proposed amendments.

Graham Pollard STRATEGIC PROJECTS DRIVER

Reviewed by Kirsty Downey MANAGER STRATEGY

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Amendments to the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy Page 3 of 5 10122204 170

Approved by Debbie Lascelles GROUP MANAGER STRATEGY & COMMUNITY SERVICES

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Amendments to the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy Page 4 of 5 10122204 171

APPENDIX 1

Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy for Community Safety in Public Places (document number 10121548) showing proposed amendments.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Amendments to the Waipa District Council Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy Page 5 of 5 10122204 172

Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy

For Community Safety in Public Places

March / 2019 (amended December 2019)

173 Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Part 1 - Introduction ...... 3

Part 2 - Legislative and policy Framework ...... 3

Part 3 - Strategic Alignment ...... 3

Part 4 - Policy ...... 4 4.1 Application of the policy ...... 4 4.2 Purpose of the policy ...... 4 4.3 Use of information collected ...... 5 4.4 Governance ...... 5 4.5 Locations of CCTV cameras ...... 6 4.6 Signs ...... 7 4.7 Live monitoring ...... 7 4.8 Access to recorded images ...... 8 4.9 Access to information by individual concerned ...... 9 4.10 Audit and Evaluation ...... 9 4.11 Complaint Procedure ...... 10

APPENDIX A ...... 11

APPENDIX B ...... 15

Issue Reason for Issue Author Reviewer Date 1 2

Page 2 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

174

PART 1 - INTRODUCTION

1.1.1 Waipa District Council (the Council) has arranged for the installation of a Community Safety Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) system in public places. This policy sets out the purpose for having a CCTV system and collecting data, the location and operation of the cameras, and the management of the system including the monitoring of, storage and access to footage.

PART 2 - LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

2.1.1 The implementation of the community safety CCTV system and the use (including monitoring, release and storage) of information collected by CCTV is governed by applicable legislation and Council policies.

2.1.2 The implementation of this CCTV Policy also reflects the Council’s policies with respect to privacy, information management and the management of public places.

2.1.3 The following are of particular relevance: (a) Land Transport Act 1998 and Regulations (b) Privacy Act 1993 ‐ Information Privacy Principles 1 – 12, set out in section 6 of the Privacy Act 1993 (c) Privacy and CCTV: A guide to the Privacy Act for businesses, agencies and organisations (Privacy Commission, 2009) (d) Local Government Act 2002 ‐ In particular, section 3 (Purpose) and section 14 (Principles relating to Local Authorities) (e) Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 [LGOIMA]; (f) Official Information Act 1982 (g) Policy on Crime Prevention Cameras (CCTV) in Public Places (New Zealand Police, 2003) (h) Waipa District Council bylaws (i) Waipa District Council Information Management Policy (ISPOL011) (j) Waipa District Council System Owner Policy (ISPOL023)

PART 3 - STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

3.1.1 The cameras will work alongside other strategies such as: (a) The deployment of NZ Police Constables. (b) A higher police profile at known problem times and locations.

Page 3 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

175

(c) The multi‐agency approach to alcohol including a liquor ban policy. (d) Re‐vitalisation projects and beautification of the Cambridge and Te Awamutu central business districts. (e) The presence of Community Patrol New Zealand (CPNZ) at peak times.

PART 4 - POLICY

4.1 Application of the policy

4.1.1 This policy applies to community safety CCTV cameras installed at fixed sites in public areas within the Waipa district for the purposes set out in clause 4.2 below.

4.1.2 The policy will apply to those CCTV cameras installed in public areas such as central business districts and certain traffic intersections.

4.1.3 This Policy does not apply to the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (drones), which may be used to allow the Council to monitor its assets and facilities to enhance public safety and monitor use of assets and facilities.

4.2 Purpose of the policy

4.2.1 The purpose of the Council’s community safety CCTV network is to: (a) Monitor and manage traffic at specific intersections and to investigate incidents that occur in those locations. (b) Improve road user safety by monitoring traffic flow patterns and investigating traffic incidents. (c) Increase public safety by discouraging public disorder and anti-social behaviour. (d) Detect and capture evidence of offending to allow for a quick response from the Police, emergency services or Council and assist with investigations and prosecutions of offending in the Waipa District. (e) Actively deter offending in the Waipa District, including that which relates to Council assets or facilities.

4.2.2 CCTV is not used to undertake surveillance on individuals or groups. CCTV is intended to prevent and detect offending in identifiable crime areas or busy places such as CBDs, and to manage traffic at key intersections.

Page 4 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

176

4.3 Use of information collected

4.3.1 Information collected by the community safety CCTV: (a) Will be used for the deterrence or immediate detection of offending which are recorded by the cameras. (b) May be used, with the prior approval of a member of the NZ Police of the rank of Senior Sergeant or above for the following related purposes: (i) to assist in the collection of evidence. (ii) inquiries relating to the investigation and prosecution of criminal or bylaw offences. (iii) training of NZ Police Officers and persons authorised by the NZ Police Prevention Manager. (iv) authorised research (for example, into the nature of particular offences, foot or vehicular traffic use and patterns, or the evaluation of the operation of camera equipment. (c) Will be used to monitor traffic volumes and traffic flows at selected intersections and to inform decision‐making by monitoring use and demand.

4.3.2 Information collected by CCTV shall not be used for any other purposes other than as stated in Clause 4.2.

4.4 Governance

4.4.1 The CCTV system will be governed by the pre-existing Waipa District Council – NZ Police Liaison Group which meets six monthly to discuss this and other matters that require a joint management approach. For CCTV matters, this will be supported by an advisory group that will consider the Community Safety CCTV operations and make recommendations to the Liaison Group.

4.4.2 The advisory group shall include the following members: (a) Council’s Group Manager, Strategy and Community Services (Chair), or his/her representative (b) Council Privacy Officer (c) Representative from Council’s Road Corridor team (d) Representative from Council’s Information Services team (e) NZ Police Prevention Manager, Te Awamutu Police Station (f) NZ Police Area Commander or their delegate (g) Representative in Waipa district of Commsafe in Te Awamutu, or such other organisations that may be assisting NZ Police with camera monitoring

Page 5 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

177

(h) Representative in Waipa district of Cambridge Safer Communities Trust, or such other organisations that may be assisting NZ Police with camera monitoring (i) Representative of the Te Awamutu Community Board (j) Representative of the Cambridge Community Board (k) Community stakeholder representatives as may be appropriate

4.5 Locations of CCTV cameras

4.5.1 Areas covered by CCTV cameras will be shown on Council’s website.

4.5.2 Cameras shall only be installed at sites in public places where there is a higher than normal risk of traffic congestion at an intersection; or a higher than normal incidence or likelihood of offending or antisocial behaviour. The justification for the placement of cameras in public places shall be by reference to specific types of reported traffic congestion or crashes, or criminal or bylaw offences (for example: car theft, property damage, assault, drunkenness, etc.).

4.5.3 Existing cameras may be moved from one location to another to improve operational efficiency.

4.5.4 Where new traffic signal systems are installed, CCTV cameras will be included.

4.5.5 Privacy Enhancing Technology software (PETs) is installed into the CCTV programmes to prevent personal, private areas from being viewed by cameras. Where the scan area of the cameras includes a private area the PETs insures that the area is ‘blacked out’.

4.5.6 Requests and proposals for the expansion of the current community safety CCTV system will be received by the Council-NZ Police Liaison Group for consideration and evaluation following advice from the Advisory Group. The following shall be considered when assessing any request or proposal for expansion of the current system: (a) Alignment with the purpose of the CCTV network as outlined in section 2 of this Policy (b) Council and/or NZ Police comments or feedback on the expected benefits of locating a camera at the proposed site (c) How well the existing system is working and whether there is a need for review or audit of the system (d) Costs involved in extending the system (e) Potential funding options (f) The priority of installation (g) The Council’s Long Term Plan, or Annual Plan, and budget implications

Page 6 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

178

(h) The Privacy Act 1993

4.5.7 Council staff will work with the Advisory and Liaison Groups, and any other appropriate community stakeholders, to consider any proposal and any recommendations by Council managers. The Council-NZ Police Liaison Group may approve, decline or approve in part the proposal to expand the Community Safety CCTV system, or refer it back to Council staff for further information or consideration.

4.5.8 Significant expansions of the CCTV system that require, under Waipa District Council policies and delegations, the approval of Council shall be referred by the Council-NZ Police Liaison Group to Council with a recommendation to pass an enabling resolution.

4.5.9 Minor expansions of the CCTV system that do not require a Council resolution, such as the installation of an extra camera, may be authorised through a delegation from the Council Chief Executive to the Council’s Road Corridor Manager. Councillors, however, shall be informed of proposed expansions and the reasons for them and provided with opportunities to comment and advise.

4.6 Signs

4.6.1 The Privacy Act 1993 requires that persons from whom personal information is collected are made aware that information is being gathered about them and the purpose for doing so. Accordingly, the sites selected for camera installation must be clearly sign posted at the extremities to notify the public that a camera is or may be in operation. The signs will also act as a crime deterrent.

4.6.2 The erection and maintenance of the signs is the responsibility of the Waipa District Council. The signs must clearly display the message: “CCTV is operating in this area” or similar wording and be of a size and style that makes them readily visible to people entering the area.

4.6.3 Public advertisements will be placed in local newspapers at the time the system is about to start operating to ensure that the public is aware that community safety CCTV is operating.

4.6.4 Public advertisements will also be posted in local newspapers to inform the public of any expansion of the area covered by the CCTV system.

4.7 Live monitoring

4.7.1 Monitoring of the community safety CCTV cameras for crime prevention is the responsibility of the NZ Police and further details regarding the operation of the cameras can be found in the Policy on Crime Prevention Cameras (CCTV) in Public Places (New Zealand Police, 2003).

Page 7 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

179

4.7.2 A central operational monitoring control room is set up in a designated area of the Te Awamutu Police Station, 75 Roche Street, Te Awamutu. Operating times for camera use will be set by the Police as outlined in the Policy on Crime Prevention Cameras (CCTV) in Public Places (New Zealand Police, 2003).

4.7.3 Operating times for the live monitoring of the community safety CCTV cameras will be set by the NZ Police and reflect when a higher than expected incidence of criminal offending is expected and can be statistically quantified.

4.7.4 Live monitoring and operation of CCTV cameras will be undertaken by community volunteers who will be recruited, vetted, trained and supervised by NZ Police (see Appendix B).

4.7.5 For monitors installed on NZ Police premises, only members of the NZ Police and persons authorised by the NZ Police shall be allowed access to the monitors when they are in operation. Equivalent measures shall be taken to ensure the security of monitors that are operated by the Council.

4.7.6 Council will have the ability to live monitor community safety CCTV cameras for the purposes of traffic monitoring, traffic management research and bylaw compliance.

4.7.7 Monitors shall not be located in such a position as would enable them to be viewed or accessed by members of the public. Systems will be put in place to allow for an audit of how NZ Police and Council staff used the CCTV system. For further details on current NZ Police procedures, refer to the Policy on Crime Prevention Cameras (CCTV) in Public Places (New Zealand Police, 2003).

4.8 Access to recorded images

4.8.1 NZ Police will be permitted access to recorded CCTV images that relate to a specific incident identifiable by date, time and location. Access must be for the purposes of incident investigation and evidence gathering and must be authorised by a NZ Police officer of the rank of Senior Sergeant or higher.

4.8.2 All other access to recorded CCTV images, by individuals and private or public organisations, must be upon application to Council. Applications will be considered as official information requests under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA).

4.8.3 Council staff may, from time to time, access the footage from those cameras that are installed for the purpose of monitoring and managing Council roads and facilities. This operation will be of a nature that enables staff to fulfil the defined purpose for which the cameras are installed as defined in clause 4.2 of this Policy.

Page 8 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

180

4.8.4 Council staff will also be able to retrieve recorded images for the purpose of responding to requests for information.

4.8.4A Volunteer monitors may view images recorded during their current monitoring session for the sole purpose of providing operational information to Police Officers who are responding to specified incidents.

4.8.5 Recorded images will be securely stored for Council. All images will be deleted or overwritten after 30 days, unless they are required for evidential purposes. Some recordings and images may be retained for the purposes of resolving incidents or to assist in any legal proceedings.

4.9 Access to information by individual concerned

4.9.1 An individual whose activities have been recorded by a CCTV camera has a right to access and view that personal information in accordance with the Privacy Act 1993 and provided it is readily retrievable. Access can only be refused on one of the grounds set out in sections 27 to 29 of the Privacy Act 1993 or Part 1 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA).

4.9.2 Individuals wishing to access and view recorded CCTV images that are not part of any court proceedings or Police investigation must apply to Council for access which will be treated as an information request under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987. All requests will be determined by a Council Privacy Officer.

4.10 Audit and Evaluation

4.10.1 Records of incidents, traffic management and the general operational use of the community safety CCTV system will be analysed and reported by the Advisory Group to the Council-NZ Police Liaison Group. Audit results will be reported to Councillors.

4.10.2 The collection of incident reports and feedback will assist with assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the CCTV system and in particular will assist with the determination of whether the system is helping to achieve the purpose of the system, as set out in section 2.

4.10.3 The Council and the NZ Police will be responsible for ensuring the CCTV system is implemented and operated in accordance with this policy. Regular audits of equipment, operation, storage and use of information will be required as part of Council’s contract of service and will be conducted periodically to ensure the effectiveness of the system and its continued viability. Council will manage the performance of this contract.

4.10.4 The Council and the NZ Police will remain vigilant to ensure that the system is operated in accordance with legislation, including but not limited to, the Privacy Act 1993, Council policy and best practice principles.

Page 9 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

181

4.11 Complaint Procedure

4.11.1 Any group or individual who wishes to make a complaint regarding the operation or use of the cameras may address their concerns in the usual manner by: (a) Making a complaint to the senior member of the NZ Police working at the time, at Te Awamutu Police Station, 75 Roche Street, Te Awamutu; PO Box 65, Te Awamutu 3800, or (b) Making a complaint to the Independent Police Conduct Authority, PO Box 25221, Wellington 6146 or online at www.ipca.govt.nz, or (c) Making a complaint to the Chief Executive, Waipa District Council, or (d) If the complaint relates to privacy or the use of or access to personal information, a complaint may be made to the Privacy Commissioner, P O Box 10094, Wellington.

The Policy on Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) for Community Safety in Public Places was adopted by the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee of Waipa District Council by resolution 2/19/26 on 5 March 2019.

Page 10 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

182 APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A Checklist – prior to installation and trial of a new CCTV system or expansion of an existing system (from Police Procedure)

Page 11 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

183 APPENDIX A

Page 12 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

184 APPENDIX A

Page 13 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

185 APPENDIX A

Page 14 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places 10121548

186

APPENDIX B Volunteer staff 1. It is acknowledged that volunteer staff may be used by NZ Police to monitor, review and operate the community safety CCTV system when required. 2. NZ Police will be responsible for selecting and appointing the volunteer staff. 3. Volunteers will initially be obtained from CommSafe in Te Awamutu. Any further volunteer staff may be obtained from the community. 4. All volunteer staff must be vetted by NZ Police for their suitability for the role before being allowed to operate and monitor the CCTV system. Vetting will be to the level required for a NZ Police employee. 5. NZ Police will ensure that all volunteer staff operating the CCTV system are trained appropriately and have an understanding of the relative policies. 6. Any concerns regarding volunteer staff involvement or use of the CCTV system are to be brought to the attention of the designated Camera Officer or the Officer in Charge of the Te Awamutu Police Station in the first instance, who will deal with any matters accordingly.

Page 15 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places TRIM: 18135595

187

TE AWAMUTU - HEAD OFFICE 101 Bank Street, Private Bag 2402, Te Awamutu Ph 07 872 0030

CAMBRIDGE - SERVICE CENTRE 23 Wilson Street, Cambridge Ph 07 823 3800

/WaipaDistrictCouncil /Waipa_NZ /Waipa_DC

Page 16 of 16 Policy on Closed Circuit Television in Public Places TRIM: 18135595

188

To: The Chairperson and Members of the Strategic Planning & Policy Committee From: Community Facilities Team Leader Subject: Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund Meeting Date: 3 December 2019 File Reference: 10128591

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Furthermore, PC2 saw a significant change in the way protected trees are managed in Waipa district – most notably the shift of maintenance and responsibility to the landowner.

During the Tree Policy workshop, it was identified a contestable protected tree maintenance fund may be developed pending Council approval. It is proposed $50,000 be allocated each year ($25,000 in the existing financial year to allow for the remaining 6 months) to assist with tree maintenance costs now being borne by landowners. Staff preferred option for this fund proposes Council develop a contestable fund with a claim cap of $2,500 per tree. This option provides a good level of support to protected tree owners, while not placing significant financial and resource strain on Council.

The following appendix accompanies this report: . Appendix 1 – Draft Tree Policy (document number 10128529) . Appendix 2 - Section 4.45 of the Procedural Policy Manual – Existing Tree Policy (document number 1135767)

10128591 189

2 RECOMMENDATION

a) That the Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund report (document number 10128591) of Brad Ward, Community Facilities Team Leader be received;

b) that the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee adopt the draft Tree Policy 2019 as set out in Appendix 1 ( document number 10128529) effective from 9 December 2019, and revoke the existing tree policy as set out in Appendix 2 ( document number 1135767) from the same date;

d) that the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee approve the criteria for applications as set out in Section 3 of this report, for applications to the Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund.

3 OPTIONS AND ASSESSMENT

Background and Assessment – Contestable Protected Tree Fund:

Purpose

To provide an avenue for protected tree owners to access funding to contribute to the costs of managing and maintaining protected trees.

Why are we proposing the fund

This fund (proposed as $50,000) will allow the Council to contribute to the cost of approved maintenance organised by the landowners, acknowledging the community value of protected trees. The purpose meets the community outcomes through being environmental and cultural champions and socially responsible.

How will the fund work

• An information package for protected tree owners will be developed including what will be covered by the contestable fund along with application details. This will be sent to all protected tree owners.

• Once received, the application will be assessed by the Arborist Planner for suitability against the criteria. The application is then approved or declined, with the landowner informed.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund Page 2 of 8 10128591 190

• If the application is successful, the landowner will programme the work directly with the contractor to have the work completed.

• Upon completion of the work to the agreed standard, the Contractor will invoice the Council directly for the Council contribution as agreed within the application.

• Approval of any application will be at Council’s discretion and subject to budget availability.

Criteria for applications

• The fund is contestable on a ‘first come, first served’ basis until it is expended for the financial year.

• A landowner can make a maximum of one claim up to $2,500 per tree per annum.

• The fund can be used for tree maintenance and inspections only; it cannot be used for tree removal, resource consent costs or legal costs.

• To qualify for the fund, the landowners must use qualified arboricultural contractors (a list of contractors can be supplied) and SHE approved. This is to ensure the quality of work done on protected trees, ensures contractors follow best arboricultural practice and meets health safety requirements.

• The work undertaken must be in accordance with the District Plan rules.

• Two quotes must be provided to Council outlining the proposed work and expected cost.

• Emergency work to make a tree safe – as defined by the District Plan – may be procured immediately by the landowner, with the Council to retrospectively consider the application.

• In the case of emergency work the application must include evidence (including photos) that there was an imminent hazard to people or property if work was not undertaken immediately; payment for emergency work will remain at the Council’s discretion.

Decision making The following options were investigated for an annual contestable protected tree maintenance fund as follows:

1. No fund. 2. Pay half the cost of one claim received per annum with claim cap of $2,500 per tree.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund Page 3 of 8 10128591 191

3. Pay half costs of claims received with no cap. 4. Pay full costs of claims received.

Option Analysis

Option Costs Benefits Risk Preferred Option Option 1 0 No cost to Council Landowners do not feel supported by the Council to manage Protected Trees. Option 2 $50,000 • Acknowledges Landowners do not  environmental and feel adequately amenity benefits supported by the trees provide. Council to manage • Some financial Protected Trees. support provided Option 3 $50,000 • Acknowledges • Landowners do environmental and not feel amenity benefits adequately trees provide. supported by the • Good level of Council to financial support manage provided. Protected Trees. • Less landowners are supported each year as the fund is expended faster. Option 4 $100,000 • Acknowledges Landowners request environmental and maintenance more amenity benefits frequently than trees provide. required as there is • Strong financial no financial impact support provided. for them.

Preferred Option Option 2 is the preferred option, to pay half the cost of one claim received per annum per protected tree with a claim cap of $2,500 per protected tree. This option provides a good level of support to protected tree owners, while not placing significant financial and resource strain on the Council.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund Page 4 of 8 10128591 192

The proposed $50,000 for the contestable fund would be enough to pay $2,500 on 20 protected trees. This equates to each protected tree being maintained on average once every five years.

Financial/risk considerations

It has been identified Council can use existing 10-Year Plan budget to cover the Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund for the remainder of the 2019/20 financial year ($25,000) and the entire 2020/21 financial year ($50,000), before seeking further funding during the 2021-2031 10-Year Plan process for the future success of the contestable protected tree maintenance fund.

Brad Ward COMMUNITY FACILTIES TEAM LEADER

Sally Sheedy COMMUNITY SERVICES MANAGER

Debbie Lascelles GROUP MANAGER STRATEGY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund Page 5 of 8 10128591 193

SUPPORTING INFORMATION: ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSAL

1 Statutory and policy requirements

Legal and regulatory considerations

Local Government Act 2002 s.10 Purpose of Local Government

The approved Tree Policy will meet the current and future needs of the community by outlining Waipa District Council’s approach to management and maintenance of Council owned trees and significant Protected Trees on private property.

Consultation and Engagement

An assessment was undertaken against the significance and engagement policy for both the proposed tree policy and the proposed contestable protected tree fund and it is considered that the impact of these proposals are considered to be of low significance and therefore public consultation is not required.

The draft tree policy does not alter the level of service for trees on public land, but seeks to clarify how Council cares for these trees. The Contestable Protected Tree Fund was proposed during the PC2 (Protected Tree District Plan Change) hearing. PC2 was a publicly notified process in accordance with the Resource Management Act 1991. The implications of PC2 is that the way that protected trees on private land are maintained needs to shift from work undertaken by Council to being the responsibility of the landowner to align with the District Plan rules.

Feedback from landowners following the PC2 becoming operative has reinforced the proposal for a contestable protected tree fund. Following approval of the contestable protected tree fund, an information package for protected tree owners will be developed including what will be covered by the contestable fund along with application details.

Council policy or strategy

This draft tree policy has been reviewed in conjunction with PC2 and the contestable protected tree maintenance fund is highlighted in the proposed Tree Policy section 19.

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund Page 6 of 8 10128591 194

Appendix 1 Waipa District Council Draft Tree Policy November 2019 (Document number 10128529)

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund Page 7 of 8 10128591 195

Existing Tree Policy (To be Superseded) Proposed Replacement Tree Policy

Purpose: Purpose:

To provide guidelines for the management of trees on public land, and To provide policy direction for the management of amenity trees on Council land make provision for the recognition and protection of significant and protected trees on private property. specimen tress on private and public land.

Trees on Council Land – Policy 4.4.5.1 Trees on Council Land

Maintenance and New Planting: a) Council will maintain trees on Council land, including road reserves, 1) Council will maintain trees on Council land, including road reserves, to to ensure their good health and undertake planting for continuity ensure their good health, safety and amenity function. where trees are nearing maturity or commencing to decay. 2) Council will undertake planting for continuity where trees are in a state of decline, commencing decay, have suffered damage or have been removed. Replacement trees shall be planted within the same or next available planting season, having regard to Policy 3 below.

3) New planting and planting for continuity shall take into consideration ‘the right tree for the right place’, including potential impacts on utility infrastructure, Regional Infrastructure Technical Specification requirements (RITS) and the long-term cost impacts associated with ongoing maintenance.

4) Council will avoid the inappropriate siting of buildings and development within the root protection zone of culturally significant, historic, significant native and gifted trees on the Council register.

196

5) A minimum tree grade of PB95 (45L) shall be used for tree planting, unless lesser grades have been approved by the Manager Community Services due to limitations of species availability. Street trees shall have a minimum 30mm diameter trunk at time of planting.

6) Unless exceptional circumstances have been approved by the Manager Community Services, street tree planting clearances shall be in accordance with the relevant setbacks specified in the Regional Infrastructure Technical Specification (RITS).

7) Council will maintain an approved tree species register which identifies suitable species for specific locations. Tree planting on Council land shall have regard to the species register.

8) To compensate for the effect of higher density urban development on limiting tree choice, Council will plant larger trees of long-term value in suitable public spaces.

9) Tree pruning shall have regard to: - The species, function and form of the tree; and - Aesthetic impacts on the streetscape or reserve.

b) Trees on public reserves, including road reserves and Council land, Tree Removal: are to be considered for removal only if it is clearly established that the tree is a potential danger to life or property by showing signs of 10) Trees on public reserves, road reserves and Council land, are to be structural defects, commencing to decay, or where root systems have considered for removal only in the following circumstances: obstructed or damaged utility services. I. if it is clearly established that the tree is a potential danger to human life or property by showing signs of structural defects, commencing c) Public reserves, road reserves or Council land which are adjacent to to decay, or where root systems have obstructed or damaged utility private property will be considered for removal if severe hardship from services which cannot be repaired without tree removal; or the effect of the trees can be proved. Types of hardship effecting 197

persons lifestyle would include severe shading and overhang of trees II. if the tree constitutes a weed species which is self-sown and/or which onto private property. Severe overhang could be has high weed dispersal potential; or measured as being in excess of 25% of a tree's canopy overhanging private property. Leaf fall on its own onto private property is not III. if the tree creates severe hardship for adjoining private property by considered a severe hardship. virtue of extraordinary leaf or debris drop, significant overhang (>25% of canopy) or damage caused by root systems where root pruning cannot be achieved; or d) Trees on Council administered land will be considered for removal to make way for Council approved capital development or improvements. IV. where tree removal is necessary to make way for Council-approved capital development or improvements. In these circumstances, the process will involve public consultation if the tree proposed for removal has a STEM score greater than 138.

V. If, in addition to (i) to (iv) above, it has been established the tree does not host nationally critical, at risk or threatened animal species (e.g long or short-tailed bats). If the tree is a host for such species, the appropriate Wildlife Act Authority may be required from the Department of Conservation.

Note: Policy 10 is not applicable to Council trees which have been planted for the purpose of timber harvesting.

Tree Register: e) A register will be maintained on the care and protection of historic, 11) A Council Tree Register will be maintained for significant exotic and significant native and gifted trees on Council land. indigenous trees on Council land, as well as culturally significant trees, historic trees and gifted trees. The Council Tree Register will be maintained as a ‘live’, non-statutory document.

12) Threshold criteria will be developed for the inclusion of significant exotic and indigenous trees on the Council tree register.

198

13) Nga Iwi Topu O Waipa will be consulted when:

- It is proposed to undertake works to, or in the vicinity of culturally significant trees; and - Culturally significant trees are proposed for inclusion or removal on the Council Tree Register. Tree Hazard and Risk f) Any felling or pruning or trimming of any tree on Council land is to be 14) Council will develop and maintain a Tree Hazard and Risk Register to undertaken at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Asset evaluate hazard and risk to public from Council trees. The Register will Manager Recreation. be based upon an appropriate industry risk analysis methodology. As a minimum, hazard rating shall take into consideration:

- Tree characteristics; - Tree health; - Site conditions; - Public exposure / target; and - Tree defects

Staff Authorisation:

15) The felling or pruning or trimming of any tree on Council land is to be undertaken by a suitably qualified arborist at the direction of, and to the satisfaction of, the Manager Community Services.

Trees on Private Land – Policy 4.4.5.2 Trees on Private Land

a) Council will undertake a regular five yearly review of all trees 16) Significant trees on private property shall be protected and managed identified in the Waipa District Plan to ensure that they are in good through the provisions of the Waipa District Plan. The Waipa District health and not posing a significant hazard. Plan shall include a register of protected trees on private property.

199

17) Access permitting, Council will undertake an independent five-yearly review of protected trees identified in the Waipa District Plan to ensure that they are in good health and retain at least 110 points in the Standard Tree Evaluation System (STEM).

18) Protected trees on private property which no longer score at least 110 points in the Standard Tree Evaluation System (STEM) will be considered for removal from the Waipa District Plan protected tree register at the next available Plan review / Plan change opportunity. Maintenance Assistance: b) During the five yearly review, Council will fund tree maintenance 19) Subject to funding availability, Council will provide an annual contestable work identified as being necessary to maintain safety, health and fund to assist landowners in maintaining trees that are protected under amenity level on trees that are protected within Council’s District Plan. the Waipa District Plan.

Advisory Service: c) Council will provide, at its expense, an advisory service to all owners 20) On a requested basis, and at its expense, Council will provide an advisory of trees that are worthy or potentially worthy of protection within service to owners of trees that are potentially worthy of protection Council's District Plan. In order to be worthy of protection, a tree must within the Waipa District Plan. In order to be worthy of protection, a accumulate at least 100 points in the RNZIH Tree Evaluation System, tree must accumulate at least 110 points in the Standard Tree Evaluation potentially worthy trees must accumulate between 90 and 99 points. System (STEM).

21) Trees which meet STEM qualification criteria will be considered for inclusion within the Waipa District Plan’s protected tree register as part of the next available Plan review / Plan change opportunity. d) If a tree does not maintain a level of at least 100 points in the RNZIH Tree Evaluation System, or the tree dies, then Council will consider initiating a District Plan change to remove it from the list of protected trees. Council accepts no responsibility for any costs associated with a tree after it is removed from the list of protected trees.

200

e) Should a tree on the schedule be damaged during a storm, Council will assist in the cost of clearing up the particular tree, but will not be responsible for damage caused by that tree

f) Protection measures for stands of indigenous trees will be targeted at those stands achieving in excess of 100 points from the RNZIH Tree Evaluation System, or a similar system approved by the RNZIH.

Definitions

‘Protected Tree’ means any tree listed in Appendix N4 of the Waipa District Plan.

‘Qualified arborist’ means an arborist qualified at least to level four in Arboriculture on the NZQA National Framework or equivalent Arboricultural qualification.

‘Root protection zone’ means for a tree with a spreading canopy, the area beneath the canopy spread of a tree, measured at GROUND LEVEL from the surface of the trunk, with a radius to the outer most extent of the spread of the tree’s branches, and for a columnar tree, means the area beneath the canopy extending to a radius half the height of the tree. The definition is explained in the diagram below, which is aligned with the definition in the Operative District Plan).

‘STEM Score’ means the score attributed under the Standard Tree Evaluation Method.

201

Public consultation process for the removal of Council trees in accordance with Policy 10(iv):

1. Notice to be placed in the local newspaper that a tree with a STEM score of >138 is proposed for removal, to make way for a Council capital development project.

2. Members of the public will be invited to make written submission within 20 working days from the date of notification. In order to assist the public in making an informed submission, a STEM evaluation of the affected tree and a project summary will be made available for public inspection at Council offices.

3. Council’s project manager will prepare a submission report with recommendations for Council’s Strategic Planning and Policy Committee.

4. Submissions will be heard by Council’s Strategic Planning and Policy Committee (no time limit proposed for the hearing date).

5. Submitters will be advised in writing of the process outcome (no time limit proposed).

6. There are no third-party rights of appeal against the decision of the Strategic Planning and Policy Committee. 202

Appendix 2 Section 4.45 of the Procedural Policy Manual (document number 1135767)

Report to Strategic Planning & Policy Committee – 3 December 2019 Tree Policy Review and Contestable Protected Tree Maintenance Fund Page 8 of 8 10128591 203

4.4.5 Trees

Trees

Policy Objective To provide guidelines for the management of trees on public land, and make provision for the recognition and protection of significant specimen tress on private and public land.

Policy 4.4.5.1 TREES ON COUNCIL LAND

a) Council will maintain trees on Council land, including road reserves, to ensure their good health and undertake planting for continuity where trees are nearing maturity or commencing to decay.

b) Trees on public reserves, including road reserves and Council land, are to be considered for removal only if it is clearly established that the tree is a potential danger to life or property by showing signs of structural defects, commencing to decay, or where root systems have obstructed or damaged services.

c) Public reserves, road reserves or Council land which are adjacent to private property will be considered for removal if severe hardship from the effect of the trees can be proved. Types of hardship effecting persons lifestyle would include severe shading and overhang of trees onto private property. Severe overhang could be measured as being in excess of 25% of a tree's canopy overhanging private property. Leaf fall on its own onto private property is not considered a severe hardship.

d) Trees on Council administered land will be considered for removal to make way for Council approved capital development or improvements.

e) A register will be maintained on the care and protection of historic, significant native and gifted trees on Council land.

f) Any felling or pruning or trimming of any tree on Council

Procedural Policy Manual – October 2010 Updated October 2018 Page 112 of 118 12023879 204

land is to be undertaken at the direction and to the satisfaction of the Asset Manager Recreation.

4.4.5.2 TREES ON PRIVATE LAND

a) Council will undertake a regular five yearly review of all trees identified in the Waipa District Plan to ensure that they are in good health and not posing a significant hazard.

b) During the five yearly review, Council will fund tree maintenance work identified as being necessary to maintain safety, health and amenity level on trees that are protected within Council's District Plan.

c) Council will provide, at its expense, an advisory service to all owners of trees that are worthy or potentially worthy of protection within Council's District Plan. In order to be worthy of protection, a tree must accumulate at least 100 points in the RNZIH Tree Evaluation System, potentially worthy trees must accumulate between 90 and 99 points.

d) If a tree does not maintain a level of at least 100 points in the RNZIH Tree Evaluation System, or the tree dies, then Council will consider initiating a District Plan change to remove it from the list of protected trees. Council accepts no responsibility for any costs associated with a tree after it is removed from the list of protected trees.

e) Should a tree on the schedule be damaged during a storm, Council will assist in the cost of clearing up the particular tree, but will not be responsible for damage caused by that tree.

Linkages/References District Plan – Policy HG4 Part 1 Section 12.4.4 Rules Section 11.4 and Appendix 13 (Note District Plan currently under review) Department Service Delivery - Community Facilities (Parks & Reserves) Last Reviewed/ 28th September 2010 Resolution Container Trees - General 01-68-01 Notes Trees are an integral and valued part of our environment. Council acknowledges this and the benefits of maintaining and developing

Procedural Policy Manual – October 2010 Updated October 2018 Page 113 of 118 12023879 205

significant trees on public land. From time to time trees on Council- administered land adversely effect neighbouring properties or present a risk to people or property. The development of a policy provides clear guidance for assessing and managing such situations. The District, and particularly Cambridge, contains a number of significant specimen trees, many of which date from early European settlement.

These trees have high intrinsic value and the importance of their ongoing protection has been recognised by the community.

Procedural Policy Manual – October 2010 Updated October 2018 Page 114 of 118 12023879