I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Catchment Operations Committee will be held on:
Date: Wednesday, 16 September 2015 Time: 10.00am Venue: Tararua Room Horizons Regional Council 11-15 Victoria Avenue, Palmerston North
CATCHMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
AGENDA
MEMBERSHIP
Chair Cr MC Guy Deputy Chair Cr JJ Barrow Councillors Cr LR Burnell, QSM Cr DB Cotton Cr EB Gordon (ex officio) Cr RJ Keedwell Cr PJ Kelly JP Cr GM McKellar Cr DR Pearce Cr PW Rieger QSO JP Cr BE Rollinson Cr CI Sheldon
Michael McCartney Chief Executive
Contact Telephone: 0508 800 800 Email: [email protected] Postal Address: Private Bag 11025, Palmerston North 4442
Full Agendas are available on Horizons Regional Council website www.horizons.govt.nz
Note: The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy unless and until adopted. Items in the agenda may be subject to amendment or withdrawal at the meeting.
for further information regarding this agenda, please contact: Julie Kennedy, 06 9522 800
CONTACTS 24 hr Freephone : [email protected] www.horizons.govt.nz 0508 800 800
SERVICE Kairanga Marton Taumarunui Woodville CENTRES Cnr Rongotea & Hammond Street 34 Maata Street Cnr Vogel (SH2) & Tay Kairanga-Bunnythorpe Rds, Sts Palmerston North
REGIONAL Palmerston North Wanganui HOUSES 11-15 Victoria Avenue 181 Guyton Street
DEPOTS Levin Taihape 11 Bruce Road Torere Road Ohotu
POSTAL Horizons Regional Council, Private Bag 11025, Manawatu Mail Centre, Palmerston North 4442 ADDRESS FAX 06 9522 929
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Apologies and Leave of Absence 5
2 Deputation 5 Judie Keane
3 Supplementary Items 5
4 Members’ Conflict of Interest 5
5 Confirmation of Minutes Catchment Operations Committee meeting, 29 July 2015 7
6 Te Kawau Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) Report No: 15-181 17 Annex A - Te Kawau Drainage Scheme Audit - August 2015 21
7 River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Report No: 15-182 123 Annex A - Schedule of Completed Works 153
8 Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Report No: 15-183 165 Annex A - SLUI Target Parcels 173 Annex B - SLUI Overview and Plan Progress 174 Annex C - SLUI Mapped Priority Land 175 Annex D - SLUI Works Tracking 176
9 Whanganui Catchment Strategy Report No: 15-184 177
10 Whanganui Catchment Strategy Operational Plan 2015-16 Report No: 15-185 181 Annex A - Whanganui Catchment Strategy Operational Plan 2015-16 183
11 Regional Coast and Land Report No: 15-186 201
12 Regional Land and Coastal Operational Plan 2015-16 Report No: 15-187 205 Annex A - Regional Land and Coastal Operational Plan 2015-16 207
Page 3
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
13 Climate Change Impacts on Water Quality Outcomes from the Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Report No: 15-188 229
14 June 2015 Storm Response Report No: 15-189 233
15 Members’ Questions
16 Public Excluded Section 16.1 Procedural motion to exclude the public 239 PX1 Confirmation of Public Excluded meeting held on 29 July 2015 PX2 Committee to consider whether any item in the Public Excluded minutes can be moved into the public domain, and define the extent of the release. PX3 Members’ Questions
Page 4
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
AGENDA
1 Apologies and Leave of Absence At the close of the Agenda no apologies had been received.
2 Public Speaking Rights Notification to speak is required by 4pm on the working day prior to the meeting. Further information is available on www.horizons.govt.nz\Council\ or by phoning 0508 800 800.
Petitions/Deputations Deputations: Written notice (fewer than 150 words) concerning the nature of the deputation must be lodged with the Chief Executive at least 2 working days before the date of the meeting and subsequently approved by the Chairperson. Petitions: Written notice to the Chief Executive is required at least 2 working days before the date of the meeting.
Further information is available on www.horizons.govt.nz\Council\ or by phoning 0508 800 800.
3 Supplementary Items To consider, and if thought fit, to pass a resolution to permit the Committee/Council to consider any further items relating to items following below which do not appear on the Order Paper of this meeting and/or the meeting to be held with the public excluded. Such resolution is required to be made pursuant to Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended), and the Chairperson must advise: (i) The reason why the item was not on the Order Paper, and (ii) The reason why the discussion of this item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.
4 Members’ Conflict of Interest Members are reminded of their obligation to declare any conflicts of interest they might have in respect of the items on this Agenda.
Page 5
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
Minutes of the tenth meeting of the ninth triennium of the Catchment Operations Committee held at 10.00am on Wednesday 29 July 2015, in the Tararua Room, Horizons Regional Council, 11-15 Victoria Avenue, Palmerston North.
PRESENT Crs MC Guy (Chair), JJ Barrow (from 10.20am to 11.59am and from 12.28pm to 2.51pm), LR Burnell QSM, RJ Keedwell, GM McKellar (to 12.21pm), DR Pearce, PW Rieger QSO JP, BE Rollinson, and CI Sheldon. IN ATTENDANCE Chief Executive Mr M McCartney Group Manager Operations Mr AD Cook Committee Secretary Mrs JA Kennedy ALSO PRESENT At various times during the meeting: Mrs S Craig (Corporate Information Manager), Mr C Mitchell (Group Manager Environmental Management), Mr G Cooper (Environmental Manager Land), Mr P Blackwood (Senior Design Engineer), Mr J Bell (Design Engineer), Dr J Roygard (Freshwater and Science Manager), Mr J Foxall (Senior Engineer), Mr D Harrison (Environmental Programme Coordinator), Mr M Todd (Environmental Monitoring Coordinator), Mr W McKay (Environmental Management Technical Land), Mrs C Hesselin (Communications Advisor), Sustainable Land Use Initiative Scholarship Recipients, Messrs G Kane, B Whitelock, G Knight, and Ms C Matena (Member, Federated Farmers), Mr J Beard, Mr M Pedley, and a member of the press.
The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.
Mr Cooper (Environmental Manager Land) introduced the successful Sustainable Land Use Initiative Scholarship recipients to the Committee.
APOLOGIES
COP 15-93 Moved Sheldon/Rollinson That apologies be received from Crs Gordon, Cotton, and Kelly (Leave of Absence). CARRIED
Cr McKellar noted he would be leaving the meeting at lunch time. Cr Pearce noted a possible early departure from the meeting of 2.30pm.
PUBLIC SPEAKING RIGHTS There were requests from Messrs Geoff Kane, Braeden Whitelock, and Gary Knight (Federated Farmers) for public speaking rights. They each wished to speak to Item 6, “River and Drainage Engineering Report, Annex A, Flood Damage Arising from June 2015 Flood Event”. The Chair invited the speakers to address the meeting and advised they each had up to five minutes to speak.
Page 7
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
Mr Kane provided an apology from Mr James Stuart (Member, Federated Farmers) who was unable to attend. Mr Kane detailed three main concerns as a result of the June flood event: the number of scheme pumps that malfunctioned during the flood event, and the consequences of that; the timing around a decision to open the floodgates and its consequences; and concerns around what he believed was a lack of general drain maintenance and build-up of weed. He commended Horizons Regional Council staff for their overall response during the flood event.
Mr Whitelock showed photographs of a breach to the Manawatu River stopbank at Te Puna Road, Linton during the June flood event and detailed his concerns in that regard. He spoke about the need to monitor the condition of the stopbank in the event of further heavy rain and outlined a proposal he believed would help strengthen the stopbank. Mr Braeden said he was disappointed with the breakdown in telecommunications experienced during the June flood event.
Cr Barrow joined the meeting at 10.20am.
Mr Whitelock explained his concerns with the upgrade work undertaken last year to the Manawatu stopbank, in particular the type of materials used. He referred to a report entitled “Review of the February 2004 Flood Event” and said he had highlighted relevant points that were applicable to the June 2015 flood event. Paper copies of the photographs displayed at the meeting and the report referred to were made available to Councillors after the meeting.
Mr Knight detailed his concerns about the breach of the Oroua River and the consequential damage to his property which he believed was attributed to improvements that had been carried out upstream. He believed it was the responsibility of Horizons Regional Council to better protect his property from flooding.
Members asked questions of clarification about the issues presented. Mr Cook (Group Manager Operations) said the telecommunications issue was being investigated. The Chairman thanked the speakers for their comments and views. He said they were welcome to stay and listen to the discussion of Item 6, River and Drainage Engineering Report, which may address some of their issues raised. A letter would be written in due course to answer the queries raised during public speaking rights.
SUPPLEMENTARY ITEMS There were no supplementary items to be considered. The Chairman noted the schedule of followups from the May Catchment Operations Committee meeting.
MEMBERS’ CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Cr Sheldon said her property was mentioned in the table on page 37 of the agenda.
Page 8
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES COP 15-94 Moved Barrow/Keedwell That the Committee: confirms the minutes of the Catchment Operations Committee meeting held on 13 May 2015 as a correct record, and notes that the recommendations were adopted by the Council on 19 May 2015. CARRIED
RIVER AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING REPORT (PRD 01 02) Report No 15-125 The purpose of this item was to report on progress with river and drainage activities for the period of 1 May to 17 July 2015. A range of photographs and maps were shown in support of activities in the report, including photographs of flood damage from the June flood event. Several typographical errors throughout the report were noted for amendment. Mr Cook (Group Manager Operations) said the latter part of the reporting period was dominated by the major flood event and subsequently addressing flood damage issues throughout the Region. He spoke to the map on page 21 which indicated the return periods for 48 hour rainfalls across the Region and the table on page 22 which indicated the location where significant flooding occurred. In response to a query, Mr Cook explained the situation which arose with the operations of the sluice gates on the Makino Stream on account of debris obstruction. He said a review of operating protocols was underway and that a design and location for a debris arrester was now being considered. There was discussion and comment on the many areas of flood damage throughout the Region and Mr Cook responded to questions of clarification, commented on possible causes, and updated on progress with repairs. He noted that the telecommunication issues experienced by Mr Whitelock and others were currently being addressed, and he clarified the process and communication undertaken to alert the community about the impending overtopping and potential failure of the Oroua River stopbank. He explained that a number of updates had been made to the “Oroua River Flood Response Plan” as a result lessons learned through the June flood event. In response to Members’ comments and questions about the damage caused to Mr Knight’s property, the Chairman and Mr Cook explained the planned flood protection works which were underway on the Oroua River and said it was unfortunate they had not been completed prior to the flood event. Mr Cook noted that other property owners had also been badly affected. In response to a query, the Chief Executive said $250,000 had been provided by government to the Manawatu-Wanganui Disaster Relief Fund and said conversations about further funding were ongoing. He said the conditions and criteria for remissions for affected properties through the Emergency Rate Relief Fund were still to be drawn up and approved by Council. The Chairman then thanked the speakers for their presentations, thanked them for their help and cooperation, and said their points had been noted and would be responded to accordingly. Mr Cook continued with his report, responding to Members’ questions and providing clarification on various issues. In response to a query about stormwater mitigation for new subdivisions in the Feilding area, he noted ongoing discussions between Horizons Regional Council and Manawatu District Council (MDC) in regard to stormwater neutralisation and said MDC were now looking at
Page 9
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
community detention dams for new developments as opposed to individual site detention.
In referring to the table (para 7.87) scheduling of all programmed Rural Upgrade Project works, Mr Cook spoke of the challenges faced by staff to achieve those objectives, together with the flood damage reinstatement work. He said the table was prepared prior to the flood event and he explained that it was now desired to include an extension to the Oroua protection works for the lower Oroua River in order to protect the marae at Rangiotu. To minimise the risk of ‘dropping’ projects from the table in order to accommodate that addition, Cr Guy asked whether outside contractual assistance was an option. The Chief Executive explained his preference was to pursue additional support for the Operations team to undertake the necessary works. In response to a query around the timing of a decision to open the flood gates and whether it affected the levels in the Lower Manawatu to the detriment of the Koputaroa outlet, Mr Cook believed the answer was no. He said some modelling output would be needed to demonstrate that. He explained the gate opening procedure and said that provided as much forward warning of potential gate opening as possible, thereby enabling the community to prepare accordingly. There was discussion and questions of clarification about the scheme pump operations during the June flood event and the problems encountered. Mr Cook spoke to a powerpoint presentation which provided an overview of the drainage scheme pumpstation operations and inspection regime. Mr Cook and the Chief Executive said they believed the infrastructure systems Horizons Regional Council had in place to protect the community had overall performed well during the recent flood event.
Cr Barrow left the meeting at 11.59am.
Cr Burnell asked questions about progress with several ongoing flooding issues in the Horowhenua area, progress with repairs at various locations after the June flood, and commented on a report of cattle grazing on stopbanks and the potential damage. It was suggested that Mr Foxall (Area Engineer) would be able to assist with a response to those issues. Mr Cook referred to the table of flood damage arising from the June 2015 flood event and explained that $4.3m worth of damage was attributable to the event. It was intended to initiate the process to lodge a claim for infrastructure reinstatement costs under the National Civil Defence and Emergency Management Plan 2009. He explained that the claim process was demanding of staff time and resources. In the interim Mr Cook explained it was proposed to fund the repair works by way of scheme reserves. He responded to Members’ questions of clarification and explained that in some instances flood damage repairs could be accommodated within existing budgets without compromising other scheme works. Concern was expressed at the frequency of drawdown of scheme reserves to fund flood damage repairs. Questions were asked about the length of time it took to compensate for the drawdown, the percentage of scheme rate increase required to maintain desirable reserves, and whether there was benefit in undertaking investigations around the costs, benefits and affordability of maintaining flood protection schemes.
Cr McKellar left the meeting at 12.21pm.
Page 10
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
COP 15-95 Moved Rieger/Pearce That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-125 and annexures; b. approves the expenditure of scheme and infrastructure reserves on flood damage reinstatement works over the next 12 months as follows:
Estimated Cost of High Scheme Infrastructure Priority Damage Reserves Reserves (20%) Reinstatement Requiring (80%) Use of Reserves $3,360,595 $2,688,476 $672,120
CARRIED
There was further discussion around the level of reserves and the frequency of reserves being depleted. Mr Cook explained that a review of Scheme emergency reserve targets was scheduled for the current year and that as part of that, the issues of drawdown frequency and replenishment time / rating impact, would be addressed. The review report could then be discussed at a Councillors’ Workshop or Committee meeting.
Mr Cook explained the ongoing flooding problems experienced in the area of the Lower Turakina River adjoining Turakina Beach Road and the benefits to be had of installing a flood water egress structure in the Makirikiri Stream stopbanks at a total estimated cost of $75,000. Accordingly it was proposed that $22,500 be funded by way of an Environmental Grant, with the remaining $52,500 to be funded by Ruapehu District Council and the affected landowner.
Cr Barrow returned to the meeting at 12.29pm.
COP 15-96 Moved Sheldon/Keedwell c. approves an Environmental Grant of $22,500 towards the installation of a flood water egress gate in the Makirikiri Stream stopbank. Abstain: Cr Barrow CARRIED
Cr Barrow explained he had not been present during discussion of the recommendation to approve the Environmental Grant and therefore abstained.
Cr Rieger noted a possible early departure from the meeting of 2.55pm.
The meeting adjourned at 12.31pm. The meeting reconvened at 1.00pm.
Page 11
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
UPPER MANGAWHERO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES - FLOODING AND EROSION RISKS AT OHAKUNE (PRD 03 07) Report No 15-126 The purpose of this item was to report on findings of an investigation into flood and erosion risks to Ohakune Township and environs, arising from the Upper Mangawhero River and tributaries. Mr Blackwood (Manager Investigations & Design) took Members through a powerpoint presentation which depicted the layout of the township, identified the five main tributaries where water could enter, and he explained the particular challenges associated with managing that. He outlined the recommended mitigation options based on a design standard of 0.5% Annual Exceedance Probability, and associated cost. Mr Blackwood responded to Members’ questions of clarification. In response to a query, Mr Cook (Group Manager Operations) explained that in the first instance it was proposed to present the report contents to Ruapehu District Council Officers and Councillors for their initial feedback, followed by consultation with the community for their feedback. It was proposed that a final report containing options and recommendations as to any possible implementation programme and associated funding matters, would be available for consideration at the November Catchment Operations Committee meeting. It was noted that although the report highlighted significant issues and risks, affordability by the community for the recommended mitigation options was an issue. COP 15-97 Moved Rollinson/Barrow That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-126 and annexure; and b. endorses the proposed communication/consultation strategy. CARRIED
UPPER MANAWATU & LOWER MANGAHAO GRAVEL RESOURCE STUDY (PRD 5 31) Report No 15-127 The purpose of this report was to inform the Committee about the findings of a study of the gravel resource in the Upper Manawatu and Lower Mangahao Rivers. Mr Bell (Design Engineer) introduced this report and responded to Members’ questions of clarification. COP 15-98 Moved Rieger/Burnell That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-127. CARRIED
SUSTAINABLE LAND USE INITIATIVE (SLUI) OPERATIONAL PLAN 2015-16 Report No 15-130 This item was to introduce to Members for endorsement the 2015-16 Operational Plan for the Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI). Mr Mitchell (Group Manager Environmental Management) introduced the item. He referred to paragraph 6.2 which set out the structure of the Operational Plan and the content of each Section. Mr Harrison (Environmental Programme Coordinator) spoke about the potential impacts of the June 2015 flood event for Horizons Regional Council and the SLUI programme and responded to Members’ questions. Mr Cooper (Environmental Manager Land) said the effect of the flood event on current pole delivery was not as great as first thought although it was too early to determine potential impacts for next season. He clarified questions around joint venture afforestation costs and referred to paragraph 2.7.6 of the Operational Plan. There was full discussion and comment around the value or otherwise to purchase land outright
Page 12
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
versus the cost of leasing land under a joint venture. In referring to the issues identified for further consideration (para 3.5), Mr Mitchell said an item in that regard would be presented to a Catchment Operations Committee or Strategy and Policy Committee meeting, early in 2016. In response to a query, Mr Cooper and Dr Roygard (Manager Science) spoke about the research underway around the pole planting programme, the performance of poles over time, and the impact of flood events on poles. The Chairman commented on the urgency around re-negotiating two joint venture contracts to ensure protection of assets. Mr Mitchell and Mr Cooper responded to Members’ questions of clarification in that regard. COP 15-99 Moved Rieger/Burnell That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-130 and Annex. b. endorses the 2015-16 SLUI Operational Plan as annexed to this item. CARRIED
PROCEDURAL MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC COP 15-100 Moved Guy/Sheldon THAT the public be excluded from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows. This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 and section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows: General subject of each matter Reason for passing this Ground(s) under section 48(1) to be considered resolution for the passing of this resolution PX1 Joint Venture Forestry s7(2)(h) - the withholding of the s48(1)(a) Valuation information is necessary to The public conduct of the part of enable the local authority to the meeting would be likely to carry out, without prejudice or result in the disclosure of disadvantage, commercial information for which good activities. reason for withholding exists This item discusses detailed under section 7. financial aspects of Council's joint venture forestry established as part of SLUI and is therefore commercially sensitive. PX2 Council / Committee to consider whether any item in the Public Excluded minutes can be moved into the public domain and define the extent of the release PX3 Members’ Questions
CARRIED
Page 13
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
The meeting adjourned to the Public Excluded part of the meeting at 2.02pm and resumed at 2.29pm.
SUSTAINABLE LAND USE INITIATIVE (SLUI) Report No 15-131 This report was to update Members about progress on Council’s Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) for the period 24 April to 30 June 2015. Mr Cooper (Environmental Management Land) said it was not a full end of year report as there were still invoices to be processed from works carried out in late June 2015. Mr Mitchell (Group Manager Environmental Management) commented on the progress against targets and said the figures had been forward to the Ministry of Primary of Industries for payment in full. Dr Roygard (Freshwater and Science Manager) advised that Horizons Regional Council and Taranaki Regional Council were working with GNS Science to complete a landslide distribution and severity report following the June 2015 flood event. He said phase one included an aerial reconnaissance assessment of the Region, and he explained that phase two would involve the preparation of a detailed report to document the findings from phase one. Dr Roygard responded to questions of clarification about phase two research, proposed costs and possible funding partners. COP 15-101 Moved Sheldon/Burnell That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-131 and Annexes. CARRIED
FORESTRY SEEDLING UPDATE Report No 15-132 This item updated Members on the proposed forestry plantings for 2015 in association with seedlings purchased in October 2014. Mr Mitchell (Group Manager Environmental Management) introduced the item and noted that depending on the response to the current Afforestation Grant Scheme applications and negotiations with Ministry of Primary Industries with regard to contract details in the new Hill Country Erosion Fund, the final position on the Winter 2015 planting plan would be known by September 2015. COP 15-102 Moved Rollinson/Sheldon That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-132. CARRIED
WHANGANUI CATCHMENT STRATEGY Report No 15-133 This report updated Members on progress on the Whanganui Catchment Strategy for the period 24 April to 30 June 2015. COP 15-103 Moved Rieger/Pearce That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-133. CARRIED
Page 14
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
REGIONAL COAST AND LAND Report No 15-134 This report updated Members of the progress on Council’s Regional Land and Coast activities from 1 March to 24 April 2015. COP 15-104 Moved Keedwell/Burnell That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-134. CARRIED
COASTAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT HIMATANGI BEACH: MANAWATU DISTRICT (PRD 08 07) Report No 15-128 The purpose of this report was to inform the Committee about the findings of an investigation of the coastal hazards affecting Himatangi Beach over the next one hundred years. Mr Bell (Design Engineer) spoke to the item. In responding to a query about whether the report included information about the impact of tectonic plate movement global warming and identifying any change in sea level, Mr Blackwood explained that it was not significant enough to be included in the assessment. Mr Cook (Group Manager Operations) confirmed that the a copy of the final report would be forwarded to Manawatu District Council, once adopted by Council. COP 15-105 Moved Sheldon/Rieger That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-128 and annexure. CARRIED
ISSUES ARISING FROM ANNUAL SCHEME MEETINGS APRIL / MAY 2015 (PRD 05 00) Report No 15-129 The purpose of this item was to inform the Committee of progress with addressing the more significant issues raised at the Annual Scheme Ratepayer meetings for River and Drainage Schemes held during April / May 2015. Mr Cook (Group Manager Operations) spoke to the item and noted that the June 2015 flood event had taken priority although the various issues would be addressed as staff resources allowed. It was anticipated that all issues would be resolved satisfactorily with outcomes reported on at the 2016 Annual Scheme Ratepayer Meetings. COP 15-106 Moved Barrow/Keedwell That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 15-129 and Annex A. CARRIED
MEMBERS’ QUESTIONS The Chairman referred to several questions submitted from Cr McKellar and noted the Group Manager Operations had addressed them during Item 6, River and Engineering Report. In response to a query from Cr Pearce, Mr Cook (Group Manager Operations) confirmed that the June 2015 flood in the Whanganui River was the largest recorded at Paetawa.
Page 15
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
Mr Blackwood (Senior Design Engineer) explained that the filling of meander loops at Flock House created a “less than minor” impact on flooding levels. Cr Barrow commented on his attendance at a Tararua District Council (TDC) meeting where the Chief Executive TDC asked whether the Sustainable Land Use Initiative should be looked at as a Regional Growth Initiative.
Cr Barrow left the meeting at 2.51pm.
In response to a further query about the meander loops at Flock House, Mr Blackwood explained that a consent had not been sought to fill them in.
The meeting closed at 2.52pm.
Confirmed
______CHIEF EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN
Page 16
5.3. 5.2. 5.1. 5. 4.1. 4. 3.2. 3.1. 3. 2. 1.1. 1. KAWAUTE AUDI SCHEME September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 5.5. 5.4.
COMMUNITYENGAGEMENT The Kawau Te Scheme auditwas scheduledin the2014 in included is audits scheme undertaking AnnualPlan under River the and Drainage Schemes Activity. in involved work the for provision Budget FINANCIAL IMPACT c. b. a. That Committee the recommends thatCouncil: RECOMMENDATION Thepurpose of this item isto report the offindings the TeKawau Drainage Scheme Audit. PURPOSE Thesescheme assetshave total a replacement value 1at July 2014of $6,442,403. Lower the Manawatu Scheme (LMS). with Rangiotu at Floodgate Drain Main the shares also It floodgates. 52 and stopbanks of approximatel maintains scheme present The system rating forthe amalgamated scheme came intoeffect newon 1 July2004. a and 2001 in completed was schemes two the Drainage of review combined RiverA Sluggish the amalgamating by 2004 in Scheme an Council by established was It and Rangiotu between River Oroua the of west Awahuri. lies Scheme Drainage Kawau Te The BACKGROUND the the with for concerns audit drainage anyscheme eng the proposals discuss and of meet them to regarding invitation informing an township) including and Rongotea 2013 findings in those April (excluding newsletter a in send newsletter a programmedreplac received last Ratepayers
improvementaround stopbank management. process with together reserves, renewal minor funding for provision relatively including system, rating to limited are recommendations audit the notes adopts audit the of the TeKawau Drainage Scheme; and receivesinformation the contained in
dOroua Drainage Scheme into a single catchmentwide scheme. ineeratan ‘Open Session’ beto held Glen in Oroua.
ementofageing floodgatedculverts Mainalong isproposedIt Drain. to
T (PRD 04 12) T (PRD 04 12)
ReportNo. 15 y 179 km of drains, two pumpstations, 28 km 28 pumpstations, two drains, of km 179 y
Information Only Information Report No. - - 181 15year.
andannexure;
-
No Decision Required No Decision
dutet o the of adjustments
15
Page Page - 181
the 17
Item 6 Item 6 6.1. 6. 5.15. 5.14. 5.13. 5.12. 5.11. 5.10. 5.9. 5.8. 5.7. 5.6. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 6.2.
DISCUSSION to required changes further any identify and review last performanceand managementstrategies, as well as any changes to the the since occurred have that changes on report to intended are and intervals year 10 at completed generally are Audits the well how assessactualscheme costsalign with assumptions the made in the schemerating systo and out carried been have reviews scheme of recommendations the which to degree the examine to introduced been have audits scheme years, recent In two the and completed upgrades schemesamalgamated aunder new systerating stopbanking main the the implementing on with to progress recommendations, steady been 2006 review had there in that noted completed report final were review The system rating the and review the summar both on reports Final system.rating new proposed the of developmentthe during implicationsdetermined cost and acceptance were recommended improvements also was and It changes minor relatively only and required,particularly to thestopbanks along Main Drain andvarious tributaries. ratepayers of needs the reviewcombinedi The Scheme ratesin 2014 from reserves andtargeted rates. replacementsfloodgate of programme a funding is and loans no currentlyschemehas The urba plus area, drainage rural townshipRongotea. of the in rated properties 515 are There protection flood and pumping scheme the works. from benefit direct receives ha 2,100 almost which of ha 13,623 approximately of area catchment a covers system rating scheme The John Foxall,Area the Engineer Southern, who isresponsible managing for thescheme. sub rating each in works various the of cost the monitoring for reviewscheme of files,annual scheme reports, rates calculations,expenditure breakdowns Th The Kawau Te audithas specificallyaddressed adt a be crid u b arnWelr Dsg Egne, n hs involved has and Engineer, Design Wheeler, Warren by out carried been has audit e Recommendedchanges designto standards and the system.rating Rating systemchanges and impacts. Actualand estimated expenditure forthe rating system. Implementationof the 2004 rating system. ofState scheme assetrecords. Recommendeddesign standards andtheir relevance to present Scheme changessince the review. Implementationof the 2001 review recommendations.
ise process the and outcomesinvolved.
-
n 2001 n 15 were$182,756 (GST inclusive).
ht h to cee b aagmtd sbet o ratepayer to subject amalgamated, be schemes two the that
concluded that the present schemes were generallymeeting wereschemes present the that concluded
the followingmatters. m.
- area, and discussion and area, conditions.
poete i the in properties n
rating system.
tem.
Page Page s with s
18
7.13. 7.12. 7.11. 7.10. 7.9. 7.8. 7.7. 7.6. 7.5. 7.4. 7.3. 7.2. 7.1. 7. 6.3. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
The rating system is flexible enough to accommodate a recent request to extend the DS DS the intoarea the Awahuri extend area. to request recent a accommodate to enough flexible is system rating The pumping and control flood drainage, the funding works managedby t to approach targeted a provided and schemes original two the successfullycombined has 2004 in introducedsystem rating The actual with consistent been replacements. generally have calculations long the over expenditure rates and budgets Scheme the for database. asset the important in those is with reconcile dimensions process mapping the ensure This will and system management assets. scheme as listed currently not are that stopbanks secondary on floodgates of number a of capture the include 2015 in completion for due is register asset the of update and mapping Asset issuesare relatively outstandingandminor will addressedbe as prioritiesallow as or the ne any and implemented a been largely Improved have recommendations review 2001 The levels. stopbank and sections cross channel the conditioninformation will better inform futuredecisions around asset upgrades. of survey full a by Drain Main of capacity the review to and inspections) facilitate better to managementmowing as stopbank (such improving for options consider to timely be nevertheless would It and channelcapacity, but damage was condition stopbank regarding issues some highlighted has 2015 June in flood recent The systemrating or managementof the scheme. and managed well being cur generally is scheme the that concluded has audit The COMMENT Acopy of audit the reportisattached atAnnex A. The relatively minor adjustments to the rating system will be included in the rates rates the in included be will system rating the to calculations 2016 for adjustments minor relatively The Drain. Main along stopbanking the under culverts floodgated ageing for programme replacement a one to beenhasinvaluable This in provide helpingto continuity transitiontwoin the from schemes Committee thatstill includes long Te The new the incorporate to adjusted Councilfunding policy to separately renewalfund be expenditure and emergency reserves. to needs also system rating the that notes audit The (FK). the to allocated the to costs as well as of areas drainage proportion the update to required are adjustments minor Some ety o ed o ay infcn ipoeet o cags o h dang network, drainage the to changes or improvements significant any for need no rently
nd in the implementation of improvements to Main Drain Floodgate and the the and Floodgate Drain Main to improvements of implementation the in nd aa Dang Shm i mngd ih nu fo a cee Liaison Scheme a from input with managed is Scheme Drainage Kawau
he scheme.he - 17 and subjectto consultation as part of the Annual Planprocess.
12) - term and the new re new the and term
-
flood control categories for Main Drain (FM) and Kopane and (FM) Drain Main for categories control flood standingmembers of the two originalschemes. fairlylight foransuch overdesign event.
newals policy will better provide for periodic for provide better will policy newals
nert o te asset the of integrity ed arises.ed -
16 and will and 16
hr is there Page Page sset
19
Item 6 Item 6 A ANNEXES DESIGNENGINEER Warren Wheeler 10.1. 10. 9.1. 9. 8.1. 8. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Te Te 4. 3. 2. 1. Followingadoption of theauditby Council, it isproposed that: CONSULTATIONNEXTSTEPS / 4. 3. 2. Scheme the with collaboration 1. in Manager, Scheme the LiaisonCommittee: that recommends audit The RECOMMENDATIONS hs s o a infcn dcso acrig o h Cucls oiy n infcne and Significance on Policy Council’s the to Engagement. according decision significant a not is This SIGNIFICANCE Kawau Drainage Scheme Audit Audit Scheme KawauDrainage
greaterassurance of the stopbankintegrity can be givenin future. managemen improved for options Considers eomne cags o h rtn sse wl b itoue truh the through introduced Other recommendations willi be be will system rating 2016 the to changes Recommended audit the findingsand providing a update general schemeon matters. s all to sent be newsletter A Theaudit findingsdiscussedbe with theScheme LiaisonCommittee. d. c. b. a. Implementsminor changes to the rating system in 2016 drainagecosts into Sluggish, the Oroua andRailway Drain areas. expendit monitor to Continues channel the of survey full a out crosssections and stopbank levels. carrying after capacity Drain Main the Reviews
-
17 Draft17 Annual Plan.
Road. DS the of extension the all once calculation rates the assets inhave been mappedand included in AMS; the and costs floodgate of split the updating drainagecategories 75%:25%to (instead of 70%:30%); of split the amending provision for funding renewals reserves;
GROUP MANAGEROPERAT AllanCook -
August 2015 August
cheme ratepayers (excluding Rongotea) summarising Rongotea) (excluding ratepayers cheme aig ra euse b rtpyr aog Highden along ratepayers by requested area rating
riae ot bten h Sugs ad Oroua and Sluggish the between costs drainage r i ec rtn ctgr, nldn te pi of split the including category, rating each in ure mplemented atmplemented the earliestopportunity.
o Mi Dan tpakn, o that so stopbanking, Drain Main of t
IONS
- 17including:
Page Page 20
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Te Kawau Drainage Scheme Scheme Drainage Kawau Te
Audit
August2015
Page Page 21
Annex A Item 6
Annex A Item 6 September16 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te CONTACT CENTRES ADDRESS SERVICE POSTAL
HorizonsRegional Council, Private11025,Bag Manawatu Mail Centre, Palmerston North 4442 | CnrVogel(SH2) & TaySts Woodville 34Maata Street Taumarunui CnrHammond Hair & Sts Marton PalmerstonNorth Kairanga CnrRongotea & Kairanga 24hr
Freephone 0508 800 800 2015
-
BunnythorpeRds
John Foxall, Area Engineer Southern Engineer Area Foxall, John
Report No: No: Report REGIONAL ISBN: 987
Acknowledgements to Acknowledgements HOUSES
Design Engineer Design Warren Warren Wheeler August 2015 August
Author - 1
2015/EXT/1455 181Guyton Street Wanganui 11 PalmerstonNorth [email protected] -
927259 - 15Victoria Avenue
-
34 - 4
DEPOTS
Ohotu TorereRoad Taihape 11Bruce Road Levin www.horizons.govt.nz
F
06 9522929
Page Page
22
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te CHIEF EXECUTIVE MichaelMcCartney Therecommendations in documentthis will be finalisedafterconsultation with ratepayers. provide to continues desired the level schemeservicof the that ensure to required are that changes any identifies It reportson what changes have occurredsince then. and review Scheme Drainage Kawau Te 2001 the of implementation the reviews audit This thatperformance standards andmanagement strategies remain appropriate. ensure managementto its under schemes drainage and river the audit to policyCouncil is It September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
e toratepayers in an affordable andequitable manner.
FOREWORD
Page Page
23
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 24
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. Contents Foreword September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
6.4 6.3 6.2 6.1 RatingSystem 5.4 5.3 5.2 5.1 Reserve Funds CodePractice of 3.2 3.1 SchemePerformance 2.2 2.1 SchemeReview 2001 1.2 1.1 Introduction
6.4.4 6.4.3 6.4.2 6.4.1 RatesCalculations Change inScheme Rates since 2004 Overlap with Rangitikei Scheme RatingAreas Removed Implementationof New Rating System 5.4.2 5.4.1 NewPolicy OrouaPortion of the Reserves Surplus Reserves EmergencyReserve Fund Scope Further for Improvements 3.1.2 3.1.1 Overview 2.2.8 2.2.7 2.2.6 2.2.5 2.2.4 2.2.3 2.2.2 2.2.1 Changessince Review the 2.1.2 2.1.1 Implementationof Review Recommendations Needa Scheme for Audit Scheme Description
AllocationStopbank of and Floodgate Costs AllocationDrainage of Costs AllocationBudgeted of Expenditure UniformAnnual Charge Rating Rese for NeedSeparate for Reserves June 2015Flood October2010 Flood DataAsset 2010Flood DamageRepair LanesNo.2 Stopbanking andFloodgates Pumping Main Drain Floodgate Replacements Main Drain Floodgate Strengthening MinorDrainage Network Changes Improvementsand Upgrades Stopbankand Pumping Upgrades Amalgamation
ComplianceReport -
SeparateReserves Emergencies for and Renewals
CONTENTS
rves Contributions
10 25 24 23 23 23 22 21 21 21 19 19 19 18 17 17 17 15 14 13 13 13 13 11 11 10 Page Page iii 9 9 8 8 8 5 4 3 3 2 1 1 i
25
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 RatingCurrent Maps ANNEXE Proposed RevisedAllocation of Costs ANNEXD Updated RatingReport 2006 ANNEXC Drain MaintenanceCosts 1992 ANNEXB 2001Review Recommendations A ANNEX 7. September16 2015 Catchment 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Conclusionand Recommendations 6.6 6.5
Operations Committee 6.6.2 6.6.1 Scope Future for Changes Ratesand Actual Expenditure 6.4.9 6.4.8 6.4.7 6.4.6 6.4.5
CombiningDS and DO Rating Areas ExtensionintoAwahuri Area ProvisionDepreciation for ProvisionPeriodic for Maintenance AllocationReserves of AllocationManagement of Costs AllocationMain of Drain FloodgateCosts
- 2011
83 53 53 49 49 35 35 33 30 30 29 28 27 27 26 26 25 87 87 83 Page Page
26
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 1.1 1. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
Scheme ratesin 2014 Thescheme currentlyloans.nohas plus area, drainage almost300 urban propertiesrural in the township o the in rated properties 515 are There Ka works. protection Te flood and pumping from benefit direct receives ha 2,100 almost which of ha 13,623 whole The Bainesse adjoining the through Drainage drainsScheme, which ismanagedby the Manawatu DistrictCouncil (MDC). area small This State adjoining south. ha the 350 to some 57 for Highway except area, whole the for River o Oroua only the the provides into and schemes two the by jointly maintained is ofDrain end Main the at structure floodgate the large to A River level. protection Oroua flood year the 100 alongrequired stopbanks the upgrading currently is which (LMS), Lower the by flooding river from protected is area scheme The the behind (HRC), largest Council fourth Regional the is Horizons Scheme Manawatu,Makerua and Koputaroa. by Drainage managed Kawau Te scheme the drainage value asset of terms In Theseassets have areplacement value 1at July 2014of 27.9 of km stopbanksand 52 floodgates. pumpstations, two drains, of km 179 approximately maintains scheme present The relative areas (67%Sluggish Riverand 33% Oroua). cost the set that Proclamation a by 1913 in resolved was This Drain. Main on works of share fair the over concerns ratepayer to largely due 1912 until lasted only 1909 in amalgamation previous the However, River. s the share and catchment same the of part logicallyform they as amalgamatedwere schemes adjoining two these time first the not was This KawauDrainage Scheme”, which effective became 1 July on 2004. intro subsequent 2001 the in and schemes both of review combined a of result the was amalgamation The the of amalgamation by 2004 in Council Sluggish RiverDrainage Scheme and byOroua Drainage Scheme. established and was scheme representatives new This local ten or nine of Councillors. Committee a Liaison with consultation in Foxall Scheme John Engineer, Area Southern the by managed is It River Oroua lower the between Rangiotu and Awahuri. of west the to located is Scheme Drainage Kawau Te The Description Scheme Introduction
- 15 were$182,756 (GST inclusive). a Shm hs rtd ra f approximately of area rated a has Scheme wau
duction of a of duction
new rating system under the new name “Te name new the under system rating new
- share for Mai for share f Rongotea. f
$6,442,403. n Drain according to their to according Drain n ame outlet into the Orouathe into outlet ame
Manawatu Scheme Manawatu
Page Page three
utlet utlet 27
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 1.2 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
eitos ae occu blindly significant where management have that that ensure ensure deviations to rather to but not recommendations, therefore review the is follows audits the accommodate of purpose to The enough flexible be must circumstancesand experience gainedover the years since the review. management that and occur inevitably will recommendations the from deviation some that accepted is It rating scheme the in made assumptions system. the with align costs scheme actual to the degree the examine to introduced been whichrecommendations the scheme of reviews have has audits scheme of programme A Audit Scheme fora Need meet to continues scheme expectations and the ratingsystem continues to provide equitable funding. the that ensure will recommendations The summary,In audit the process will on report the following: a well anychanges as to the rating system. strategies, management and performance to required changes further any identify andreview the occurredsince that changes on report wouldaudits The documentedprocess leading to thatchange. RecommendedChanges to Performance Standards andRatingSystem. Rating SystemChanges and Impacts Actualand Estimated Expenditure forthe Rating SystemDifferentials RecommendedDesign Standards and Relevance Presentto Scheme Changessince theReview Implementationof the 2001 Scheme Review Recommendations
04 12) 04 rd tee a be a well a been has there rred,
been carried out and how welland howbeen out carried - nomd cniee and considered informed,
Conditions
ratepayer changed
Page Page 28 s
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 2.1 2. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
process objectives, the and outcomesof the Sluggish Riverand Oroua DrainagesummariseSchemes review to completed was report final a 2006, June In of Recommendations Review Implementation o the and time to not improvementof the scheme. System related were recommendations generally Rating these and of New Most specific Funding, A). Annex Management, (see Amalgamation Scheme Drains, Pumping, Stopbanking, Design, Scheme regarding recommendations 50 were there total In 3. 2. 1. amendments following the with recommendations, review the adopted Council 2001, July 24 On of ratepayersand only relatively changesminor and improvements were required. needs the meeting generally were schemes present the that concluded review The amalgamation of to improve overallmanagement of the area the for 10 next effective be will r that operation and protection design the in improvements flood for options and drainage the schemes, two the examine of performance the consider to was review the of purpose The and 2001 May in endorsedby Council for consultation with stakeholders. completed was schemes original two the of review combined A SchemeReview 2001
n cs ipiain dtrie drn te eeomn o te propose the of development newrating system in 2002 the during determined implications cost acceptance and ratepayer to subject amalgamated, be would schemes two The Amalgamation with theaffected ratepayers. upgrade at to fence works minor relatively the 2001 in completed be Diversionwould Saunders ponding, undue further prevent To PumpingImprovements StopbankingUpgrade n cmltd n h floig re o pirt t esr ta te works the that ensure to priority of order upstreamwould not overloadexisting flood following the in completed and 2001 in started be should works minor recommended The - 20 years, assess the need for a new rating system and consider the matter the consider and system rating new a for need the assess years, 20 TributaryDrains. Johnson’sDrain Main Drain Stopbanking
regardingimprovements and amalgamation. ap Ra Pmsain ol b caiid ute i consultation in further clarified be would Pumpstation Road Raupo
- 03.
gig aaeet mitnne and maintenance management, ngoing qieet i te ra explore area, the in equirements protection:
- 02; and the need for a weed a for need the and 02;
.
- 02 if practicable, if 02 .
Page Page 29
d
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 2 .1.1
at variousat locationskey because of the ofrisk damage andlimited benefit. beinginstalled not boardslevel water gauge exception withthepriority,of and need to according implemented been haverecommendations outstanding the then Since catchment on effect the into coming into system rating amalgamated new a were 1 with schemes Scheme, Drainage two Kawau Te the particular In the of implementation on progress reviewrecommendations. steady been had there that noted report This ol ol b ue fr hi bnft ihrwl i 2005 in Withdrawals benefit. their for used be only would reserves surplus existing their that ratepayers Oroua satisfy to separately reported at years, transition first the In all otherwise but expenditureand financialaccounting was completelyintegrated.area, scheme each for reserves emergency the of breakdown a are 2004 in Report membersScheme Annual combined first The The the in two Councillors). Sluggish, the three in five Oroua,one in with both areas and one in theRailway Drain area(Rangiotu). (plus area the across members spread well geographically nine has members original these currently of scheme, each Five from members one. committee except previous the all provided including Committee Liaison by Scheme continuity new the management, scheme of terms In included also but the followingtasks: system rating time new a somewhat involved only if not straightforward, that process relatively consuming, a was schemes two the Combining
July2004. Amalgamation Operations Committee yearlyplan updates. ( AMP scheme new a with 2002) July 1 (Effective(AMP) Plans Management Asset scheme two the replacing combiningthe two separateAnnual Scheme Reportsin 2004 updatingthe Council’s Annual Plan and Annual Report; updatingincome combining financialdata bothfrom schemes; and scheme name; numbers asset new the match to system financial the in codes job updating Main Drain (Rangiotu)Floodgate; updating 43 drain assetsinvolved; the renumbering by assets Oroua the incorporate to AMS the updating in change folder (no assets Kawau Kawau Te numbers); asset as Te assets River Sluggish under the renaming database system asset the Herman updating new the PRD0412 in incorporated transferring the backelectronic few 1998and to each (dating in scheme files creatinga new scheme file18,01 (RE replaced in2008by PRD 12);04 archivingold scheme files (OrouaRE 01 10, Sluggish
the AMS database cost share for the Main Drain and the Sluggish the and Drain Main the for share cost database AMS the \ General
and expenditurespreadsheets;
\
TeKawau);
es, t a fl ta te eevs edd o be to needed reserves the that felt was it least,
–
fetv 1 uy 05 a pr o te 3 the of part as 2005) July 1 Effective se Mngmn Sse (M) by (AMS) System Management Asset r sil n h cmite which committee, the on still are -
05 included, as recommended, as included, 05
- 6 ee sd o help to used were 06 RiverRE01 11);
- 05;and
Page Page
-
wide 30 - -
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 2.1.2 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
origin the than time. more same the at culverts considerablyupgrade and material fill import cost to need the to due has estimates, work stopbank completed Some be drain maintenance. to envisaged were Drain Johnson’s normalwith conjunction in strippings drain and material locallyavailable using and done drains tributary of up topping Minor two the before out carried were upgradesschemeswere amalgamated. stopbank recommended the of Most has improvements pumping in and and table following moredetail below. the in out upgrades set as need and stopbank priority to according progressed the of Implementation Stopbankand Pumping Upgrades Discussionemergencyon reserves issetout in Section 5.1.1. fordisaster recovery. requ funding the and scheme the objectives out plansset These scheme plans. all yearlysuch update of three the of part as 2005 in completed was schemes combined the for AMP new A Fur carted assuch expenditure controlto spread the of new invasive weeds. be to material required cleaning localised of spread.alsoworkrecognise wider didaway not the benefit It instead of mechanical c whether was or cleaning spot involved, misleading or length spraying quite spot only was whether as breakdown such a such involved,work the of scope variable widely that the account into take not did it because concluded finally engineer The Scheme Engineeruntil 2010 compared directly attempted was be expenditure actual to of breakdown able a although rates, not their with are area each in costs the that meant has This drain each maintenancerequired (e.g. spotspraying versus fullspray). on expenditure individual the record to practicable not is it but maintained, drain of length the cover records continuedto listthe drains samein the orderas previously each scheme.for These ma drain the convenience For reserves issetout in Section5. scheme on discussion Further area. each for allocations reserve separate include to continued have calculations rates although reporting, separate with continue to were reserves The 2009 in that levela such to reduced then costs. drainage respective their subsidise to used and down area,weredrawn area each surplusreserves for the years next three the Over reserves. Sluggish the in repairs flood fund therdiscussion on rates andactualexpenditure areset out in Section6.
ired to achieve the desired service levels, as well as provision as well as levels, service desired the achieve to ired
- 11.
neac rcrs nldd n h Ana Report Annual the in included records intenance
- 10 it was no l no was it 10 o con fr h dfeet ees of levels different the for account to ihu ay ihrwl rm h Oroua the from withdrawal any without onger considered necessaryconsidered onger
rid u aog the along out arried
Page Page
by the the by 31 al
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te Implementationof Stopbank and PumpingRecommendations priority low their to due drains several on Instead, someother minorstopbanks have neededlow topped spots up. out carried been yet not have Works review. the from 3 Table updated the in below out set are completed works Actual minimal is variance overlong the the ensure help to adjusted typically are budgets successive so year, each for rated is that amountbudgeted the from varytypically costs Actual maintenancebudgets and reserves. the Funding of relatively carriedworksminor out after amalgamation has
Weed Fence Weed Pump Road Raupo Diversion Saunders Upgrade Improvements Pumping Drains Tributary Drain Johnson’s Drain stopbanking Main Upgrades Stopbank Recommendation Operations Committee
- term.
$6,000 ratepayers with clarified be to Need $2,000 2001 $6,500 2003 $3,500 2002 $30,000 2001 Target
- - - -
02 04 03 02
Implementation Actual Decided not to proceed proceed benefit. to not Decided 2014 installed finally Floodgates mtce minor 2004 new 2007 2006 2004 height design 2004 Fleming 2003 2002 2006 2004 damage) flood 2004 2003 2001 2010 re culvert including 2009 - 05 Taylor&Morrisons Taylor&Morrisons 05 floodgates on six side drains side six on floodgates ------
08, Lane’s No.2 LB low spots & spots low LB No.2 Lane’s 08, top minor No.2 Lane’s 07, mtce minor 05, No.6 to raised Rd Leens u/s LB 05, 04, LB/RB spots low 03, various up top minor 07, mtce minor 05, (including Raupo LB km 0.2 04, RB Raupo 1.4km 02, 10, No.6 200m RB levelled levelled LB 100m 11, No.1 RB 200m No.6 10,
short section Russell Russell section short
- laid
–
stopbank dubious dubious
come from Cost $675 Page Page $11,751 $11,476 $34,326 $14,533 $14,396 $30,058 $12,916 $3,581 $9,692 $1,448 $4,946 $1,130
$680 $336 $451 32 .
Drain Johnson’s Drain Taikorea Factory Drain Drain Lane’s No.2 Drain Mora’s Lane’s Deviation Drain Lane’s No.1 No.1 Drain Location ReviewTable Update: 3 Proposed SecondaryStopbank Improvements September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te Taylor Morrison No.6 Drain
the areas to be topped up. Generally no more 150mm topping up is expected to be required. provide to guide protectiona with as intended due regard are to theThey potential ponding data. likely surveyto limited develop from and the respectivelevels designprevious catchments. on A based are shown levels The Note:
-
Minor maintenance. Minor up. topped bank on right Low section Review since Works Additional Extension: Kopane No.3 of Downstream RL12.0m. to minimum banks up both Top RL11.3m. and leftbank to RL11.6m upbank right Top Works Proposed form a 50m spillway on the right bank at Leen’s Drain, 75mm 75mm Drain, Leen’s at grade. below stopbank bank right the on spillway 50m a form and level, flood 2000 abovethe 150mm level a to sides both up top level). design the to determine is required investigation (Further No.1. Lane’s as local runoff from protection west the area to in the ponding to contain stopbanking left the top up Drain. into Mora’s outlet floodgate lower the is RL11.35m). level (Road stopbank. Mora’s Drain of bank left the on11.2 RL to top up Drain. Gimblett’s Lane’s of Deviation bank the right on11.2 RL to top up except; RL11.5m, design on Deviation Lane’s stopbanks the top up RL10.3. right the up top the No.1 Drain. west Lane’s of the area to in ponding contain to RL10.3m to stopbank left the up top at RL10.30m. is spillwayas bank left leave top up of Lane’s No.2 Drain to provide a similar standard of flood of standard a similar provide to Drain No.2 Lane’s of
the stopbank to design RL10.55m. to design stopbank the
tpak n h Dorn the on stopbank
-
Mora’s Drain to Drain Mora’s
-
Lover boundary to to boundary Lover pegged 3 October October 3 pegged
up to up to
Works Actual 2010 2004 culvert. relaying including 2009 2004 design raised to 2004 Fleming. 2003 2002 side six on floodgates 2007 2006 2008
------05 Smart’s, in levelled 200m 10, 05 Rd Leens u/s Russell LB of km 1 section 05, short 04, LB/RB spots low 03, various new & spots low LB No.2 08, top minor 07, No.2 work) 09 (unspecified 100m LB 11, No.1
dditional surveyis required to confirm design levels and
height. drains.
similar standards of flood of standardssimilar Cost
$12,916 $11,751 Page Page $9,692 $1,448 $3,581 $1,583 $1,130 $675 $680 $336 33
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 34
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 2.2.2 2.2.1 2.2 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
h Dsrc Cucl u a ihr tnad f aneac ws euse by requested was maintenance of standard higher a landowners. but Council District the by maintained being was into This properties drain). upstream scheme new recommended from (a water Drain Middle feeds and long m 400 is Drain Road Kellow of the review,with drains two other also beingadded. 7 Table inrecommended as been generallyhave networkdrainage the to Changes MinorDrainage Network Changes the categoriesrating deemed beto affected. budgetedrequiredtheseexpenditure loanandThe funds for programmed and Floodgate) belowdetails). for (Rangiotu Floodgate upgrade sections(see stopbank MainDrain along culvertsageingfloodgated replacement of substantial Drain some Main been strengthening has there addition, In and budgets,reserveswith therating calculation adjusted to coverany existingincreases. from covered been has works minor relatively these of cost The more ponding clear 600outlets mm in lower the Kopane area. to areas some in 2007 in example for installed quickly, been also have culverts Larger in maintenance,particularly in thelower areas. floodgates new st of installation the secondary in reflected been have expectations These stock and bridges new installed have Drain underpasses,as well as moreon Main along farmers example, For intensi more and development practices. farm ongoing with increased steadily havescheme the serviceby provided level of the Ratepayerexpectations regarding Improvementsand Upgrades failed proceedto economicon grounds. Dalgety’s at pumping install to proposal A expenditureworks to the respective drainageand controlflood categories. the targeting bysystem rating the withinaccommodated been havechanges These Drain. the implementationa programme of to and structure Floodgate Drain Main the of strengthening network, drain the to additionsimprovements, drainage various included have review the since Changes the since Changes Review
pakn ad nrae dmn fr tpak n drain and stopbank for demand increased and opbanking
- 08 there were three 300 mm floodgates replaced floodgates mm 300 three were there 08
- farm pumpedfarm drainage systems. replace the ageingreplace the culverts floodgate along Main
Drain was also considered in 2010 but but 2010 in considered also was Drain
ot ascae with associated costs works wasworksallocatedto
e farming ve
Page Page with 35
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 2.2.4 2.2.3 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
MainDrain Floodgate Strengthening significantlyincrease the maintenance budgetor level rating.of road or landowner by maintainedthe best were that drains minor be to considered were they Previously u a with consistent are everywhereproperty, necessaryand extentto the possible. network the to drainageprovidingforobjectiveoutlet a of and the area indrainage theto approach additions minor relatively These Road maybe requiredin future. extensionabovePykes Somefurther upstream. drains from waterforeign the carry Dra Lover’s ytm a dvlpd t a rcgie ta sm poiin o funding for provision some that recognised was so future, in required be may it structures pumpstation and floodgate of rating depreciation the developed When was involved. costs the system target to adjusted be to calculations rating required it system, rating the in for allowed that to additional was work this As along culverts floodgated Main Drain. 2009ageing the period of many the replace to over need the out revealed these carried were CCTV overall using inspections their Internal verify fully to required were inspections condition internal that noted was it condition good in be to appeared headwalls the although and review 2001 the of partas out schemewerecarried floodgates the Preliminary of inspectionsstructural MainDrain Floodgate Replacements estimated originally as Drain, Main whenrating the system was maintaining developed. of cost the with compared small relatively was cost loan the because system rating the to made was adjustment No shortened be to and thelast payment of able $6,497 was mad was period loan the that so 2010 and 2009 both in principal Under t from resulting savings cost Originallyallowedworkscheme budgetthis year the a 20 for loan$80,000 of butfor in 2007 The remedialworks t also were Works side. upstream the on outcarried to stabilise the upstreamleft abutment using reinforced wallearth. retaining concrete precast a with st the of top the across relativelybackfill earth reinforced and placing involved innovativeThis solution. an inexpensive on deciding before considered were options Various LMS. Floodgate Drain Mainageing the on conducted wascapacityassessment structural a 2004, In -
expenditure on other activities allowed the scheme to repay over $10,000 of $10,000 over repay to scheme the allowed activities other on expenditure - ructure to support the parapet wall on the downstream side of the structure, the of sidedownstream wallthe parapeton the support to ructure 08 and08 after some delayswere eventually completed in March2009. .
structure (Rangiotu Floodgate). This structure is shared 50:50 with the the with 50:50 shared is structure This Floodgate). (Rangiotu structure
in is 1.3 km long and extends from Lane’s Drain up to Pykes Road to Road Pykes to up Drain Lane’s from extends and long km 1.3 is in
o strengthen andstabilise the structure wereeventually started n atoiy epciey Ter nlso nw os not does now inclusion Their respectively. authority ing
he final design meant that only $30,000 was required. was $30,000 only that meant design final he
ein 2012
- 13.
- Page Page 2 and 12
nified the 36
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 2.2.6 2.2.5 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
ok mnind bv) s ged n oslain ih h Shm Liaison Scheme the with consultation in agreed is Committee ensureto rates arereasonably equitable long the in above) mentioned works Reallocat in delays and maintenance drain on expenditure cost upgradingthe Rangiotu Gates. under $11,751 the by but offset for, was budgeted not involved was by maintenance” issues “channel This flooding drain. some reduce and water much performance as retaining improve to floodgates with 2007 in up topped was bank left the on Stopbanking Lane’s No.2Stopbanking and Floodgates not would These review.contributesignificantly to the water in the since installed been have pumps drainage surface sub small three or Two Road. Drain Main along properties individual on systems of number small A access rampto allow 2005 a portable tractorpump beto installedwhen required. in an provide to investigated done was work minor was some Instead, Drain proceed. to not Dalgety’s decided owner on pump a for proposal A expenditure the involve problemwouldrelatively the justifythe isconsidered it not that stage, scale minor of thisHowever at idealsolution. the wouldbe weedwiderscreen a that effectiveand Experien farmers. local and staff both for times at task onerous an be to continues screen weed the raking so review, the in recommended as installed been not has fence weed a However, in overhauled and no removed was workexpenditure drainon maintenance. roof was and overhaul pump this of cost the Pumpstation 2009 Road Raupo At There have beenno significant changes pumpingto in thearea. Pumping Once theseworks are completed the rating calculations willadjustedbe to suit. 2013 the newsletterin April 2013 to seek ratepayer feedback. in included were proposals The the to allocated be Flood Control (CF),Rongotea (CU)and wouldthe Uniform Annual costs the Contributor (FM), Drain thatMain Control Flood (DS), determined Sluggish Drainage for categories was it rates the target To that over rates were in replacements increase an floodgate with years the periodto cover $50,000 the of six ratepayers over programmed on be impact to proposed the minimise help To arise. m was system the
-
10 and the roof was altered to make this task easier in future. The $15,657 The future. in easier task this make to altered was roof the and 10 ion of funds in this way (as with the Raupo Road pump overhaul and roof and overhaul pump Road Raupo the with (as way this in funds of ion
ade inherently flexible to allow such costs to be targeted as they as targeted be to costs such allow to flexible inherently ade rvt pms evc oe dan o sub or drains open service pumps private d. ce elsewhere indicates that a weed fence would not be cost be would not fence weed a that elsewhereindicatesce
as possible in the higher ponding area to the right of the of right the to area ponding higher the in possible as
annualexpenditure involved.
Main Drain during events.flood -
4 nul ln n pbiie b a by publicised and Plan Annual 14 t budgeted, but was offset by under under by offset was but budgeted, t
- 08 and six side drains fitted drains side six and 08 Charge(AC).
- term.
- ufc drainage surface
- 6 u the but 06
Page Page
37 -
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 2.2.8 2.2.7 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
ear ot wr rpre a mcaia aneac” hn dal te would also“flood be damage”and funded reserves.from they ideally when maintenance” “mechanical as reported were costs collapsed repair the at drain The done insurance. by covered mostly was cost this and ($43,713) installation for was drains repair in roadside ready temporary purchased were culverts box Replacement rainfall a ($13,867). of culvert outlet spillway heavy and slumping of ($11,303), some result Drain was a Highden There as recorded 2010. was September damage minor relatively Some 2010Flood Damage Repair stopbankand furthertopping up would desirable. be o minor caused 2015 May 16 on rain Heavy o orsodn etis n h Iseto ad ok tb. uh eal are details Such tabs. Works and recent Inspection import for the in particularly entries AMS, corresponding the no in entered consistently 2012 in replaced wasFloodgateS8 replacementse.g. White’s floodgate been not carri have works and asset inspections of details that found been also has It the to on passed been have auditScheme Engineer. this during identified errors such of number A se floodgate Region counterweighted). default incorrect and original the or errors the location minor was throughout relatively (counterweighted)” and of “Steel dimensions number (typically incorrect a component as of correction such the omissions, include also will It secondary on floodgates of number a of capture stopbanksthatare currentlynot the include will process This mappingand data reconciliation 2015 in asset GIS of completion the after updated be to due is AMS the in data Dimension Theasset register in the currentAMP listsdata all schemefor AssetData Drain Main the of upgrade subsequent the fund Floodgateand other floodgate replacements. helped surplus the because s transfer, the ratingfor ($10,000) Oroua and ($10,000) need the expenditureoffsetmanagement and maintenance on Savings Sluggish categories. the to transfer reserve (2010 $20,000 year this for rates the Coincidentally, were reserves needed. not the so costs, management and maintenance drain on expenditure case, this In infrequent. generally but costly are quite which works, unexpected such funding in difficulty a highlights This antin the AMS and more care isrequired in this regard.
te eevs ee o dan on wih a fortunate was which down, drawn not were reserves the o
–
oe f h T Kwu ae ae actually are Gates Kawau Te the of none
listedas scheme assets. - 16.
the flood damage was covered by under under by covered was damage flood the
vertopping of an upper section of this of section upper an of vertopping
- 1 wr sbiie b a proposed a by subsidised were 11)
assetsin the AMS. d u o each on out ed particularly , - 13 but has but 13 Page Page tting
38
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 3.1.2 3.1.1 3.1 3. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
channelcross sections and stopbank levels, last donein 1984. the of survey full a out carrying after Drain Main of capacity the review to timely be wouldextremeit event an such performedscheme wellfor reasonably Although the LMS the with 2004, in those to similar contributing torepair of the br be to expected are costs damage Flood Kopane andevenmore extensive in damage the June event. near the breaches been have certainly construction almost would there 2004, for in as then, upgraded due Road Hoihere below alre not had Road Hoihereof upstream stopbanksthe If 2016. of summer works final the with incomplete, was stopbanks Oroua the upgrading progressively of programme a Unfortunately, spread and reaches lower the in were breaches ups stopbank various the June In places t several in event, out Kopanenear and inundated washed area the as outflows spread down that towards Rangiotu. stopbanking Oroua In the but rain 2004. local from February ponding in flood disastrous the in than higher m 1 about was Rangiotu near areas lower the in flooding resulting The Hoihere Road. below River Oroua the along stopbanking LMS washou the of washout several a and by stopbanking exacerbated was ponding local Severe 20 yeardesign the standard for Main the Drain stopbanking. exceeded well which event, rainfall year 100 a was this that estimated is It extensive flo 19 over rainfall Heavy June2015Flood how around issues highlighted but minor relatively arerepairs funded. was 2010 in damage Flood October2010 Flood has and well reasonably performs it capacity sustained relativelylittle damage in rece limited has scheme the Although standardsdrainage, for flood protectionand pumping. schemedesign of termsratepayer expectationsinmeeting is scheme Generally the Overview SchemePerformance treamas well as downstream.
odingthat took up ato week to clear fromthe lowest areas.
- 0 ue 05 a te os i lvn mmr ad caused and memory living in worst the was 2015 June 20
eachesalong Main Drain.
ntoverdesign events.
s f h Mi Drain Main the of ts ee a mc less much was here
ady been ady Page Page 39
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 3.2 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
p o sos ht eoe paet uig ev rifl eet, u n major no but events, rainfall heavy during apparent upgrades are envisaged. become that spots low topping up involve to continue will stopbanking secondary to improvements Ongoing replacing for need the identify to out carried floodgatedculverts throughsecondary stopban be will inspections CCTV Further more now is formallymanagedunder newlife the renewals policy. useful their of end the reached have that assets of Replacement floodprotection or management of the scheme. system,drainage the improvementsin anysignificant for need no currentlyis There forImprovements Further Scope n h matm, h cpct o Mi Dan ol wl b ipoe as improved be well could Drain Main to batters channel the of on reinstatethe original shape as muchas practicable. up build capacity silt excavating by review the the in recommended meantime, the In Furtherdesign workwould r be design new compensate forthe greater flowswithout raising water levels. decide to to necessaryincreased Drain Main of wouldcapacity discharge the and it floodgates sizing for criteria impacts, negative such any avoid To levelin Main Drain andslowclearance the ofponded waterelsewhere. water the increase to tend will areas ponding some from discharge the Increasing adjacentponding, with the lowestbeingareas the tolast fullydrain. Main waterhigh flood,levels impede recent Asseen Drain the in effective. cost be not may works such and quantified been gains not have achieved actual be could the that although outlets, floodgated of size the increase and Drain Main the improving by quickly more ponding clear to scope is there However, the upgrade to need no is existingstopbank system. there so event, lifetime” a in “once a be to considered Given the of 8.6.3 Section in discussed on review. as private economic, then become problem, may a pumping be drainage scheme to reduced continues has areas this lying if low and such depths in settlement ground that likely is It and Road Drain Main between channel Creek Leens Sluggish old the out cleaning by recently addressed was area Kopane lower the in drainage improved for Demand ratepayers. fromrequests to response in out carried be to improvementscontinuewill Drainage Road. h ecpinl aue f h rcn fod n ue 05 i cud ihl be rightly could it 2015, June in flood recent the of nature exceptional the
equiredto assess impact the of such improvements.
king.
- am upn or pumping farm the clearance clearance the of
capacity of capacity Page Page 40 -
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 4. September16 2015 Catchment
TotalOld Drains (Remove) Lyne’sDrain Carrington’sDrain Carlyle’sDrain OldDrains TOTALDrains New (Add) Taylorand Morrison Extension Middle Drain Lowe’sDrain Lover’s Drain KellowRoad Drain Bond Drain NewDrains Changes to Drainage the Network t in included is Scheme Reportunder Appendixscheme drainC, maintenance report. the in currently drains the all of list complete A Atable showing the changesto the drainage network isset out below. environmentalimpact of scheme. the tha rather drains existing over taking scheme the involved only have they case any In the in include to enough significant not were report. and km 170 about of length drain 1 than significantless been have occurred have or that variations annual Those issues compliance no been have there variations to the size thatnumber or of scheme assets. show reports The and tolook forimprovements around its arise that issues any record and monitor to required is scheme the code the Under with theEnvironmental Code ofPractice forRiver Works. 2008 Since CodeofPractice ComplianceReport te osrcin f e oe, o hr hs en o hne n overall in change no been has there so ones, new of construction the n Operations Committee
-
09 the Annual Scheme Report has included a section on Compliance on section a included has Report Scheme Annual the 09
operationalactivities. 1,370m 300m 260m 810m 5,500m 400m 2100m 500m 1300m 400m 800m Length
- 2% of the total the of 2%
he Annual he Page Page 41
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 1. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 42
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 5.2 5.1 5. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
1 those be also whobenefit it.from should contributed who those that expectation an is there works of variety a for used been has windfall this although and reserves the on earned been of size large The other in those by subsidised categories.rating be effectively may work the from benefit who those and Road so rates, the to matched not expenditureis the that is approach this with problem A Drain Main along Rangiotu culverts of floodgated strengthening replac of including replacement maintenance Floodgate, unexpected and upgrades years ten the various past surplus reservehelp the have to fund In funds beenused improvementsand other drain funding for allows it level target the of excess in well is balance this Although Thebalance at30 June 2014in thescheme emergencyreserve was $182,802. ReservesSurplus 100 yearearthquake ev ainbeingwith primarydamage targeted, the Floodingrisk is reasonably adequate. amountsconfirm2004consistentwithfloodThesethearedamage andtarget is the $178,000.be curve loss flood the on Based of policy management risk less, Council’s or afterallowing insurance for level claims. recurrence with year 50 a with accordance flood a from repairs in damage for providing set was target This year50on flooddamage, less insurance dedu based reserves for level target the that concluded 2014 in assessment updated An $150,000 target foremergency reserves was adequate. T Coupers and Drain Main along GreenawayDrain andsubmergedelectrics at Dixon’s Pumpstation. breaches stopbank several area, Kopane the in withsilt filled includeddrains and wasminorschemerelatively the to damage Flood was recovery low disaster fund to of ha 2,000 someand housesof flooding inresulting Kopane,stopbankingnear the reserves breached River Oroua the in emergency flood large very a when 2004 adequate February in highlighted for need The Emergency Fund Reserve ReserveFunds
Te Kawau Scheme Asset Management Te Asset Kawau Plan Scheme 2014 e ot f cee ear ws prxmtl $3,0 ad ofre ta the that confirmed and $130,000 approximately was repairs scheme of cost he - lying farmland bet ementof collapsed the spillwayculvert.outlet
the fund has meant that interest of about $10,000 per year has year per $10,000 about of interest that meant has fund the
ween Kopane andRangiotu. ent expected ent to lessbe than level.this extraordinaryworks.
s for the scheme the full 50 year damage cost would cost damage year 50 full the scheme the for s
ctible,would $126,000 be
1 .
Page Page
43 -
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 5.3 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
n n cs, t s oe ta pmig a be rcgie a rqiig more a same the waythatthe other categories have beenat times. requiring in as reserves surplus recognised by subsidised been been not have has rates that and pumping approach targeted that noted is it case, any In rating that in ratepayers long the other by in because acceptable generally is This scheme. subsidised the of rest the by not if category, effectively are that is expenditure maintenance local Occasional scheme the objectives, particularly of drainage for and control.flood delivery and rates the targeting to approach brush broad the given expenditure This comparedwith actual the subsidies of$50,000. $37,000 the $61,000 was with rates subsidising for available total the that then years, seven subsequent noting by roughly 2008 shown in be surplus can date to benefits Oroua continue with thecurrent 33% level. 20% a only receive would they mean also would this However, 33%. current the of instead 20% tocontribution their reduce to appropriate be would it then disaster major a is there Oroua proportion the 2:1, consistentwith historic the reserve levels. and rates drainage in Oroua split be to proposed generallyare surpluses inFuture rates. Sluggish for $115,000 increases potential offset wi to one, used as reserves managed surplus been have reserves two the then Since DrainageScheme reserve targetof $50,000. previousOroua the with wasreasonablylineand 2:1),in (i.e.areas scheme original $174,131 of total reserve the of 33% (compare about was balance Oroua the time that At whentwo the reserves weredeemed beto in balance. 2008 in reserves the of share Oroua $62,537 the than less substantially is This or $25,000 approximately 20%about of current the be emergency reserves targ would event, year 50 target the on based reserves, emergency the of portion Oroua the that assessed been has it audit this of part As 2008 since between the two drainageareas. one as managed s be to continued has been rates subsidise to reservessurplus of allocation have they although and separately, managed been have reserves the of portions Oroua and Sluggish the Historically, ofthe Portion Oroua Reserves ui akolde ta tee s cp fr oe icein eadn such regarding discretion some for scope is there that acknowledges audit
riae aeaes r bnftn sgiiaty rm hs prah bt if but approach, this from significantly benefiting are ratepayers drainage - term unforeseensuch local works could wt te eurd agt f 1000, hc ws rprinl o the to proportional was which $150,000), of target required the with d
share of any subsidised rates in future years, so they may wish to to wish may they so years, future in rates subsidised any of share - 9 n alwn aot 2,0 o acmltd interest accumulated of $24,000 about allowing and 09
us a rqie rltvl hg lvl of level high relatively a require may sues
occur anywhereoccur acrossthe area. et forthe scheme ($126,000).
h vr 5,0 of $50,000 over th
plit 70%:30% plit over the the over - Page Page 9 the 09 -
09 44
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 5.4.2 5.4.1 5.4 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
ensure reserves contributionsare appropriate in allrating categories. is work Further is and approximately is of77% the 100 total yeardamage loss.flood insurance year 50 risks) curves. loss (all flood the damage in included not material therefore by separately covered flood is year damage 100 total the assets, d the scheme plus $253,266 the be would for damage for curves loss those flood the on than Based amount higher drain proportionally the a because stopbankingand pumping, where mostof the damage would occur. contribute appropriate not would is categories on based expenditure approach rata maintenance pro A budgeted occur. to expected is damage where categories those to allocated be to need reserves emergency into contributions the Likewise, future the to allocated be drainagecategories. to contr flood need respective the to will renewals floodgate contributions e.g. categories expenditure the policy new the Under categoriesthose not affected. accord basis rata pro a on scheme the over rated been have reserves the to contributions Past Rating forReserves Contributions under had categoriestends to balance out over astime budget adjustments are made tosuit. that category rating an and small relatively is involvedvariance the to matched not but year, next the for process budgeting overall the in included is surplus such Any operatingbalan surplus of addition the involved have not has It that affected. categories amounts the over rated budgetedbeen specific as well as interest reserve of accumulation t Over years10 it is forecast to varybetween and $36k $89k. next the Over asset. each of usefullife remaining the on assessed been has which expenditure, forecast the on depending vary will reserve renewals the of level The emergency the reserves willgraduallybe bui years five next the Over reserve. renewal the into rest the transfer and level target 2015 In interestand surplusesmay still earn to continue would funds Both reserves). renewal (Capex funds upgrade and maintenance from reserves) (emergency funds recovery disaster separate clearly new Council’s Need forSeparate Reserves PolicyNew he last 10 years the reserve fund has been progressively built up from the from up built progressively been has fund reserve the years 10 last he - 16 it is proposed to reduce the emergency reserves to slightly less than the than emergencyslightlyless the to reservesreduce proposedto is it 16
n t te ugtd xedtr i ec rtn ctgr, excluding category, rating each in expenditure budgeted the to ing -
Separate Reserves Renewals and forEmergencies Separate financial policy from 1 July 2015 requires two scheme reserves to to reserves scheme two requires 2015 July 1 from policy financial cewhen expenditure actual is less thanbudget. required to include an assessment of the pumpstation damage to damage pumpstation the of assessment an include to required
be transferredbe onefrom to the other.
amage to pumpstations. Pumpstation flood Pumpstation pumpstations. to amage y cross subsidisation between the rating the between subsidisation cross y lt uplt to the targetlevel.
- xedtr. sal the Usually expenditure.
Page Page ol and ol age 45
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 1.
hr i cnieal vrain ewe te iey aae trbtd o each to attributed damage likely the between catego variation considerable is There and powercosts). 2016 for costs comp damage flood rata pro reserves emergency funding how shows table following The and DO. expenditureeach category,for with surplus used subsidiseto thedrainage ratesDS For rating respective the from be will categoriescontaining those assets. reserves renewals of funding the summary, In Allocationof Maintenance100 and year FloodDamage morethan would otherwise be the case. other hand, the On surplus be reserves able subsidise are to usedto rates drainage reserve if that seen pumpstations. be can It categories subsidisin be drainage effectively would the then maintenance table. on based the be to in continue contributions highlighted are differences Key Dixons Raupo Road Kopane Main Drain Railway Awahuri Oroua Sluggish Category
simplicity the funding of emergency reserves could continue to be pro rata the rata pro be to continue could reserves emergency of funding the simplicity r wt po aa aneac epniue o ec rtn ctgr. (The category. rating each for expenditure maintenance rata pro with are ryand therespective reserve contributions basedon maintenance.
Mtce 2016-17
- 7 r tpcl long typical are 17 $246,797 $128,407
$52,547 $38,188 $3,933 $7,866 $8,819 $3,390 $3,647
% % Mtce g damage to the Main Drain stopbanks and the two the and stopbanks Drain Main the to damage g 100%
21% 15% 52% - em aneac bde, nldn renewals including budget, maintenance term 2% 3% 4% 1% 1%
100yr Damage $305,173 $151,239 $32,068 $31,239 $70,393 $8,966 $5,808 $2,336 $3,124 % % Damage
100% 11% 50% 10% 23% 3% 2% 1% 1% Difference 184% 330% 233%
53% 56% 69% 66% 44% Page Page
46
Audit KawauScheme Te 6.2 6.1 6. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
h rslig orcin eoe apoiaey 3 h fo te Rangitikei the from ha effect negligibletheiron rates. a 638 had that 0.4% about approximately of reduction overall minor very removed a Scheme, correction resulting The rating Rangitikei the when systemwas updated be in 2007. overlooked would inadvertently was boundary this Kawau but Te line, catchment the that accepted therefore was It was system rating developedin 2003. the when boundary catchment the determine accurately more to out carried was work field considerable Scheme, Kawau Te new has the in those for that data terrain digital rat greater on the of Because terrain. basedlying low this in accuracy limited 1995 in set was boundary Rangitikei The appearedit that somerationalisation was required. sys rating the As Rangitikei. the into drain not did property his though even schemes, noticingboth to rates after paid he issue that this raised ratepayer A Scheme. Kawau Te the with Scheme 2 November In RangitikeiOverlapAreas RatingScheme Removed with Details of the rates calculations areset out in Section3.4. appropriaterating categories, with adjustments forreserves contributions. each calculated been have Rates in are plans rating current and C Annex AnnexE. in is report rating amended the A of copy system. rating the for document foundation the update to amended was report made system were changes minor rating Other new the be of to needed that nature errors corrected,particularly of in the database.rating number complex a to contributed relatively and difficult implementation the that compl was system noted rating new the on report final A 1 July2004. on effect into came Scheme Drainage Kawau Te the for system rating new The and classifications. 2003 2002 for programmed Originally ofRating New SystemImplementation RatingSystem - 4 n con o saf en cmitd o diinl ok n te reviews other on work additional to committed being staff of account on 04
(PRD 04 12) 04 (PRD
1, creto ws ae o eoe vra o te Rangitikei the of overlap remove to made was correction a 012,
made to rating area boundaries and the original rating original the and boundaries area rating to made tems for both schemes are based on their catchments their on based are schemes both for tems
- 03, the new rating system had to be to had system rating new the 03,
er y loaig ugtd xedtr t the to expenditure budgeted allocating by year
td n uut 06 I was It 2006. August in eted
ing implicationsing
deferred until deferred h definitive the
Page Page 47
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 6.3 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Variation Ratesin since 2004 (GSTinclusive) current the in properties in categorirating the involved affected has expenditure which year), additional per ($50,000 the replacements floodgate to of programme due is excess the of Most doublein that 2004 2014 in rates Scheme Rates Scheme since in Change 2004 (Irrigation (Irrigation and drainage)increasedland to from1404 2818. 3 2 Drainage Land for with construction 100%work (for floodgate structures,say) increased by only 28%. to Earthworks Goods for Consumer 45% the from varies on (CGPI) based Index Inflation Price scheme. the in involved work of range given apply to difficult are figures published nationally although 2014, to 2004 from period year 10 the over inflation with line in less or more are increases These from increased has maintenance $10,000 (42%).Engineering and havefees increased $29,000from to $43,000 (48%). operation pumpstation while same $85,000 the(42%), to $60,000 increasedfrom has maintenanceDrain over period. year ten 50% than less increased has budget the maintenance routine For Includes to1. contribution
Note thatGST from Note 15% into 2011 12.5% changed June 2004 June Drainage Description Urban Rongotea Road Raupo Control Flood Dixon’s Dixon’s Contributor Dixon’s Dixon’s Road Raupo Pumping Kopane Drain Main Control Flood Rangiotu Railway/ Awahuri Oroua Sluggish UAC Drainage
- - – –
- flood drainage
medium/ low benefit medium/ benefit high 2014, CGPI for S2CD (Earthmoving and Site Work) increased from 1181 to 1715; S2DC 1715; to 1181 from increased Work) Site and (Earthmoving S2CD for CGPI 2014,
1
- 05 ($69,403)
Dixon’s Pump for for Dixon’s Pump stopbank seepage. - 5 ee 1898 GT e (GST $158,918 were 15
es DS,FM, CF andACsince 2012
Category 2 TOTAL . . DO FM DR CU CR DA DS AC PR CF C2 C1 FK P2 P1
-
12. 2004 $78,030 $50.00 21.26 23.74 UAC $/ha
4.83 2.84 0.56 3.37 3.44 1.85 0.26 0.27 6.91 5.93 8.55 2.41
- 05
cuie, hc i mr than more is which xclusive), $182,756 2014 $64.94 25.16 29.54 34.15 10.87 UAC $/ha 6.80 1.38 5.32 9.72 2.30 0.88 0.39 9.91 8.54 8.00
- 15 -
13.
Increase 421% 140% 146% 183% 239% 232% 134% 58% 30% 39% 24% 43% 43% 44% 44% 27%
700 to $7,000
Page Page
the the 48
3 ,
Audit KawauScheme Te 6.4.2 6.4.1 6.4 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
4 matchwith expenditure actual ove reasonablea ensureexpenditure(rated) budgeted to to made also Adjustmentsare floodgates andpumps are targetedto the ratepayers affected. stopbanks, drains, on expenditure programmed that ensure to done been has This the to costs appropriaterating categories, as set out in the 2004 budgetedrating report target to year each adjusted been have calculations Rates AllocationBudgetedof Expenditure drainage the c floodgateon replacementUACisbasedThe have been includedcosts because the (now$69.38compared with $55.15). yearsincreasedhas due costto the of the floodgate replacementsalong Main Drain t in that to similar been has UAC This round a it making arbitrarily of instead calculationnumberto within fit approximate the 20 the proposed the of standardises end top but the at range is This required. revenue the of 25% produce to 2004 in amount initial The (GST associatedwith thedrainage categories DR,DS, $50 andDO DA. at set approximately20 was life rate small This that ensure to categories rating DR contributetheir share fair towards scheme. the and DO DS, the in properties rural all to applied is drainage for (UAC) Charge Annual Uniform A Uniform Calculations Rates updated been has number the each yearand theniscurrently 520. Since income. rates required the 2004 producing in introduced still whilesignificantly dropped property per rate AC the that meant This first 526. be to was system an updated was number this project rates ratingthe of completion the when as 2010Until area to due been has years 10 properti of last charge (AC). number the the over in changes rates and in adjustments variation the of Some Price Index,which for theyear 10 period 2004 incr CGPI These
Minor updates inMinor 2006. updates
AnnualCharge - 11 the number of properties rated AC was assumed to be 400, the same the 400, be to wasassumedAC ratedproperties of number the 11
osts,which currentlyinclude 50% a share of the floodgates. (PRD 04 12) 04 (PRD
eases are significantly more than inflation based on the Consumer the on based inflation than more significantlyare eases - 25% of the rates revenue rates requiredthe scheme the of 25% drainage for works
- 5 was $50 and subsequent years have been calcu been have years subsequent and $50 was 5
r longr the nlsv) r uh mut s o produce to as amount such or inclusive)
he Manawatu Drainage Scheme but in recent in but Scheme DrainageManawatu he
- 25%range. - term. - 2014 was only7%.
s ae te nfr annual uniform the rated es d in 2011 in d
-
5 Floig the Following 05. 4 .
- tl properties style - 12 was found was 12
Page Page lated 49
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 6.4.3 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
aeois ae o te siae long estimated the (equivalent 4.7%to of the totalSluggish expenditure). on sub been based then categories has portion Sluggish The the between up divided expenditureof $38,000 and $16,000 respectively 70:30 i.e. (approximately). been has maintenance Sluggish drain for expenditure Budget AllocationDrainageof Costs maintenancesuch as pump overhauls. periodic provisionfor inadequate is there if arise discrepanciescan some However, require lessmaintenance thanthose in low the Sluggishlying areas. thatcountrysand higher in drains moreare there becauselargely is This drains. of the shows drainage of percentage that below table the in seen be can conclusion this for support Further similaramounts and the relative splitsimilar in to past the i.e. no morethan 25%. ar in Sluggish maintenance the drain better for demand increased been also has there However, to appropriateallowincreasing for demand higher for standards drain of maintenance.considered was percentage adopted The B). Annex in breakdown main drain (see adopted 30% the not Sluggish, the in those of 24% 21 been have Oroua the in costs average the 1992 to back dating records past on based but trend, this confirm to required be would analysis and monitoring Further was weed invasive of spread the repairs, unduly preventone extraordinary to separating costs and localised reasonable and be improvements to appeared 70:30 historic the of as monitored split been not has area each in expenditure the 2011, Since period short relatively the although estimated, originally involvedmayaccount not forperiodic mechanical than less 50% some are costs averageOroua the that indicates2011 and between2004 monitoring The the given level appropriate an is this additionalnowwork requi considers Engineer Area The $10.48/ha. of rates DS Sluggish and $5.76/ha of rates DO current the between midway about DS t lower areas the in maintenance increased to due higher now are If rates Sluggish rated. unduly the being not is country sand higher this ensure to reassessed be to completenessFor estimated the long area (DR) the separating Drain Railway involved the for breakdown a included has not has but costs, Oroua 2011 and Sluggish to 2004 from expenditure actual of Monitoring hen the DR rates may be too high. They are currently $7.33/ha, which is is which $7.33/ha, currently are They high. too be may rates DR the hen . n Ooa ra bsd n h pooto o etmtd long estimated of proportion the on based areas Oroua and rous and rous time
a o h epniue n ah ra s iey o ae nrae by increased have to likely is area each in expenditure the so ea
costs are lower in the Oroua area compared with the lengththe with compared area Oroua the in lowerare costs - red inred thisarea to control invasive weeds. consuming.
- termexpenditure in theDRideally area needs
- - iie it te S n D rating DR and DS the into divided te m xedtr i te R area DR the in expenditure rm cleaning.
tenance costs tenance
Page Page
- term
50 -
Audit KawauScheme Te 6.4.5 6.4.4 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
oto” Ti apoc i cnitn wt al h ohr e rtn systems rating new other the all with consistent is developedby HRC sin approach This flood and drainage control”. flood and the drainage to between benefits complimentary equally the “recognise split to categories currently control is share Kawau Te The shared are Floodgates) (Rangiotu Floodgates between50:50 LMS the and the Kawau Te Scheme. Drain Main the for costs Scheme renewal estimated the Alloca incorporate to appropriate be would expenditurewhen estimatingthe futurelong it addition, In after the mappingupdate iscompleted. reassess to Engineer Area the for timely be would it installed been have floodgates new of number a As the for change would costs of allocation the calculations.rating how shows which D, Annex in out prop the and correction This 5% be therefore should and control instead of10% i.e. split 50%:45%:5%. flood and drainage between split the 50%:50% justify helped error hasin be to found and audit this of and part The as checked been originally area. this set in outlets as on installed remained floodgates additional has 10% the on Sluggish but cate value, revaluation between control asset 50%:40%:10% flood 2012 the shared and with are (DS) drainage line costs in maintenance Floodgate 5% and 95% to amended 1 July2014. be to These Rongotea urban and CF category contributor category and (CU). control flood Drain the Main to allocation the the deducting between (after values asset respective split the on based FK) currently and (FM areas Kopane are costs maintenance Stopbank AllocationStopbankof and FloodgateCosts DrainageCosts Comparison (excluding AuditRecommendation ActualExpenditure 1992 ActualExpenditure 2001 ActualExpenditure 2004 BudgetExpenditure (Rates) Length ofDrains RatedArea Item -
13 indicated that the split for Kopane would be 3% if based solely on asset on solely based if 3% be would Kopane for split the that indicated 13 tion of Maintion Drain Floodgate Costs values have changed from the original 97% and 3% in 2004 and now need now and 2004 in 3% and 97% original the from changed have values
(PRD 04 12) 04 (PRD
this split once all the assets have been included in the AMS the in included been have assets the all once split this ce 1999. ce
- - -
11 11 11
osed change to a 75:25 split of drainage costs are set are costs drainage of split 75:25 a to change osed
Sluggish River
75% 77% 76% 80% 70% 58% 65% ois F, K. n seset in assessment An FK). (FM, gories Main Drain) -
term maintenancecosts.
–
rgnl loain has allocation original it did not allow for the for allow not did it Oroua 25% 23% 24% 20% 30% 42% 35%
Page Page 51
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 6.4.7 6.4.6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
As set out in the rating report the scheme management costs have been allocated been have costs management scheme the report rating the in out set As Allocationof ManagementCosts egre rapid from outlets silt drain pondedwater. remove at to erosion cleaning prevent mechanical and backflow for by need deposited the reduce drains), storage is the there in when capacity floodga events rainfall benefit, low drainage frequent in of (particularly levels terms drainage in that, acknowledged is It (FM,CU).CF, categoriescontrol flood Drain Main the to share control flood the and DA) DO, (DS, areas drainage three the to basis rata pro a on distributed is portion drainage The Orouareserves. the in excess historic reduce to 1:1 was split the 2011 and 2010 In areas. scheme original two the to proportion in i.e. 2:1, been typically has split the years recent In and theneed to mitigate potentialrates increases. worksinvolvedproportiondependingsplit the on variesyear the year The of to from t contributereserves. it does nor scheme; it the because from benefit (DA) direct any category receive rating not does Awahuri the to applied been not have Reserves r pro a the on between allocated split being respective ratingcategories, excluding pumping the beencategories when appropriate. before has areas increase and Oroua year and would each Sluggish varied rates has allocation then reserves The disaster major a by depleted significantly,especially theOrouain area. are reserves fund the help and rates subsidisebut year, to year from rates in fluctuations to wide avoidhelped has This upgrades. used been have reserves emergency Surplus AllocationReservesof involved. a is category be rating to each considered for expenditure works the rata pro costs these Allocating supervision). staff (including costs works the of 30% averaged have they years 10 last the Over administrationand valuation. managemen engineering include costs Management floodgate replacing of cost the of 75% culvertsalong Main Drain. exclude to adjusted been has allocation 2012 since involved, input management the reflect fairly more to Similarly, thereisnegligible managementinvolv pumpingPowerisexcludedworkscosts,excluding rata for power.because the pro
esnby rgai apoc t tre te ag o costs of range the target to approach pragmatic reasonably
ed withed this cost.
, se mngmn, rates management, asset t, t bss o their to basis ata e hl maintain help tes Page Page - 13 the 13 o the o s of ss
52
if
Audit KawauScheme Te 6.4.9 6.4.8 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
t hud e oe ta ast ercain il ny e ple oc ay capital any once applied be only will actual depreciation loans relatedto those assets have beenpaid off. asset the that noted be cover should It to sufficient are reserves ensure expenditurewh be to periodically readily are reviewed life useful remaining and value replacement can asset that important be therefore replacements), will It funded. be nowwilldepreciation that means policy funding renewalsnew The floodgate ongoing and accommodatedby appropriate adjustmentswithin therating system. programmed upgrade or loans by Gates funded be typically would expendituren over a works capital floodgate major and Such pumpstations as such life, finite a structures. with assets of replacement allowance No Provision forDepreciation a of establishment the involved been which now policy, has renewals separaterenewals reserve. maintenance new periodic the other by and improved overhauls future for Provision workthis over manyyears. towar contributed already have to previouslyconsidered was case this wasin and A Class rated area Road Raupo the However Raup involved. expenditure unplanned the when 2009 that, in overhauled meant has omission This estimated these with consistent long been generally have amounts budgeted Annual whennew the systemrating was introducedin 2004. future indicative calculate to used were etc., screens weed and components long Estimated Provision forPeriodic Maintenance all andcontrol from pumping areas. contribution renewal future rata for withdrawals consistent anticipated reasonably pro with are contributions a These by (DA). Awahuri established except categories, been have reserves Renewal works16 in eacharea. a withdrawn been have reserves emergency Surplus wasseparateup set from emergency the reserves. 2015 In in the Orouaarea and typically by 10 approach This hasresulted in rateseffectively subsidised being b
- term costs,term but for RaupoRoad Pumpstationbeenhas less half.than - 16 the new financial policy came into effect and a new renewals reserve renewals new a and effect into came policy financial new the 16
(PRD 04 12) 04 (PRD has been made in the past for funding depreciation to cover the full full the cover to depreciation funding for past the in made been has en it occursiten in the future. - em aneac css icuig eidc elcmn o pump of replacement periodic including costs, maintenance term - umber of years and, as seen in the last few years (for Rangiotuyearsfewlast years (for as seen inthe of and, umber 0 te cee per t hv sbiie te 1,0 of $15,000 the subsidised have to appears scheme the 10,
- 15% in15% the Sluggish.
xedtr i te riae flood drainage, the in expenditure
Ra pm nee t be to needed pump Road o
nd applied to subsidise 2015 subsidise to applied nd
yas much50% as
Page Page rates ds 53 -
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 6.5 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
hs ae cnieal efr compa effort considerable takes This be can rates that expectedto match expenditure so over thelong expenditure historical with line in adjusted are items Budget budgeted of quitevariable. item each allocating an by calculated r the to expenditure receiving are rates annual are the year they Each that assured be then can appropriatelevel benefitof fortheir contributions to thescheme. Ratepayers to intended are category expenditure. each in charged rates the time Over Actual and Rates Expenditure Stopbanks1. and Floodgates excludeto exceptionalexpenditure upgradeson repairs.or adjustmentswith Reports, Annual fromtaken are tables following the in figures The considerable indicates expenditure actual and variationea budget rates the of Comparison brush broad the and required works natureof the rating system itself. the of nature unpredictable often the given sys rating any with as But, accuracy. of level high a implies and scrutiny to open more is approach rigorous current The F). Class to A (Class benefit of level overall the on based costs scheme total allocated %difference TOTAL 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 Year
------11 10 09 08 07 06 05 13 12
ch year, butin thelong
espective rating category, but the actual expenditure is typically is expenditure actual the but category, rating espective Budget 10,000 50,000 10,000
5,000 3,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 2,000 5,000 Stopbanks
-
BudgetActand -
termthey generally match quite well. Actual tem, it is not without its limitations, especially limitations, its without not is it tem, e wt te l rtn sse, hc simply which system, rating old the with red
44,568 14,201 11,240 11,660 1,479 2,709 2,201 - 11% 627 451
- term. 0
ualExpenditure 2004
Budget 317,750 107,000 45,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 22,000 17,100 15,000 36,650 Floodgates
ac te actual the match Actual 310,587
50,114 66,683 14,982 12,370 21,285 68,359 26,239 28,327 22,228
- - 2013 2%
Page Page
54
Audit KawauScheme Te 6.6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
control categories would also be more and equitable. fair flood the to categories drainage the from costs floodgate of reallocation addition, In managementand better reflectthe unified nature areas. of scheme. the rating DO and DS the to particular combine in itself, system rating the changing for scope also is there However, more a provide to extension an such for acceptable and demandreliable standardof drainage there. increasing been has There and the costs into scheme scheme the target Awahuri area. of extension to possible flexibility the including inherent changes, has accommodate system rating existing The for Changes Future Scope Drain3. Maintenance Pumping2. %difference TOTAL 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 Year %difference TOTAL 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 Year
------13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05
-
Budgetand Actual Expenditure (PRD 04 12) 04 (PRD
Budget Budget -
124,000 Budget and ActualBudgetand Expenditure 2004 37,500 15,000 15,000 12,000 13,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 12,000 12,000
5,000 4,500 4,500 4,500 4,000 4,000 4,000 3,500 3,500 RaupoRoad
MainDrain
Actual Actual 113,276
58,976 19,973 22,259 10,644 16,500 14,219 11,954 16,911
2,778 3,875 3,157 2,878 8,100 5,112 4,311 8,792 7,288 5,627 7,874
Experie 57% - 9%
2004
Budget c sget ti wud simplify would this suggests nce
Budget - 2013 530,000 37,500 70,000 61,000 69,000 65,000 60,000 55,000 55,000 49,000 46,000 OtherDrains
5,000 4,500 4,500 4,500 4,000 4,000 4,000 3,500 3,500 Dixon’s
-
2013 Actual
Actual 498,819
41,573 45,215 93,050 46,355 49,610 47,066 51,426 50,294 61,417 54,386 3,797 5,570 4,471 3,208 3,928 2,326 8,756 2,593 6,924
11% - 6%
Page Page
55
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 6.6.2 6.6.1 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
This relatively minor change could readily be implemented be readily could change minor relatively This systemrating was developed. the when envisaged as involved,area the cover to ha 50 about by (DS) area rating This willrequest readily implementedbe by extending the current Sluggish drainage been recently has area Awahuri the into requestedby five ratepayersalong HighdenRoad. network drainage the of extension An Extension Awahuriinto Area Theseissues physical and use land factors assuch soi variations, seasonal on depending whole typically the area, across scheme widely varies maintenance drain on expenditure that noted is It requirementsinvolved and ensure that ratesare properlytargeted. different the for account to need therefore would areas two the Combining concerns historic remain satisfied. ensure to scrutiny to open be to needs schemes, both for outlet common the provides which Drain, Main maintaining for share cost the addition, In subsidisation as one. managed cross been have no reserves the balance ensure reached they to since although separately occurred, managed been have area scheme original each from reserves financial that ensure to taken been has care Particular of the floodgatesisonly allocated to the Sluggis requiredhas This be the separateto kept two areas 50% the so thatdrainage share capital nocapital assets such as pumps and floodgate structures. with country t sand while higher predominantlyassets, is area drainage Oroua The that different the drainage and financialensureneedsin each area were properly recognised. to was separate areas two the keeping for reason main the However, hasarea wider benefits acrossthe whole scheme area. one in waterweeds new vigorous of spread the controlling of cost the example, For whole the drainagenetwork. to approach wide catchment a with inconsistent somewhat is that legacy historical categori rating separate as areas scheme original two the keep to need The CombiningDS and DO Areas Rating Rating plansand therates databasewould then updatedbe to suit. process followinglocal consultation andinput.
are discussedin moredetail below. e lgih ra a lw yn fod rn ln wt significant with land prone flood lying low has area Sluggish he
l typeand drain size.
harea.
through the Annual PlanAnnual the through
Page Page funding es is a a is es 56
Audit KawauScheme Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee to considered is area DS the needsdownstream as well as theindirect benefits. over rating drainagethedevelopment landon ofuseimpact uniform the accountinto appropriately take current the Nevertheless, drainageas thelower areas. sam the rated is country sand higher the where area DS the within especially system,rating current the in areasdifferent rating the bywellrecognised notis This drainage less areas achieveto thesame performance andallow intensive more farming. needs generally country sand higher the However lower the in weed water of areas. clearing mechanical for need the increase but areas higher the in spraying chemical for need the reduce may example for seasons Dry
(PRD 04 12) 04 (PRD
hn oe silty lower than
Page Page e for e 57
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 58
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 7. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
3. 2. 1. audit This recommends: policy separatelyto fund renewalexpenditure and emergency reserves. adjustedincorporatenewCouncilbeneeds fundingtoto ratingsystemalso the The and Kopane (FK). the to as well as areas drainage the toallocated costs of proportion the update to required are adjustmentsminor Some extend to request DS the area into Awahuri the area. recent a accommodate to enough flexible is system rating The control and pumpingworks man flood drainage, the funding to approach targeted a provided original and two schemes the combined successfully has 2004 in introduced system rating The periodicmaintenance and replacements. in long the over expenditure completion for actual with consistent been generally have calculations rates due and budgets Scheme is register asset stopbanksthat the are currentlylisted not as scheme assets. of update 2015 and mapping Asset any and implemented as theneedarises. been or allow priorities largely as addressed be will and have minor relatively are issues outstanding recommendations review 2001 The of channel the cross sections and stopbank levels survey full a by MainDrain of capacity review the to timelybe neverthelesswould It overdesign an such for light event. fairly was damage but capacity, channel highlight and has levels 2015 June in flood recent The drainage the to changes or improvements network, systemrating significant or managementof thescheme. any for need no currently is there and managed well being generally is scheme the that concludes audit This Conclusionand Recommendations
crosssections and stopbank levels. of capacity the Review drainagecosts into Sluggish, the Oroua andRailway Drain areas. of split the including category, rating each in expenditure monitor to Continuing Minorchanges - 1
ad il nld te atr o a ubr f logts n secondary on floodgates of number a of capture the include will and 6 c. b. a.
the assets the have been mapped andincludedin the AMS. the in costs floodgate of split the updating and Sluggish the between costs drainage Orouadrainage categories to75%:25% (instead 70%:30%); of and of split the amending provision for funding renewals reserves;
to to the ratingsystem including:
agedby the scheme.
- term and the new rene new the and term Main Drain after carrying out a full survey of the channel the of survey full a out carrying after Drain Main
flood control categories for Main Drain (FM) Drain Main for categories control flood
d oe sus eadn stopbank regarding issues some ed
.
wals policy will better provide for for provide better will policy wals
rates calculation once all once calculation rates
Page Page 59
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Kawau Te Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) 04 Audit (PRD Scheme
Page Page 6 0
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
2001 Review Recommendations ANNEXA Page Page 61
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 62
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 6.3 6.2 6.1.3 6.1 6. Co amend to likely was that Act Government Local area. Awahuri the of inclusion the facilitate and boundaries, scheme drainage the of review the 2001 of in system rating new the 2002 to programme amended to recommendation Committee the addition In matters rating or operational the review. of scope the outside were they that considered staff because 2001 June 28 on Hearing the following Committee Operations bythe recommended the amendments of some adopt not did Council Note September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
SLUGGISHRIVER AND OROUA DRAINAGE SCHEMES REVIEW
1. Culverts 2. 1. Pumping capacity 1. DesignDrainage Coefficients DrainageCriteria SCHEME DESIGN
RECOMMENDATIONSFROM DRAFT REVIEW (includingamendments adopted by Council) - 03 to avoid affecting existing programmed commitments, and to await the outcome outcome the await to and commitments, programmed existing affecting avoid to 03 of maintaining optimum drainage levels for Scheme pumping should be providedwhere economicallyviable with the aim discharge. the drain water level to be kept at the optimum level for the associated Pump stations should include at least two pumps for reliability and to enable unless site conditions determine otherwise. loss of 50mm and a design discharge based on the drain full flow plus 30%, The diameter of Scheme culverts should generallybe designed for a head c. b. a. b. a. 2 Scheme drains should be designed with a discharge capacity based on the
-
5 year rainfall event with the following minimum criteria.
intermediate flows. and where practical high flows low flows of 2.5 mm/day; freeboard 1200mm (900mm minimum) Adopt a drain f 500mm, but no less than 300mm. Adopt a design drainage coefficient of 15 mm/day with freeboard of
of 10
ull drainage coefficient of 25 mm/day. - 15 mm/day; freeboard 500mm (300mm minimum),
discharge (m
3 /s)
uncil powers to extend extend to powers uncil
Page Page - 02 was was 02
63
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 6.6.1 6.6 6.5 6.4 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 6.6.2
Drain Shape 2. 1. Stopbankfreeboard 2. 1. Dra Freeboard 2. 1. ChannelRoughness 1.
in in freeboard
Design freeboard on scheme drains should be 500mm, but no less than c. b. a. depths as follows. Drain design be based on winter conditionswith allowance for different flow weed growth The drains be maintained in "fair" condition, or better, free of excessive reshapedwithin three years. Where existing slumping is an ongoing problem the drains should be Side slopes be maintained at stabl and rail culvertswhich are expensive to lower. level due to cleaning and ground settlement upstream, especially for road invert level,with due consideration of the likely long Culverts should be installed with the invert at least 50mm below the drain (For derivation of these formula refer to Appendix 3.2). discharge of 25 mm/day. dischargebefore spillway ov Design freeboard onthe Main Drain should300mm be at the design hour rainfall ( 75 rainfall events. This is equivalent to the average runoff for the 5 at bank Allowance for freeboard may also be made by designing the drain capacity 300mm, at the nominal 2
- full for runoff of 25 mm/day or the pe
0.75m, and 0.04 for depths less than 0.75m. Mannings n Lowwater level design (for base flows) be calculated with a calculated with aMannings n High water level design discharges (with of 0.025. Drain full design discharges be calculatedwith a Mannings n
on the banks or in the water. - 87 mm)
- value of 0.033 whenwater depths are more than
- 5 year design discharge.
erflow. e batters to suit the soil type and situation.
- value of 0.033.
ak 1
-
2 year, 1 500mm freeboard) be
- term reduction in drain
- 3 day design - 10 year, 24 Page Page - value
64
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 6.7 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
1. FloodgatedOutlets 2.
of of flooding tothe areas thatwould inundated be byoverflows. Design freeboard ontributary drains should bein accordance with therisk Scheme floodgated drainage outlets should be designed at the 25 mm/ha/day discharge. drain full discharge. For example, for drains with flat gradients use 50mm to minimise any potentialadverse effects of heading to maintain a
consistent standard with existing floodgate sizes, and
- up at the nominal
Page Page
65
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 7.8 7.5.3 7.5 7.4.9 7.4 7. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
STOPBANKING 4. 3. 2. 1. 2. 1. ChannelErosion and Slumping Pe RecommendedStopbanking Upgrade Secondarystopbanking Presentstopbank levels 4. 3. 2. 1. Adopt Option 2
rformance Regrade the Main width ($30,000). phase), and reconstruct where necessary to maintain a 1.8m minimum top below the original 1950 design level (to be confirmed during detailed design Top up the Main Drain stopbank to a new design level generally 300mm maintenance programme. Stopbanking should be inspected and repaired as p stopbanking. Repair the stock damage and slumping on Couper and Greenaway Drain design levels are being maintained (see Table 3). Re ratepayers. location of any topping up that may be required in consultationwith Monitor stopbank levels and overflows during flood events to identify the remedial and Monitor channel scour, bed degradation and slumping, and undertake scour are minimised or avoidedwhere practicable. The Main Drain should be maintained in such a manner that erosion and Extension ($3,500) by Upgrade the Johnson’s Drain stopbanking downstream of Kopane No.3 levels as shown in Table 3 ($ Top up low areas of the secondary stopbanking to the appropriate design (cost included above). the original level (RL11.17m, 300mm below the proposed stopbank level) -
survey stopbank levels and top up as necessary to ensure that the stopbank grade. forming a 50m spillway on the right bank at Leen’s Drain, 75mm b 2000 flood level, and topping up both sides to a level 150mm above the pegged 3 October
–
Partial Upgrade $40,000
preventative works as necessary.
Drainspillway level to a new design level 300mm below
6,500).
art of the annual Page Page elow 66
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Generally no more 150mm topping up is expected to be required. Additonalsurveyrequiredis confirm todesign levels toppedareasbe andtheup.to due with protection flood of standards similar provide to guide a as intended are They Note:The levels shown are based on previous design levels and limited survey data. Table 5. Johnson’s Drain Johnson’s Ta FactoryDrain Lane’s No.2Drain Mora’s Drain Lanes Deviation Lane’s No.1Drain No.1Drain Location
ikorea Drain ikorea regardtothe potential ponding likely todevelop from the respective catchments. 1 : Proposed: SecondaryStopbank next 3 years in the following order of priority: The works be started in 2001
Tributary Drains Johnson’s Drain Main Drain stopbanking
-
Proposed Works Downstreamof Kopane No.3Extension: Top up both banks to minimum RL12.0m. RL11.3m. Top up right bank to RL11.6m and left bank design level) (Furtherinvestigation isrequired to determine the (Road levelisRL11.35m)
leavebank left spillwayas isatRL10.30m. up top the stopbank designto RL10.55m;. boundary RL10.3.to up top the right stopbank on Dorn the Lane’sNo.1 contain pondingin area the to the west of up top the left stopbank to RL10.3m to top up top to RL 11.2 onthe bank left of Mora’s Deviation to up GimblettsDrain. up top to RL 11.2 onthe Mora’sDrain design to RL11.5m,except; up top the stopbanks on Lane’sDeviation lowerthe floodgateoutlet into Mora’s Drain. Drain stopbank. Leen’sDrain,75mm below stopbank grade. aform 50m spillway theon right bank at pegged the 3 October2000 level,flood and up top both sides ato level 150mm above No.1. floodprotection localfrom runoffas Lanes No.2Drain provideto a similar standard of pondingin the up top the left stopbanking to contain -
02 if practicable, and be completed within the
Improvements Drain.
areato the westofLanes
right bank
ofLane’s
- Lover
- Page Page
67
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 8.7 8. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Note1. Table Recommended Improvements PUMPING present.None at NewScheme Pumps Leave Dixon’sPump Option1 RaupoRoad Pump Option Installweed UpgradeSaunders’ Diversion 2
: Summary: recommendedof pumping improvements as is
–
minor upgrademinor
Subjectto review in consultation with ratepayers.
- fence
$6,000 $2,000 Cost
2003 2001 Programme
- - 04 02
1
Page Page
68
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 9.2 9. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
DRAINS Table 3. 2. 1. Criteriafor aScheme Drain Roadside drains are Note R & S Skinner, Leens Rd 14250/1700 John Wills’ property Oroua SchemeArea Rangiotu Morrison’s property, South arm of Taikorea Drain Boundary drain into Sluggish River Scheme Drain location Saunders’ boundary. Morrison’s Drain to extension of Taylor and up to Kellow Road. Drain downstream of Walsh’s Johnson’s Drain, 500m Area flow. prevent undue overland high flow capacity to adequate maintained to ensure 14250/193
3
: Recommended: DrainNetwork Alterations Table 7 in consultationwith the affected ratepayers. That the drainage network classification process. scheme drains unless agreed with the affected ratepayers during the re downstream boundary of the most upstream property, shall continue as That c. b. a. That Scheme drains provide a drainage outlet for:
drainage and
existing scheme drains, including those that extend beyond the
the Scheme area. in certain circumstances significant foreign water passing through the most upstream property on the drain; and circumstances; agreed unnecessary due to adequate natural drainage or other each significant farming unit within the
Drain
Extension, Carrington Morrison’s Extension
Russell’s, Sklenar’s Carlyle’s
Lowe’s Mora’s Middle Lyne’s Bonds Drain Drain Drain
&
in the schemes be amended in accordancewith
with MDC as appropriate. improvements cost Leave as is. Any swamp. On farm drain in amenity On farm drains. 2000. and main road. Agreed in Services three properties network. Saunders into scheme drainage outlet for Integrates the existing Services 4 properties. Services 3 properties. Need for change
scheme; except where it is
-
share
Length of drain to includes floodgate Remove 300m Remove 261m add/remove Add 2000m Add 600m Add 310m Add 250m None. 805m & Page Page
-
69
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 9.4 9.3.4 9.3.3 9.3.2 9.3.1 9.3 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
1. Maintenance 2. 1. Size Drain Performance 1. WaterLevel Gauges 4. 3. 2. 1. Floodgates 3. 2. 1. Culverts
affected ratepayers. Scheme drains continue to be maintained and upgraded in consultationwith programme where necessary to maintain the effectiveness of the drain. Re designed in accordancewith the recommended design criteria with due The size of replacement structures for the existing old floodgates be Install and maintain lifting wires for smaller flapgates as necessary. and el Install a winch system for the floodgate on the outlet of the Spillway Drain, backflow. carry out modifications as necessary to ensure it closes without undue Monitor the performance of the side Where practicable, promote the installation of bridges instead of culverts. to allow for land settlement and future drainage improvements. Install new culvertswith the invert at least 100mm lower than the drain invert design crite maintenance and improvement programme, and in accordance with the Continue to upgrade undersized and high culverts as part of the annual for input into the re maintenance drain a Establish datum, at Install metric gauge boards (estimated cost $2000), to standard Moturiki the existing floodgate. consideration of
- battering of drains continue to be
sewhere as necessary. Mangawhata Road bridge, No.1 drain at the inlet of the road culvert, each of the two pump sites,
both the inlet and outlet side of the Main Drain Floodgate, ria (see section 6.3).
the particular characteristics of the location and the size of
-
classification process.
rgam i cnutto wt ratepayers with consultation in programme
- included on the maintenance hung Lane’s Deviation Floodgate and
Page Page
70
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
Leen Road bridge. Main Drain at the outlet of the twin culvert on MainDrain Road, Taikorea Rd bridge,
Page Page
71
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 10.5.1 10.5 10. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
CostSharing Responsibilities SCHEME Table 1. Interaction Lowerthe with Manawatu Scheme c. b. a. 3. a. 2. c. b. a. 1. Descriptionof works
Washoutdue to river flood failure Failure,pipe beddingfailure, improveto drainage Improvements,e.g. lowering schemes discharging into river drainageschemes Pipesthrough stopbank from maintenance Replacement,repair, scheme discharging into river drainagefrom scheme Allfloodgates and headwalls Scourprotection flood. Clearingsilt build Maintenance drainage for Outletchannel to river 4 : Cost: Schemes bereviewed with reference to the changesshown Table in 8. That cost the sharing arrangements between the LMSDrainage and the MANAGEMENT
sharing Lowerwith Manawatu Scheme
- up from
Drainage Scheme 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50%
Manawat Scheme Lower 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% u
*Thechannel *Floodgates are an Improvementsin *Floodgates are an excludingnon LMS protection,flood integralan part of floodsand is therefore isaffected by river floodgate to the river levels. governdrain water floodprotection, and integralpartof LMS drainage responsibilitytheof areuse) the moreintensive land consolidationand example, landfrom drainage(required, for floodprotection. integralpartof LMS drainage. relatedwork for Comment
scheme. from the - Page Page flood
72
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 11.4 11.3 11.2 11. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
Fundingof Upgrading Works Reserves PresentFunding FUNDING 2. 1. 4. 3. 2. 1. 1.
as necessary to ensure funding from the appropri That for any new scheme works the rating system be reviewed and revised as appropriate, and decided in consultationwith ratepayers. That other the all of potential service assets. the maintain to works capital ongoing pumpstations,floodgateandformajorassets established theand being for con furtherThat scheme rates. untilrequiredfundsthereached,sizereduceisexcess anyandthe used to Thatinterest earned onthe emergency reserves funds shall beadded tothe normal operating costs. Thatthe emergency reserves be flood the cost equitably over for time. reserves spread emergency toannually inputfunds with works,emergency appropriatecapital and damage maintain Schemes the That revoked classification of the scheme(s) and the Proclamati That appropriate cost sharing for Main Drain be determined during re
improvement works be funded by loans, reserves, or direct contribution
.
sideration be given to separate Capital ReplacementCapitalseparatefundsto given siderationbe
usedonly foremergency works and not for ate ratepayers. on for cost sharing be
- Page Page 73
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 13.6 13. 12.4 12. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
NewRating System RATESAND CLASSIFICA Conclusion AMALGAMATION 2. 1. (b) (a) 4. 3.
2002 thatthe proposed new rating system programmedbe forcom system;rating and new proposed the of development the during determined implications cost and acceptance ratepayer to subject amalgamate, schemes two the That agreement. common drainage outlets with due consideration of the current cost That the new rating system allow for the costs for the Main Drain and other for disaster recovery andthe scheme assets in each area. That the new rating system allows for the existin is consistentwith the Asset Management Plans. proposed capitalimprovement costs of the scheme works in each area, and That the new rating system allows for the maintenance, operating and drainage, pumping and flood control com differential rating system. (It is envisaged that this will include separate That the two schemes be re
- 03.
TION
- classified by developing an area ponents.)
g and future reserve funds
- based pletion in - sharing Page Page 74
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
Drain MaintenanceCosts 1992 ANNEXB Page Page - 2011 75
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 76
Sluggish and Oroua September16 2015 Catchment 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te Chemical Mechanical Sluggish Drainage Running average Chemical Mechanical Oroua Drainage Running avg<2011
Operations Committee 1992-93 40,093 Actual 19964 6,205 7,762 23% 81% 19%
-
1993-94 Drain MaintenanceExpenditure 1992 16,346 Actual 29057 8,381 6,458 78% 23% 75% 25% 1994-95 10,231 Actual 12220 1,763 3,518 79% 23% 81% 19%
1995-96 12,314
Actual 19390 8,653 7,434 76% 23% 66% 34% 1996-97 Actual 24850 6,307 2,076 2,990 78% 23% 86% 14% 1997-98 Actual 17636 8,600 7,364 3,404 77% 23% 71% 29% 1998-99 10,657 Actual 19025 7,044 3,759 76% 23% 73% 27% 1999-00 Actual 12764 8,706 1,351 - 752 2011 78% 22% 91% 9% 2000-01 Actual 16913 8,340 1,346 4,055
79% 24% 82% 18% 2001-02 13,540 Actual 11888 4,642 3,778 78% 24% 75% 25% 2002-03 11,841 Actual 22521 1,958 8,775 78% 24% 76% 24% 2003-04 12,705 Actual 7,561 9265 0 76% 24% 57% 43% Average Average To Date 17,958 12,878 4,232 5,449 76% 24%
2004-05 Actual 16,980 28,916 4,490 4,000 77% 21% 84% 16%
2005-06 Actual 19,906 39,264 5,814 6,590 78% 22% 83% 17%
2006-07 Actual 29,836 8,707 6,750 1,776 78% 23% 82% 18%
2007-08 Actual 17,651 20,212 5,841 7,722 78% 25% 74% 26%
2008-09 Actual 17,725 15,410 13,056 77% 24% 70% 875 30%
2009-10 Actual 19,623 17,583 5,814 6,590 77% 22% 75% 25%
2010-11 Actual Page Page 12,373 25,456 6,750 1,776 77% 18% 82% 18% 77 Average Average To Date 17,287 17,432 4,585 5,626 77% 23%
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 78
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
UpdatedRating Report 2006 ANNEXC Page Page 79
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Kawau Te
Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) 04 Audit (PRD Scheme
Page Page 80
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.1 3. 2.2 2.1 2. 1.1 1. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
must utilise only a factor or factors that are identified in the Council’s Annual Plan Annual Council’s the in be and in identified are that factors or factor a only utilise must 16 Section under set rate targeted a for liability the that states Act the of 18 Section was land the “where rate, situate targeted proposed the for categories the developing In the out sets 2 Schedule Act. the of mattersto be used defineto categories the of 2 rateable land. Schedule with accordance in be and Plan identifiedincategoriesland be mustrateable states of these 17 Section land. rateable of categories different for differentially or set be to is rate the which of Annurespect in land its rateable all for in basis uniform a identified on set is be may ratefunction targeted the if function a for rate targeted a set the of 16 Section wor drainage undertake to Act). decision or the to districts, (subject region drainage its in abolish anywhere or modify create, to the of 12 Section RelevantLegislation report. categ specified other any of respect in levied and made rate the from vary shall property the of category specified by levied rates) any of respect leviedin and made rate the that such 3, Annex in Plans the shownon Scheme Drainage Kawau Te Drainage Manawatu Oroua proposed and River (or Sluggish rates the to Scheme apply will system rating targeted The Thetargeted rating system set out belowwill take effecton 1 July2004. Application byCouncil adopted April13on 2004 followingpublic consultation early in system2004. rating new proposed the of details provides report This catchment Scheme). a create to areas scheme two Sluggish the in Council by amalgamatingRiver DrainagewithviewandOroua Schemes, ex to and a out carried works the for System Rating Targeted new Manawatu The Introduction Scheme the “area of the land within the rating unit” has been chosen to determine to liabilit the chosen been has this unit” rating For the within rates.land the targeted of for “area the liability Scheme the calculating in used be may that factors 12
d”was used. Theareas in eachcategory shownare Annex in 3. SLUGGISH RIVER AND RIVER SLUGGISH OROUA DRAINAGE A RATING SYSTEM FOR A NEW DRAINAGE AREAAA SYSTEM FOR DRAINAGE RATING NEW y(“land accordance with Schedule 3 of the Act. Schedule 3 of the Act sets out the the out setsAct the of 3 Schedule Act. the of 3 Scheduleaccordancewith - Wanganui Wanganui
- Wanganui Regional Council resolved on 24 July 2001 to develop a a develop to 2001 July 24 on resolved Council Regional Wanganui - area”). Local Government Act 2002 gives the the gives 2002 Act Government Local Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 Act (Rating) Government Local AMENDED RATING REPORT 2006 AMENDED RATINGREPORT einl oni o al aebe rpry n h rtn area rating the in property rateable all on Council Regional
INCORPORATINGTHE r o poet a st u i Scin 4 5 n 6 f this of 6 and 5 4, Sections in out set as property of ory
- ie cee te e aa Drainage Kawau Te (the scheme wide - aig rvsos f at o the of 6 Part of provisions making
states that the Council may Council the that states Council the general powers general the Council SCHEMES
the Council’s the Annual
l ln A Plan. al tending the tending Page Page ks 81
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 5.1 5. 4.1 4. 3.7 3.6 3.5 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Kawau Te
eto 11 3 ()i) eurs h Cucl o ae osdrto o te xet to extent the of consideration take to Council the requires (a)(iv) (3) 101 Section property any service to the two existing network drainage sub of the result a as to (particularly modifications ready for allows social, future and current rating the on needs well revenue cultural and environmental, for economic, liability of allocation any of Se ratepayers. of groups for various considerations to the funding out andCosts and funding have beenprojected over a 10 to year20 period. costs sets of 2002 allocation Act the Government determining Local the of 101 Section d. c. b. a. categories following the into divided are area rating Scheme the in properties rateable of parts sy rating differential targeted the of purposes the For RatingCategories for rate targeted uniform a charged be drainageeach year. shall 5.1 Section in defined as DR, or DO propertirateable all rate, targeted uniform the of purposes the For UniformTargeted Rate recognised been has works control developm flood withinscheme the areas. and land drainage of for effects need the The on therefore activity. the undertake to need the to contribute group, a or individuals, particular of inactions or actions the which
Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) 04 Audit (PRD Scheme ction 101 (3) (b) requires the Council to take into consideration the overall impact overall the consideration into take to Council the requires (b) (3) 101 ction system spreads the scheme costs in an affordable and transparent manner, transparent and affordable an in costs scheme the spreads system future additional drainage works upstream of the existing Sluggish River River Sluggish existing the of DrainageAreaboundaries upstream managedby the Council. works drainage additional future any and 5.1.a) section in works the (excluding Area Drainage River Sluggish benefit indirect covering (DS) category drainage A RailwayDrain andRangiotuDrain areas managed byCouncil. the benefit indirect covering (DR) category drainage A Council(Awahuri area). Le to Floodgates Drain Main the (from benefit covering (DA) Drain category drainage A Main the (from Drain Main Rongoteaarea defined the in section5.1.kbelow. and Area Council, the bymanaged floodgate)Drain Leen’s to Floodgates Drainage Oroua the benefit indirect covering (DO) category drainage A :
from, or contributes to the need for, the drainage works on MainDrain on worksdrainage the needfor, the to contributesor from,
scheme areas. es in the Scheme rating area that are in the differentialthecategoryin DS,thatareaare Scheme the rating in es
from, or contributes to the need for, the drainage works in th in works drainage the for, need the to contributes or from, nee the to contributes or from, from, or contributes to the need for, the drainage works in the the in works drainage the for, need the to contributes or from,
-
division), and recognises the historical separation of separation historical the recognises and division),
- the rateable area that that area rateable the the rateable area that area rateable the being of the community. The proposed The community. the of being the rateable area that that area rateable the h rtal ae that area rateable the en’s Drain floodgate) managed by the the by managed floodgate) Drain en’s aebe rpris n prs of parts and properties rateable
d for, the drainage works in the the in works drainage the for, d
stem, rateable properties and properties rateable stem,
n o rnf and runoff on ent receives direct or direct receives or direct receives receives direct or direct receives
eevs indirect receives excluding theexcluding
Page Page 82 e
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 6.1 6. 5.4 5.3 5.2 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
rm h uiom agtd ae s e ot n Sectio in out set as rate categoriesas set out in Section 6.5. targeted uniform the from obtained be shall rate targeted this for required revenue total the year rating each In LevelRatingof of thatproperty shall be thesum of amounts the foreach of the relevant categories. or property that to applicablerate the category, differential one than more within Whereof any a separatelyseparatelypart propertyorrateable propertyfallsrateable smallchange to theupstream extent of theDR category). amended been not has 3 Figure that (note report this of 3 Annex in figures more the in shown and Councilare the by held 4619 reportNo. Plan on out set particularlythis in described property of categories the by covered areas The Drainage Oroua and River Sluggish the Schemes Reviewas adopted2001, in by the Counci recommended works to and Council, bybenefits reference the to and need from worksexisting for be to maintained bythe definitio these of purposes the For k. j. i. h. g. f. e.
works managedby Council. the control flood and drainage the for, need the to contributes and from, benefits that area rateable the covering (CU) category contribution urban Rongotea A Pumpstati Road Raupo the Council. at the pumping to the contributing for area rateable need the covering (CR) category contributor A byCouncil. the managed Pumpstation Road Raupo the at pumping the from benefit coveri indirect (PR) category pumping that A area rateable the covering respectively),at the Dixon’s Pumpstation managed byCouncil. the C2) C2 and (C1 (C1, pumping flood and pumping drainage for need the to contributes categories contributor Two Dixon’sPumpstation managedby the and moderate degree Two managedby the Council. pumpin for and need areas, the Kopane and to Drain partly Main the in works control flood for need the to contributes that Rongotea) of area urban the (excluding catchment Drain covering (CF) category contributor A area rateable the covering (FM) Drain Main FK) and Kopane areas the (FK) managedby the Council. in works and control flood the (FM from benefit direct categories receiving control flood Two
pumping categories (P1, P2) covering the rateable area receiving a high a receiving area rateable the covering P2) (P1, categories pumping
-
low degree of benefit (P1 and P2 respectively)P2benefit of(P1 and the fromlow degree
ns, direct and indirect benefit has been assessed been has benefit indirect and direct ns,
a Ruo od n Dxns Pumpstations Dixon’s and Road Raupo at g
g h rtal ae rciig iet or direct receiving area rateable the ng
Council. h rtal area rateable the l on 24 Julyl24on 2001.
62 n fo te rating the from and 6.2 n
n aae b the by managed on
f the of to show the recent the show to
hl Main whole
Page Page part 83
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 6.2 6.5 6.4 6.3 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Kawau Te
c. (associatedwith drainage the categories DR,DS, DO and DA). revenue rates scheme 20 approximately produce to as amount such or inclusive) (GST $50 be shall 4.1, Section indefined propertiesas rateable all on Rate UniformTargeted The aebe rpry hl b cluae i rset f h dfeeta ctgre as categories differential the of respect in calculated be shall property rateable a the year rating each In an and works actual include categorydetailedin Section 15 and as Annex1. costs scheme each other and in administration, management, of to proportion appropriate referred works scheme The net revenuerequired after deducting any General Rate the as defined is category each in works scheme the for required revenue rate The f. e. d. b. a. follows:
Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) 04 Audit (PRD Scheme io’ Pmsain n eto 65c 65e 65f n 65i Wti the the Within of 25% 6.5.i. equal shall and P2 Category 6.5.f for hectare 6.5.e, per amount 6.5.c, the sectionrevenue, in Pumpstation Dixon’s at pumping Scheme a pumping Scheme the the for revenue the deducting for after Pumpstation Dixon’s required revenue rate scheme the produce to as such be shall P2 and P1 categories pumping for hectare per amount The the for required revenue rate scheme the of 50% Scheme pumpingat Dix other the of 20% and Pumpstation Road Raupo at pumping Scheme the for revenue rate scheme the of 20% produce to Dixon’s as such be also at shall addition in and pumping portion), control Scheme rate the scheme for the of required 50% Main revenue and the Scheme, in the within works areas control Kopane flood and the Drain for required revenue rate scheme the amount The the floodcontrol revenueas setout in section6.5.c and 6.5.i. control flood the for afterdeductingScheme withinthe areas Kopaneand MainDrain the in required works revenue rate scheme the produce to as such categ control flood the for hectare per amount The the in6.5.i. section from revenue contribution Rongotea the the and 6.2 section deductingin out set as rate aftertargeted uniform sch Scheme, the the within produce works to drainage DA as and such DO DS, be DR, categories shall drainage the for hectare per amount The 6.5.c. section in defined portion control flood 50% the deducting after Pumpstation revenue rate scheme the of 10% produce to as such be shall C2 category for hectare per amount The Dixon’s at pumping Scheme 6.5.c. the section in defined for portion control flood 50% required the deducting after Pumpstation revenue rate scheme the 25% produce to as such be shall C1 category for hectare per amount The amountper hectare Category for P1.
per hectare for category CF shall be such as to produce 25% of of 25% produce to as such be shall CF category for hectare per
o te cee riae ok mngd y h Council the by managed works drainage scheme the for on pr etr apyn t ay atclr separately particular any to applying hectare per mount
on’sPumpstation (drainageportion).
eurd o te cee upn a Dixon’s at pumping Scheme the for required
m rt rvne eurd o the for required revenue rate eme Contributionor other income. ories FM and FK shall be be shall FK and FM ories
uptto (flood Pumpstation
- 25% of the of 25% Page Page
84 of
t
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 9.2 9.1 9. 8.1 8. 7.4 7.3 7.2 7.1 7. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
xed usra o tee onais o nld al ra contributi areas all include to boundaries these of upstream extends existing the also and Area,Drainage Oroua andwithin Area Drainage RiverSluggish the of liesboundaries generally system rating new the by covered be to area The the to change upstreamextent of small recent the show to amended been not has 2 Figure that (note is system rating new the of area The AreaRating ratepayerseach year. amount budgeted the on depend will expenditure Actual 1. Annex in out set is expenditure scheme future estimated of Schedule The SchemeWorks Expenditure the from benefit in variation the recognise works. to areas these separate for with appropriate where categories Pumping and Controlestabli been haveDifferentials each. identifiedfor areas contributor and benefit Flood Drainage, into separated been workshavescheme the system rating equitableflexibleand more provide a To providesa more and fair equitable rate forsmall properties pa in land on based system rating this for which, rate targeted uniform a of inclusion the of introduction The with developed be would system widescheme. rating new a create to area Awahuri the the including of possibility the of consideration that envisaged Review The adoptedby Council 24on July2001. recommenda the new The area Background tothe New RatingSystem i. h. g. riae ytm As ecue ae fw ml aes n rpris rud the around properties on areas small few peri a are excluded Also system. drainage scheme theto, contribute or benefitfrom, not do thereforeand drained be to needed area catchment
phery of thecatchment with verylow drainage benefit or contribution.
n te cee upn a Ruo od n Dxns upttos as Pumpstations Dixon’s and Road Raupo describedsection in at 6.5.c. pumping scheme the and control flood revenuefor the 1.2% of and (DO)category Oroua the with associated works drainage the for revenue rate scheme the produce3.7%of to as such categorybeshall CUhectare per amount for The Pumpstation. f required revenue rate scheme the of 25% produce to as such be shall CR category for hectare per amount The to at pumping RaupoRoad Pumpstation as in section6.5c, 6.5.h Scheme and 6.5.i. the such for revenue the be deducting after shall Pumpstation Road PR category pumping for produce scheme the raterevenue required forthe Scheme p hectare per amount The
- baseddifferential systemrating has beenprepared inaccordance with – in o te lgih ie ad ru Dang Shm Review Scheme Drainage Oroua and River Sluggish the of tions
the DR the category). xldn toe xesv aes f sand of areas extensive those excluding
oa Gvrmn (aig At 02 a alwd t allowed has 2002 Act (Rating) Government Local
hw i Fgr 2 f ne 3 o hs report this to 3 Annex of 2 Figure in shown
or the Scheme pumping at Raupo Road Raupo at pumping Scheme the or dtrie i cnutto with consultation in determined s - country that have not not have that country
rticular. works on MainDrain onworks
umpingat Raupo
catchment g o the to ng Page Page - area, shed he 85 -
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 12.1 12. 11.3 11.2 11.1 11. 10.2 10.1 10. 9.3 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Kawau Te 12.3 12.2
The proposed rate calculation is similar to that used for the Longburncontribution the for usedfor that to similarcalculationisproposed rate The benefit than ruralproperties the in scheme. the so area the servicing systems Drain. Main Drainage into Oroua and the Area through drains that community Rongotea the with made associated been has provision Special Provision forRongotea are costs existing scheme equitablyshared and the thefairly. that outside ensure to areas necessary catchment considered is these boundaries scheme include to area rating the Extending indirectly theneedto for schemeworks thatbenefit these properties. Propertiesthat require drainage orare low stopbankdesign levels and maintenancerequirements, and pumping requirements, requirements. maintenance and size drain the affects hard This development. lifestyl of smaller proportion of higher proliferation a and drainage, on from arises runoff Increased thereforethe drain maintenance requiredby the scheme. channels drainage the in growth weed and siltation to contributes runoff nutrient and sediment example, For catchment. for drainage each need within properties the from works to contribution a is there categories work the of each with Associated Contributionto the Need forWork drain network,with corresponding a decrease in theDA area. DS the category would amended be to include thebenefiting area extendingfrom the app be may it (from areaschemeintonetworkthis drainage the extendManawatu Council) area District or the this in drainage of management over take scheme the should However to due DA) (category abs the area Awahuri the in properties the to applied not is rate This forscheme drainageworks. need the to contribute or from benefit that DO and DS DR, areas category drainage draina for charge annual uniform A the for, need the to more contribute and from, schemedrainage works than ruralproperties. benefit indirect or direct greater life small the basis area an On Provision forUniform TargetedRate Annex an Road 20% Raupo the and to costs control contribution flood Drain Main the to drainage contribution the 25% to the basis and rata costs pro a on applied proportion urban the with areas), rural the on based simply is runoff It increased 2003. System Rating Scheme Drainage Manawatu the Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) 04 Audit (PRD Scheme
2) ence of scheme works in this area and the lack of significant of indirectschemelack benefits. enceand of inareathe works this .
ropriate to apply this rate to the DA area. In any case the boundary of of boundary the case any In area. DA the to rate this apply to ropriate
associated with urban development (90% compared with 30% for 30% with compared (90% development urban with associated
h shm ol poie otes o te stormwater the for outlets provides only scheme The - ad eieta bok ad industrial and blocks residential and e style and residential properties receive proportionally receive properties residential and style - d Dixon’s Pumpstations (see calculation sheets in in sheets calculation (see Pumpstations Dixon’s d farm development such as contouring and sub and contouring as such development farm Rongotea s e s hrfr apid o l poete i the in properties all to applied therefore is ge o te nrae rnf fo te catchment the from runoff increased the for
-
lying
community re community - surface areas associated with the the with associated areas surface
andprone to floodingalso contribute
ceives considerably less less considerably ceives
- commercial
Page Page - and soil 86
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 13.4 13.3 13.2 13 13. 12.9 12.8 12.7 12.6 12.5 12.4 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee .1
ln Mi Dan n i te oae ra a wl a shm pmig i more is pumping, scheme generally as well small, as area, relatively localised. Kopane the is in and area Drain Main scheme along the to benefit widespread,effectdrainage and largely the The works. relatedto indirect of level The socialand economic fabric of Scheme the area. prot and serviced land the from derived income through benefit area scheme whole the of ratepayers The and drainage works that providethembenefit. of control the controlflood the contribute should to thus and by roads these useof the throughbenefit network roading the to floodingand drainage the low the of protection provide works Scheme The Scheme the works. from benefit indirect receive to considered are area Scheme the within Ratepayers IndirectBenefit and Drain No.1 No.6Drain thatcontribute tothe need forpumping during floodof events. catchments the to applies C2 category rating The Pumpstation. The (rating works these for need Pumpstation). the to contribution Dixon’s for C2 the C1, categories rating and Pumpstation, Road Raupo of for CR category respect in levied be will the Therefore schemepumping. for need the “contribute” to also ponding, benefitindirectfrom or direct receivewhich but pumps, the to drain not do normally that properties adjoining and these of areas t for need the towards contribute Pumpstation Dixon’s and Pumpstation Road Raupo the towards drain that properties all Likewise (rating works categoryCF andCU). these Dixon’s for need the to contribution the and of are respect in rating levied be will Scheme Road 12.5 proposed the Raupo within properties these at Therefore pumping Scheme the and Drain to Main the Pumpstations and in protection areas, flood for Kopane works Scheme planned and existing All uniform the and CU category Rongotea urban the targeted rateDU. DA, and and DO Drain, DS, Maincategories on works drainage for Floodgateitself. Allowance for contributionsthese beenhas included in the drainage need the to contribute particular, In properties that drain towards the Main Drain Floodgat Drain Main the towards drain that properties aig aeoy 1 ple t te oa cthet riig iety o Dixon’s to directly draining catchment local the to applies C1 category rating
.
properties within the proposed Scheme rating area described above described area rating Scheme proposed the within properties l poete ta dan oad te an ri Fodae also Floodgate Drain Main the towards drain that properties all
ected by the Scheme works. These works help support the support help works These works. Scheme the by ected
- lying Ratepayersareas. within t
his scheme pumping. In addition the addition In pumping. scheme his
e contribute to the need for for need the to contribute e
of of stopbanking the he scheme areahe h Mi Drain Main the a described in in described a
Page Page 87
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 14.3 14.2 14.1 14. 13.5 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Kawau Te 15.1 15. 14.4
c. b. when a. considered been have matters following the benefit determiningthe level benefitof direct provided byscheme the works: direct to relation In rating drainage the DirectBenefit in included is benefit indirect categoriesand uniform the targeted rateeach for propertywher for allowance Accordingly, and detailedin Annex1. allocation The Allocation to Rating the Categories the required Theestimated average long first categories various the for cost the thatwill attributedbe variousto the works. rating of wor various the of identification level the Determining improve and where necessary,and maintainto the extent possible: to intended are Scheme the by undertaken be to works The j. i. h. g. f. e. d.
Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) 04 Audit (PRD Scheme pumpingto control floodingand drainage in Dixons the and Raupo Roadareas. standard the and integrity theof floodcontrol works; and standard the and integrity thedrainageof network; a drainage outletevery for property; flood control, and pumping systems cost for and properties efficient maintain andin the provide rating to areas; need the the practicality of recovering costs for scheme works from the areas benefiting; flood protection categories; benefitsharingchanneloffromandthe sub variousdrainagetheinterdependencein theschemeworks the otherwise of or an derived drainsfrom these; Scheme to access and proximity the the need for a relatively simple and fair rating the estimated future cost of Scheme works; and the variability of soil type, ground contour and land use; the relative ground elevations; the susceptibility to flooding and the likely duration of potential inudation; - catchment areas;
of the scheme works costs into the categories is summarised below summarised is categories the into costs works scheme the of
- term futureworks expenditure is set out in Annex1.
ks that provide benefit to the various areas and thus and areas various the to benefit provide that ks
floodgatebetweenworksdrainageand
system.
/r up ad h benefits the and pumps d/or -
effective
e appropriate. rvt drainage,gravity
Page Page
88
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 15.12 15.11 15.10 15.9 15.8 15.7 15.6 15.5 15.4 15.3 15.2 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
up aneac icue long includes maintenance pump and floodgates large pump structures,although some provision may requiredbe in the future. The amount for of depreciation funding for made been has allowance No loan annual the to similar is the otherontributary drains. that involved like stopbanking return construct amount to required be The would that repayments seepage. are foundation to costs helps and This pumping the CF). the precluded and (FM of have categories compensate f control flood conditions 50% Drain Main ground stopbanking, the to poor return allocated where of area, construction Dixon’s economic the for that category Dixon’s and Road Raupo the to allocated are costs Pumping the floodcontrol contributor category (CF) and the urbanRongotea category (CU). to allocation the deducting after FK) (FM, categories control flood Kopane and Drain pro allocated are standards) service maintain to long (including maintenance stopbanking for costs scheme The urban Rongoteacategory (CU). deductin after River Sluggish FK)(FM, areaeach incosts estimated the on categoriescontrolbased flood the Kopane and Drain Main to the to allocated allocated is 50% is other the areas and (DS) area Kopane category Drainage and Drain Main the in systems stopbank the with associated floodgates the for costs scheme the of 50% Likewise, areas.other The 50% is allocatedto the Main Drain controlflood categories. categories drainage three the over basis rata pro same the on distributed isdrain portion The control. to flood categories and drainage control to flood benefits complimentary and the recognise drainage the between equally allocated are LMS) the with 50:50 shared are (which Floodgates Drain Main the for costs scheme The Drain Main need for, at discharging catchment the form Floodgate that areas category drainage to basis the rata pro a on apportioned are costs maintenance channel Drain Main The improvementcosts are apportionedpro ratathe maintenancecosts. Drainage costs. Drain Main the for except categories, rating drainage respective the to directly apportioned are areas scheme existing two the of each in costs Drainage excludingpower the cos costs, works the rata pro allocated are costs administration other and Management benefiting from,or contributing to the need for those works. those to allocated are category rating each in works scheme with associated Costs any in required funding LTCCP/AnnualPlan process. the the of part If as amended be below.would allocation the then shown significantly changes category allocations the and works scheme long the on based prepared been have rates Indicative Drainage category (DO), the Main Drain Flood Control category (FM) and the the and (FM) category Control Oroua Flood the Drain to allocated Main costs the the (DO), to category contributes Drainage also area urban Rongotea The sealsand b theworks. – earings,weedscreens etc.
DS, DO and DA. These areas either benefit from, or contribute to the to contribute or from, benefit either areas These DA. and DO DS, or the relatively the stopbankwith or required pump ongoing cope large to the g the allocation to the flood control contributor category (CF) and the the and (CF) category contributor control flood the to allocation the g
tspumping. for
- em elcmn o cmoet sc a pump as such components of replacement term
- aa h ast val asset the rata - term funding of the various the of funding term
- term reconstruction term
e o h Main the to ue areas, except areas,
Page Page age
89
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 16.4 16.3 16.2 16.1 16. 15.13 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Kawau Te 16.5
Note: Dixon’s Pumping cost shown is 50% of the estimated future cost cost future estimated category. Control Flood the Drain Main the in included of 50% is shown cost Pumping Dixon’s Note: Allocation Summary of Estimated Future Scheme Costs Category in6.5 section above. detailed as 25% to 10% from varypercentages The works. for need the on impacts costs works relevant the of basedla portion a allocated been have categories Contributor be to estimated is proportiona runoff threetimes Urbangreaterbased on runoff factorsof 0.9 and 0.3respectively. the areas. on rural than based areas urban Pumpstations from runoff Dixon’s greater and Road Raupo at pumping od Paa Sap, h etn o bcig p n h dan ad odn when ponding and drains the inpumping, and the fairlyland contours. flat up backing of extent the Swamp), (Puawai low Road the from away ground higher the from runoff pre of lack the givendefine to difficult are pumping Road Raupo for relativebenefits The from showing pondingflood before the pump was defined commissionedin 1978. been have areas benefit The that that highfor the banking diversion by Drain No.1 of25% estimatedbeoverflows relative tois theThe directs tobenefit Dixon’s pump. of overflows spillway from benefit receives Dixon’spump. toconnection of lack the todue ponding local by affected is low the for less are benefits and risk The No.1Drain.on runoff, local by affected Drain No.6 along areas lowest the for highest are benefits and risk The determined were pumping Dixon’s for P2 and basedon relativeand risk benefitreceived. P1 between benefits relative The Relative Proportions TOTAL Pumping Dixon’s Pumping Rd Raupo Control Kopane Flood Control Flood Drain Main Awahuri Drainage Drainage Oroua Drainage Sluggish Drainage Railway Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) 04 Audit (PRD Scheme - pump aerial photos of flooding, the layout of the draina the of layout the flooding, of photos aerial pump
rgelytheon increased runoff fromdrainage developmentand the associated
seepage through the No.6 drain stopbanks, and overflow of the spillway the of overflow and stopbanks, drain No.6 the through seepage
-
benefitarea.
Works cost Works $18,885 $42,631 $82,633 $6,324 $8,165 $1,519 $1,601 $2,768 $740 -
lying area that outlets into No.1 Drain and Drain No.1 into outlets that area lying
on Management - ie npcin ad eil photos aerial and inspections site - yn aes ptem f Puawai of upstream areas lying $10,141 $22,892 $42,976 $2,698 $4,035 $1,137 $397 $816 $860
ge system which diverts which system ge
- TOTAL
the other 50% is is 50% other the $125,609
$12,200 $29,026 $65,522 $9,022 $1,137 $2,335 $2,461 $3,906
This area This Page Page
lly 90
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 3. 2. 1. ANNEX 17.1 17. 16.8 16.7 16.6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
Rating Plans RateCalculation Sheets EstimatedFuture Costs Thesetables show: currently the with areas gross (preliminary) the avai replaces that 1 Table of version 2004 for those and indicative rates future the determining for used spreadsheetspreliminary the show report this to 2 Annex in 2 and 1 Tables FinalCalculations drawn to on makethese decisions. an judgement The Main Drain andin Kopane the area. along land the for categories benefit protection flood single only are there Similarly with eachaffectedlandowner or farm manager. benefi pumping single A
the the ratesper hectare the ratesper hectare percentage the yield the Scheme of rate revenue eachfrom category; lable rateable areasin eachcategory.
d experience of the person preparing the new rating system was system rating new the preparing person the of experience d
- t category PR has been determined after on after determined been has PR category t
– – Allocationto Rating Categories
GST inclusive.GST exclusive;GST and
- 05. Table 3 is an updated an is 3 Table 05. - site inspection site
Page Page 91
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Kawau Te Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) 04 Audit (PRD Scheme
Page Page 92
EstimatedFuture Scheme Costs September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
3. 2. 1. TOTALCOSTS management Total LAPP/asset insurance mgt Asset Admin Valuation + Rates MgtEngineering MANAGEMENT Dixon’s Rd Raupo Power power) (excluding Dixon’s R&M R&M Rd Raupo Pumping Long Stopbank maintenance Stopbanks Main floodgate Drain maintenance Floodgate Floodgates Main maintenance Drain improvementsDrain maintenance Drain Drains Works Scheme Total Works Total
Total management costs managementTotal are rata shared the costspro for Total (excluding power). Works share thebased Cost 1913 theon works out for by Proclamation Sluggish.carried Rongotea the area of Includes township. - term reconstruction
3
Existing Schemes Existing Sluggish $96,289 32,656 24,800 61,033 32,000 8,000 1,300 1,300 4,236 5,024 2,000 6,673 2,000 1,560 3043 3253 500 600
2
–
Allocationto RatingCategories
Oroua
$29,320 10,320 19,000 15,000 4,000 1,330 8,032 158 958
2
Sluggish $65,522 ha 7670 22,892 42,631 30,493 3,337 6,727 1,906 168
4322 ha 4322 Oroua $29,026 10,141 18,885 15,000 3,791 Drainage
95
1
Awahuri
1690 ha 1690 $2,335 1,519 1,482 816 37
Railway $2,461 ha 347 1,601 1,507 860 94
Main Drain Main $12,200 4,035 7,515 2,118 1,937 2,676 Flood Control Flood 650 484 300
Kopane $1,137
397 740 661 63 16
Raupo Road Raupo $9,022 $5,024 2,698 1,300 5,024 Pumping
Dixon’s
Page Page $3,906 $2,118 1,137 2,118 650 93
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 94
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
RATE SHEETS CALCULATION
Page Page 95
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 96
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te (includingroadsetc) TotalAwahuriarea incl areaCF Rongoteaarea RONGOTEACONTRIBUTION RaupoRoad Pumping and Dixons 50%Pump Drain,Main Kopane, Dixons CONTRIBUTIONFLOODCONTROL AND PUMPING UniformTargeted rate(drainage) ofno. ratepayers *Estimated RongoteaContribution ContributionFloodControl andPumping Contributionflood- Dixons Pumping Contributiondrainage- Dixons Pumping ContributionRaupoPumping Road moderate-low Dixons Pumping benefit highbenefit Dixons Pumping RaupoPumping benefitRd direct - FloodControl Kopane FloodControl DrainMain DrainageRailway-Rangiotu DrainageAwahuri DrainageOroua Drainage Sluggish DrainageUTR* Description landreserves,etc.areas includingroads,ongross Based TABLE 1:RatesTABLE Future Indicative Calculation
Main DrainMain Total $ $ Differential
50.00 13658 13603
400 FM DO CU CR PR DR DA DS DU CF FK C2 C1 P2 P1 55 Combined Sluggish Runoff Rongotea andexcl Awahuri (ha) Area
44.44 13603 Oroua 1135 1690 4267 7670 834 721 339 209 347 0.3 0.9 55 81 10 40 (%) Proportion Costs Excl GST Excl below see below see Effarea 125,609 29,320 96,289 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 4130 4081 20% 25% 10% 25% 25% 25% 49.5 (ha) Equivarea Adj. Note: This is the catchment-wide contribution to the need for pumping, excluding the 50% of Dixons allocated to FloodControl. needto the allocated offor to 50% contribution Dixons catchment-widethe pumping, the excluding Thisis Note: FloodControlare oflieuto in allocatedreturn poor duestopbanking to foundationpumping ofcosts Dixons 50% the Note: conditions. % total eff total area % 1.20% 1135 1690 4267 7670 42.5 339 209 347 0 Nett cost Nett $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Cost 125,609 125,609 12,200 29,026 65,522 29,320 96,289 3,906 9,022 1,137 2,461 2,335 Orouaonly $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ cost Nett after adj. 125,609
12,200 29,026 65,522 RegionalContribution 3,906 9,022 1,137 2,461 2,335 100% 100% 100% 4322 4267 55 Contribution Runoff $ $ $ Regional Regional
-25,122 -13,104 25,122 19,258 -1,804 -2,440 -5,805 5,864 -781 -227 -492 -467 0.3 0.9 Effarea $ $ $ $ Rates Scheme Scheme Scheme costs costs
100,488 100,488
23,456 77,032 1280.1 23,221 52,418 3,125 7,217 9,760 1,969 1,868 1330 20% 49.5 910 % Oroua area% Rongotea Contribn 3.72% -865 950 -17 -39 -29 0 Contribn $ Rural 50.00 -1,406 -3,248 -2,440 4,736 1,804 UTR -312 -227 312 781 0 beforeUTR Costs Nett 100,488 22,357 52,418 22.4% 4,736 1,804 1,389 3,931 7,291 1,969 1,868 950 312 781 682 Scheme Drainage Scheme costs GST) (excl UTRwith costs Nett 82,710 17,301 40,564 17,778 4,736 1,804 1,389 3,931 7,291 1,523 1,446 950 312 781 682 Yield % Yield 100.0% 17.2% 40.4% 17.7% 0.9% 4.7% 0.3% 0.8% 1.8% 1.4% 3.9% 0.7% 7.3% 1.5% 1.4% UTR excl GST excl Rate/ha 17.26 32.69 11.59 0.35 0.37 9.64 2.50 8.17 3.26 6.42 4.39 0.86 4.05 5.29 with $50withUTR incl GST incl Rate/ha 12.5% 19.42 10.85 36.77 13.04 0.39 0.42 2.82 9.19 3.67 7.23 4.94 0.96 4.56 5.95 Page Page
97
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te (includingroadsetc) TotalAwahuriarea incl areaCF Rongoteaarea RONGOTEACONTRIBUTION RaupoRoad Pumping and Dixons 50%Pump Drain,Main Kopane, Dixons CONTRIBUTIONFLOODCONTROL AND PUMPING UniformTargeted rate(drainage) ofno. ratepayers *Estimated RongoteaContribution ContributionFloodControl andPumping Contributionflood- Dixons Pumping Contributiondrainage- Dixons Pumping ContributionRaupoPumping Road moderate-low Dixons Pumping benefit highbenefit Dixons Pumping RaupoPumping benefitRd direct - FloodControl Kopane FloodControl DrainMain DrainageRailway-Rangiotu DrainageAwahuri DrainageOroua Drainage Sluggish DrainageUTR* Description landreserves,etc.areas includingroads,ongross Based TABLE 2:TABLE 2004-05 Rates (provisional) Calculation Operations Committee
Main DrainMain Total $ $ Differential
50.00 13658 13603 400 FM DO DR DA DS DU CU CR PR CF FK C2 C1 P2 P1 55 Combined Sluggish Runoff Rongotea CUexcl andAwahuri DA (ha) Area
44.44 13603 Oroua 1135 1690 4267 7670 834 721 339 209 347 0.3 0.9 55 81 10 40 Excl GST Excl below see below see (%) Proportion Costs Effarea 125,609 29,320 96,289 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 4130 4081 20% 25% 10% 25% 25% 25% 49.5 Note: This is the catchment-wide contribution to the need for pumping, excluding the 50% of Dixons allocated to FloodControl. needto the allocated offor to 50% contribution Dixons catchment-widethe pumping, the excluding Thisis Note: FloodControlare oflieuto in allocatedreturn poor duestopbanking to foundationpumping ofcosts Dixons 50% the Note: conditions. (ha) Equivarea Adj. Provisional % total eff total area % 12,000 1.20% 15000 3,000 1135 1690 4267 7670 42.5 347 339 209 Nett cost Nett $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Cost 125,609 110,609 12,200 29,026 65,522 26,320 84,289 3,906 9,022 1,137 2,461 2,335 Orouaonly $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ cost Nett after adj. 110,603
10,680 26,056 57,357 RegionalContribution 3,419 7,897 2,154 2,044 4322 4267 88% 90% 88% 995 55 Contribution Runoff $ $ $ Regional Regional
-22,121 -11,471 22,122 16,858 -1,579 -2,136 -5,211 5,264 -684 -199 -431 -409 0.3 0.9 Effarea $ $ $ $ Rates Scheme Scheme Scheme costs costs
88,488 21,056 67,432 1280.1 88,482 20,845 45,885 2,735 6,318 8,544 1,723 1,635 1330 20% 49.5 796 % Oroua area% Rongotea Contribn 3.72% -776 850 -15 -34 -26 0 Contribn $ Rural 50.00 -1,231 -2,843 -2,136 4,146 1,579 UTR -274 -199 274 684 0 beforeUTR Costs Nett 88,482 20,069 45,885 25.4% 4,146 1,579 1,216 3,441 6,382 1,723 1,635 850 274 684 597 Scheme Drainage Scheme costs GST) (excl UTRwith costs Nett 70,705 14,922 34,116 17,778 4,146 1,579 1,216 3,441 6,382 1,281 1,216 850 274 684 597 Yield % Yield 100.0% 16.9% 38.6% 20.1% 1.0% 4.7% 0.3% 0.8% 1.8% 1.4% 3.9% 0.7% 7.2% 1.4% 1.4% UTR excl GST excl Rate/ha 15.46 28.61 10.15 0.30 0.33 8.44 2.19 7.15 2.86 5.62 3.69 0.72 3.50 4.45 with $50withUTR incl GST incl Rate/ha 12.5% 17.40 32.19 11.42 0.34 0.37 9.50 2.46 8.05 3.21 6.33 4.15 0.81 3.93 5.00 Page Page
98
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te Note: these runoff areas include roadsetc include runoffareas these Note: TotalAwahuriarea incl areaCF Rongoteaarea RONGOTEACONTRIBUTION RaupoRoad Pumping and Dixons 50%Pump Drain,Main Kopane, Dixons CONTRIBUTIONFLOODCONTROL AND PUMPING UniformTargeted rate(drainage) ofno. ratepayers *Estimated RongoteaContribution ContributionFloodControl andPumping Contributionflood- Dixons Pumping Contributiondrainage- Dixons Pumping ContributionRaupoPumping Road moderate-low Dixons Pumping benefit highbenefit Dixons Pumping RaupoPumping benefitRd direct - FloodControl Kopane FloodControl DrainMain DrainageRailway-Rangiotu DrainageAwahuri DrainageOroua Drainage Sluggish DrainageUTR* Description etc. rateableonnet reserves, landcemeteries, roads,Based areas excluding churches, TABLE 3:RatesTABLE 2006Future - Indicative Calculation
Main DrainMain Total $ $
Differential
50.00 13658 13603 400 FM DO DR DA DS DU CU CR PR CF FK C2 C1 P2 P1 55 Combined Sluggish Runoff Rongotea andexcl Awahuri (ha) Area
44.44 13321 Oroua 313.5 1644 4178 7499 1089 36.6 82.5 10.9 40.5 848 712 339 207 0.3 0.9 Excl GST Excl below see below see (%) Proportion Costs Effarea 125,609 29,320 96,289 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 4130 4081 20% 25% 10% 25% 25% 25% 49.5 Note: This is the catchment-wide contribution to the need for pumping, excluding the 50% of Dixons allocated to FloodControl. needto the allocated offor to 50% contribution Dixons catchment-widethe pumping, the excluding Thisis Note: FloodControlare oflieuto in allocatedreturn poor duestopbanking to foundationpumping ofcosts Dixons 50% the Note: conditions. (ha) Equivarea Adj. % total eff total area % 1.20% 1089 1644 4178 7499 43.2 314 339 207 0 Nett cost Nett $ $ $ $ $ Cost $ $ $ $ $ 125,609 125,609 12,200 29,026 65,522 29,320 96,289 3,906 9,022 1,137 2,461 2,335 Orouaonly $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ cost Nett after adj. 125,609
12,200 29,026 65,522 RegionalContribution 3,906 9,022 1,137 2,461 2,335 100% 100% 100% 4322 4267 55 Contribution Runoff $ $ $ Regional Regional
-25,122 -13,104 25,122 19,258 -1,804 -2,440 -5,805 5,864 -781 -227 -492 -467 0.3 0.9 Effarea $ $ $ $ Rates Scheme Scheme Scheme costs costs
100,488 100,488
23,456 77,032 1280.1 23,221 52,418 3,125 7,217 9,760 1,969 1,868 1330 20% 49.5 910 % Oroua area% Rongotea Contribn 3.72% -865 950 -17 -39 -29 0 Contribn $ Rural 50.00 -1,406 -3,248 -2,440 4,736 1,804 UTR -312 -227 312 781 0 beforeUTR Costs Nett 100,488 22,357 52,418 22.4% 4,736 1,804 1,389 3,931 7,291 1,969 1,868 950 312 781 682 Scheme Drainage Scheme costs GST) (excl UTRwith costs Nett 82,710 17,301 40,564 17,778 4,736 1,804 1,389 3,931 7,291 1,523 1,446 950 312 781 682 Yield % Yield 100.0% 17.2% 40.4% 17.7% 0.9% 4.7% 0.3% 0.8% 1.8% 1.4% 3.9% 0.7% 7.3% 1.5% 1.4% UTR excl GST excl Rate/ha 25.94 32.14 11.59 0.36 0.37 9.47 2.53 8.03 3.30 6.70 4.86 0.88 4.14 5.41 with $50withUTR incl GST incl Rate/ha 12.5% 29.19 10.65 36.16 13.04 0.40 0.41 2.85 9.04 3.71 7.53 5.47 0.99 4.66 6.09 Page Page 99
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 100
Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Kawau Scheme Audit (PRD 04 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme
RATING PLANS
Page Page 101
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 1 02
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te Figure September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 1 :
LocationPlan
Page Page 103
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 Figure September16 2015 Catchment 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te 2 :
ExistingBoundaries andProposedRating Area Operations Committee
Page Page 104
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te Rongotea the of area the Figure excludes Oroua Drainage DO category benefit CU. category Contribution of area The Note: September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 3 : : Drainage Categories
Page Page 105
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 Note 2: C1 Contributor Dixons Pumping category includes the area covered by benefit category P1. P1. a the includes category C2 category Contributor benefit by covered area the includes category Pumping Dixons Contributor C1 2: Note Road. Raupo Pumping PR category benefit by covered area the includes category Pumping Road Raupo Contributor CR Note1: September16 2015 Catchment 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te Figure 4 : : Pumping Categories Operations Committee
rea covered by benefit category P2. benefit category by rea covered
Page Page 106
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te Figure CU. category in contributor Rongotea area of the excluding and Kopane, Control Flood FM categories benefit two the by covered area the including shown area catchment whole the includes category Control Flood Contributor CF Note: September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 5 : : Flood Control Categories
–
Main Drain and FK and Drain Main
Flood Control Control Flood Page Page 107 –
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te Operations Committee
Page Page 108
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
ProposedRevised Allocation ofCosts
ANNEXD Page Page 109
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Operations Committee
Page Page 110
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te DrainSplit StopbankingSplit Total Cost Total Management Total insurance LAPP/asset mgt Asset Valuation + Admin Rates EngineeringMgt Management Dixons RaupoRoad Power Works Total R&M Dixons RaupoRoad R&M Pumping Long-termReconstruction MaintenanceStopbank Stopbanks DrainMain Floodgate FloodgateMaintenance Floodgates DrainMain Maintenance Drainimprovements DrainMaintenance Drains Works Scheme
Oroua Sluggish Kopane Main
Sluggish Existing Schemes Existing
98,289 32,656 24,800 63,033 36,000
3,043 3,253 1,560 1,300 1,300 4,236 5,024 2,000 6,673 8,000 500 600
Oroua
26,478 10,478 16,000 12,000
4,000 1,330 8,032 25% 75% 97% 158 958 3% Works Split 15% 61% 5% 6% 3% 1% 1% 8% 0% REVISE Floodgate split per asset value per asset Floodgatemapping REVISE aftersplit completed. asset FloodgateSplit
Sluggish 7670
68,844 24,307 18,502 44,537 34,305
1,804 2,373 1,629 3,337 6,727 168
Oroua 4322
24,556 15,886 12,000
8,670 6,599 3,791 Drainage 643 846 581
95 Sluggish Main Kopane
Awahuri 1690 2,348 1,519 1,482
829 631
62 81 56 37
Railway 347 2,620 1,695 1,695
50% 45% 925 704
-
5% 69 90 62 AreaSplit Main DrainMain
12,777 FloodControl 4,282 3,259 7,845 2,118 1,937 3,006
318 418 287 650 484 300 Awahuri Oroua Sluggish
Kopane 632 223 170 409 330
17 22 15 63 16
RaupoRoad
9,066 2,742 2,087 1,300 5,024 5,024 Pumping 12% 32% 56% 203 268 184
Dixons
3,924 1,156 2,118 2,118 Page Page 113 880 650
86 77
111
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 112
12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee
CurrentRating Maps ANNEXE Page Page 113
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 114
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 115
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 16 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September2015
Page Page 116
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 117
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 16 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September2015
Page Page 118
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 119
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 16 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September2015
Page Page 120
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te
Page Page 121
Annex A Item 6 Annex A Item 6 16 Catchment Operations Committee 12) 04 Audit (PRD KawauScheme Te September2015
Page Page 122
5.2. 5.1. 5. 4.1. 4. 3.1. 3. a. 2. 1.1. 1. AND E RIVER DRAINAGE September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River
aiu mtes otie i ti ie ete hv be, r il e cmuiae with communicated be, will or been, have either item this in contained matters Various the of COMMUNITYENGAGEMENT sections Activity Schemes Drainage item. the and 2014 in River or 2015 General Drainage Fundingprovision all activitiesfor inon included thisiseither item reported River the in and FINANCIAL receivesinformation the contained in That Committee the recommends thatCouncil: RECOMMENDATION periodJuly17 to August31 2015. item this of purpose The PURPOSE aiu aon ta cud e lie fr 0 assac truh h Ntoa Civil National the through assistance 60% for Defence andEmergency Management Plan, which applies only ‘essentialto infrastructure’. claimed be could was that amount purpose maximum that for at to added is million, arrived$0.527 is number The 2014 of weeks two last the incurredover cost repair damage the If impairment. million. $3.039 asset for Statement Loss su erosion, Annual ‘new’ toand blockages opposed the channel as assets of to damage part identify separately As to necessary was it refined. process, Report progressively been have repairs damage for Estimates have commencedon the workshigher prio and completed substantially been have items Those channels. drainage and river from blockages debris of clearance by the followed infrastructure, of with pieces J critical reinstating made the been from has arising progress damage allowed, of have reinstatement conditions site and river weather, As DISCUSSION otherissues will subject the be of media release. through ratepayers scheme
- 25 Long 25 - 15; or additional approval will be specifically sought by way of recommendation in recommendation of way by sought specifically be will approval additional or 15;
Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
IMPACT
- term Plan; is covered by an approved carry approved an by covered is Plan; term
NGINEERING REPORT (P is to report on progress with river and drainage activities for the the for activities drainage and river with progress on report to is their respective Scheme Liaison Committees. As necessary, As Committees. Liaison Scheme respective their
that, the total of $3.56 million gives a good indication of the of indication good a gives million $3.56 of total the that,
rityasset repairswithin manyschemes. ReportNo. 15
ch that provision could be made in the Profit and Profit the in made be could provision that ch n fod. h iiil ou hs en on been has focus initial The floods. une
Decision Required Required Decision Report No. - RD 01 RD 01 02) 182
andannexure. -
forward of unexpe of forward
nded budget nded
Page Page 15 - 15, that15, - 182 123
Item 7 Item 7 5. 5.8. 5.7. 5.6. 5.5. 5.4. 5.3. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 5.10. 9.
o ietf a ead o a icesd ee o srie tee r idctos ht the that indications are there service, of level increased an for demand a identify did 2012 not in undertaken review recent most the While system. the overtaxed easily June resul runoff the surprisingly not so flows, flood year Foxton 10 to the 5 only contain scheme within this in channels overflows drainage main The channel Scheme. Drainage East with associated Foxton, in Horowhen issues from flooding staff discuss engineering with met have staff HRC of the issueskey raised. each to responses providing meeting, Committee Operations Catchment July the at rights Lett through East, Wanganui withinMatarawa the Scheme formaintenance purposes. flows that StreamMatarawa the of section that of inclusionpossible the is Group, Advisory Stream MatarawaPutiki and addressed specifically attended meetings two The event. flood the to regard with concerns and experiences their convey to opportunity an with owners property attend have Staff from Officers Executive and CEO’s each Council. Draft Termsof Reference forsuch a group are presentlybeing prepared. comprising group, advisory technical management decided waswould issuesIt those that so. or year next the over decisions and consultation investigation, some require willthat District Wanganui the within floods the from arising issues of number a are fl various discuss to August early in (WDC) Council District Wanganui of Executive Chief the with met GMO and Executive Chief The lodge a formalclaim by mid October. indicat the MCDEM claim. with satisfied ais and lodged is claim detailed a of before time some be will it timing that understands and framework the around officers (MCDEM) Management Initial firstcontracts very early in theseason aand planning isin placein that regard. accommodate to order In constructi of months. number large particularly 12 next the over completion for programmed and identified been have projects construction and design investigation, of number substantial stra annual its undertook Group Operations The LMS. the careful requires issue The through protection localised of provision the for area. justification be may there from and lowerinvestigation that result in to spillway the thought to is contribution flow and overland operations spillway previous during occurred not has That flooded. seriously was area Road Kerekere Road, Rongotea the in spillway the 20 on Spillway Mangaone the of operation the During a generated have letters Those time. first the adv numberof queries and staff for are working waytheir through those. in category is rating HF that (LMS) July, Scheme 28 on Manawatu Lower the within ratepayers properties of inclusion the 69 explaining invoices, rates receiving to sent were letters Individual Board and willstaff attendingbe that meeting. Community Foxton the of meeting next the at discussed oc be will issue the this that understood on experienced flooding extensive r hv be sn o ah ftetrertpyr wo ee ie pbi speaking public given were who ratepayers three the of each to sent been have ers icsin hv be hl wt Mnsr o Cvl eec ad Emergency and Defence Civil of Ministry with held been have discussions
ive numbers provided at this stage. It is expected that we will be in a position to to position a in be willwe that expected is It stage. this at provided numbers ive flooding issues. One issue that could be considered at an early stage by the by stage early an at considered be could that issue One issues. flooding
ed to a number of public meetings arranged by WDC to provide affected provide to WDC by arranged meetings public of number a to ed
be best managed through the establishment of a joint flood risk flood joint a of establishment the through managed best be
on works this year, it will be necessary to award the the award to necessary be will it year, this works on
ood related matters. It was accepted that there that accepted was It matters. related ood ain a la t sc a eus. t is It request. a such to lead may casion
tegic planning exercise in early August. A August. early in exercise planning tegic ting from the extreme rainfall event in in event rainfall extreme the from ting - 21 June, at least one house within house one least at June, 21 ua District Council (HDC) to to (HDC) Council District ua
ne f them of ance
Page Page large a 124
6.9. ANZACCLIFFS 6.8. 6.7. 6.6. 6.5. LOWER 6.4. 6.3. 6.2. TAONUIBASIN 6.1. INVESTIGATIONS 6. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 6.10. LOWER
tpak prds o te hl rah mnr prdn o te agou Spillway, Rangiotu the of upgrading minor reach, whole the for upgrades between season stopbank this for Oroua planned the of work reach Rangiotu the raising and Road stopbank Hoihere the of most for provided been 12 the of 10 year in now are We isconsent already held outstanding for workson Lin the Consents the to that note, to responses important is It formal consultation. public further with involved forming being also while team involved has this partly and Creek Manawatu Kara and Lower Strea Tokomaru lodged River, Manawatu the the on earthworks on remaining the provided been hasall covers application This application. consent earthworks Upgrade work Rural (LMS) Scheme design further period This effectively more in is drainage improve involved significantly will drain This the Basin ‘D’in phase the final ofdraining after a reaches. major flood. of lower the capacity regrading the by addressed that show also Investigations over for request, his on sizedculverts. ‘D’, Basin in landowner a to provided been has advice Detailed project, this for requirements consenting the which involvesenlargement the of completing the waterways and completion of ringbanks. on continued again has Work also whilst flood, the to related matters carryingout publicthe programmed design projects. and scheme both to regard in resources 19 the Following DESIGNSECTION Normally in a river of this nature, the flood wave spreads out as it moves t moves it as out wavespreads flood the nature, this of river a Normally in reaches. lower the in flow the boosted havemay catchment lower the in rainfalls high Very fl recorded largest the is This gauge. Rewa Te the at period)a return year 85 in showing (1 AEP 1.2% calculations with continued, been has flood June the of modelling Preliminary protectionworks. subst the alongside River Manawatu the of armouring bed the optimalassessmentstrategy the was completingcompletedAnof outstanding workson for These Stream. Mangaone the PalmerstonNorth Airport,at Flygers Line and Benmore Avenue. of sections three 0.2% to on upgrade the AEP for completion, nearing designs with underway, well also is Survey Riverstopbankupgrade project.Designs for this willprovidedbe through September. secti remaining several the for underway well also is Survey protectionto an adjacent milking shed and works Mainto the Drain gates. o fr hs oain ic rcrs ea. t s ned fod f ao consequence. major of flood a indeed is It began. records since location this for ood WHANGANUIRIVER MANAWATUSCHEME
Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
- 1 ue 05 los hr hs en n nesv dmn o desi on demand intensive an been has there floods 2015 June 21
- year Rural Upgrade programme and so far design has design far so and programme Upgrade Rural year
River. These designs have included have designs These River. tonMain Drain andOroua River.
are located adjacent to the the to adjacent located are n fteLwr Manawatu Lower the of ons antive rock riprap riverbank riprap rock antive
, agoe Stream Mangaore m,
hrough the lower the hrough
Page Page
125
gn -
Item 7 Item 7 6.16. 6.15. ADDITIONAL DESIGNADVICE FOLLOWING THE JUNE FLOOD 6.14. TEKAWAU SCHEME AUDIT 6.13. ARAWHATASEDIMENT TRAP 6.12. 6.11. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River
Arawhata sedimenttrap required forthe Lake Horowhenua consents resource application. thi provided was information design Additional intocome play(as accurately described NZ in Standard 4404). may phenomenon of set different a where houses also but rivers, for freeboa only not levels, flood for need the reinforce Aramoho at levels higher The instance. first the in sections cross the of resurvey a require However, the followinggeneral points design are clear: will any This and size flood processing. the of assessment at further that ramifications recognise to important is It the tributary flowsHowever,were high in this flood. flows. tributary downstream the cancels approximately this often and river follow: m numerous flood the Following predictions on Group Recovery Flood and riskson mostof the flooding rivers. the to provided being is advice design Continued followinga Scheme, Drainage Oroua the and Scheme Drainage River Agenda. Sluggish the of amalgamation this in separately presented are outcomes the and complete is Scheme Drainage Kawau Te the of audit programmed The 2. 1.
Rangitaiki River downstream of the Township of Edgecumbe by almost a metre in a in floodin 1998);and highermetre flowsthan measured. a almost by Edgecumbe of Township the of downstream River Rangitaiki rive in changes river); the of flow main the to close were which camp, motor and clubs the rowing the in of (particularlyvicinity bank right the on levels affecting bank. swash strong the right include; which the on level. particularly flood AEP 1.2% the to levels, expected close were levels the above Bridge, RailwayAramoho the near bank, left the on Interestingly were Aramoho at Levels scouring This withhigher a tide. parameters. sensible as levels, design the using in included not levels is process flood recorded the reproduce to minor with againabilitylow, the the mouth scourto was date, of To modelling enhanced.has beenable higher m 0.4 further a sco was likely is very mouth the and surge) storm case design the and June of month the in earlier higher m 0.5 was (it small being range tidal the tide, high with coinciding not rela were Putiki of downstream river the in Levels a de o omne n ans floig h cmlto o te 12 the of completion h the there following However, earnest programme. in Upgrade commence to due was build sediment and ramps access C to underway. out well carried been has currently is assessmentlevels these of Mitigation River. Oroua the onsite inlevels flood high the analyse and modelling of amount significant A
review of the two schemesin 2001.
hs tg ae rmtr ad eur frhr ope professional complex further require and premature are stage this
ue ae ies bt nld rsrcin de o eeain and vegetation to due restrictions include but diverse are auses
rbed levels; formation of dunes (these increased levels in the the in levels increased (these dunes of formation levels; rbed
tes otne o rs, ih h picpl atr as matters principal the with arise, to continue atters There are a variety of possible reasons for this variation this for reasons possible of variety a are There
- p. pand rgam o sdmn removal sediment of programme planned A ups.
s en n bomly ih ucsin of succession high abnormally an been as hs cee a fre i 20 b the by 2004 in formed was scheme This
s period for the for period s
uring. As the sea levels offshore were offshore levels sea the As uring.
the amount of scouring may be small small be may scouring of amount the tively low. This was due to the peak the to due was This low. tively
d o e nldd n design in included be to rd design and operation of the the of operation and design - year Rural Rural year Page Page 126
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 6.18. 6.17. ASSETMANAGEMENT
ek alwd n rvos er. tf hv wre eta ie o et hs timeframe this meet to time to extraorder in worked agreed have Staff years. previous in allowed weeks by actiontwo the of instead week one in completed was assets scheme of capitalisationannual pending The are software (AMS) System Management Asset Datacom. isIt understood the to Updates have beenbetween 2% AEPan likely would flows flood the event, the preceding 48 rainfalls high the to Due the magnitude. with flood extreme Roberts crossing west re before east the to travelled and Road Napier of downstream bank right true the on stopbank Creek Stoney by NapiercausedRoad adjacent landto of into commenced flooding investigationhas An recommendations made. remedial and assessed was RiverRangitikei the on stopbank McAloon the to Damage Manawatu the River. a actions flood for determined were levels flood Warning programmewill theseprotect areas from the OrouaRiver 2016 and Makino Stream. for planned Stopbanking catchment. Mangaone over at flows an AEP clearly1% of was coincidence likely This houses. these near loop meander old an entered that Stream Makino the in flows large very t the to due is This Awahuri. of cause the of made also have Assessments been factory. R Triple and houses the flood to Bridge 3 Highway State the of east km 2.7 travelledoutflows particular, In area. Line Camerons the and h assessment detailed A and reinstate themin the location.failed banks these retreat slightly to is study this of conclusion The Rivers. Mangahao and Rangitikei the on successful these made have that parameters design same the using cost be be well may works iron rail cannot though unaffordable, and channel be main generally would works protection the edged Hard floods. to major withstand to expected close perched t generally in are deposition silt They that so minimised. flow river the focus to designed are stopbanksThese Awahuri. slightlyof located downstream is This River. Oroua the on “summertheonestopbanks”ofof intothe investigationhasbeen carriedout failure An are Staff 2015. June in year) nowinvestigatingaccelerating priority the this 50 in (1 AEP 2% the to on continuing and flood year) 250 in (1 AEP 0.4% 2004 February the withdecade,commencing past the over floods ie ad atclry n h Badn al od ra Te uani mod Tutaenui for2015 The long area. Council Regional Road Horizons the Hall in included Brandon the in particularly and River Rangitikei the with confluence investigation. the near greater significantly laterwere they year), (60 AEP for 1.7% programmedaround at significant were Marton, are at Tutaenui, the in or, flows whilst that, appears programmed be to yet are other several in levels these though Marton, flood and Tangimoana Stream, MakowhaiHunterville,including areas elevated the assess will investigations detailed Future River. the in levels flood high very the on out carried was assessment initial An study the isdue for mid Septemberand study completion isdueend of October. for brief The recurrence. a prevent to option an to parts component several are There
Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering -
16and Makowhai 2016 - rsig air od hog a uvr. h oefos otne t the to continued overflows The culvert. a through Road Napier crossing
provide a buffer against any later contingencies in the Annual Report Report Annual the in contingencies later any against buffer a provide
outflows. In the June 2015 floods, Stoney Creek outflowed over the over outflowed Creek Stoney floods, 2015 June the In outflows.
thathigher priorities at Datacomhave delayedprogress. Line and flooding several properties and a house. This was an was This house. a and propertiesseveral flooding and Line
as been made of the outflows of the Oroua River at Awahuri at River Oroua the of outflows the of made been as - or anal o apoiaey .% E (0 year) (60 AEP 1.7% approximately of rainfalls hour he flooding on the right bank of the Oroua River at at River Oroua the of bank right the on flooding he d 1%AEP. - 17.
both the Makino at Rata Street site and West West and site Street Rata at Makino the both
programme has. - term Flood Hazard Modelling project project Modelling Hazard Flood term - effective and are and effective - t the Whitelock’s stopbank on stopbank Whitelock’s the t 7 ne te ua Upgrade Rural the under 17
- design event with the the with event design e daet ec is reach adjacent he being trialled being Whanganui Whanganui
gi, it Again, Page Page lig is elling
127 –
Item 7 Item 7 6.24. 6.23. 6.22. 6.21. 6.20. 6.19. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River
for2015 omit inadvertentlywas assets work tree of value in increase an in $3.6m, mostlyincreases from in of the area protection planting. resulting An additional$1.3m of tied assets 150 approximately to changes with Scheme, vegetative of intensity involv largely and year This sizes required. works protection river relative the reflects This Scheme. Mangatainoka the in metre per $179 but Scheme Ruahine East South the in metre per exam $117 is Forwork tree scheme. each in work to of type the for rates used average unit an These are 2014. data July 1 on assets scheme the of revaluation the for derivedthe and rates using unit adjusted been have years changes dimension with assets recent of value The over dimensions. Region the across Write as well as mapping, GIS during identified changes dimension 240 over for account to Disposals) asset involvedinalso adjustmentscapitalisationannual process The schemes the all of value the year, this expenditure capital managedby Horizons is now(on$382m June30 2015),increasean of2%. of $7.89m the of result As allocatedbe next year, mostlyon Anzac the CliffsProject and T will that progress in work LMS of $3.3m was there year, this expenditure of $7.89m the Of existing or new 100 AMS. approximately to allocated was a expenditure This capital Basin. of Taonui $11m almost the in works upgrade LMS and Pumpstation Burkes Wanganui, in Ave Park/Anzac Kowhai of allocation the pr 2014 involved in completed projects first for expenditure process capitalisation The provito afterwards immediately taken was data AMS the of snapshot A July. 28 on team Finance process.Asa result, therequired AMS Depreciation was out Runcarried be for the able to s diin ad ipsl fr niiul ses epcal a mjr ear were repairs major schemeassets at 30 June 2015. of “impairment” the as for accounts Report Annual the especially in made been therefore has assets, provision individual cut for 2015 June 30 the after soon Disposals completed and Additions as damage the treat to misleading and impracticable considered was it and completed been yea the of end annual the of most after occurred event flood June This 20 2015. on flooding the from damage included has Disposals and Additions the of None dimensions. LMS Ditt at the in $1.1m of reduction a were value,writing largely due to schemes other in changes significant most The ssets, with input from the area engineers to provide dimension and location data for the for data location and dimension provide to engineers area the from input with ssets, evious years (i.e. work in progress). Most notable projects involved the stopbanking of stopbanking the involved projects notable Most progress). in work (i.e. years evious mer Drive in Palmerston North, plus changes in miscellaneous stopbank and drain and stopbank miscellaneous in changes plus North, Palmerston in Drive mer of work in progress that is yet to be allocated to specific assets. specific to allocated be yet to is that in work progress of $4.9m approximately includes 30/06/2015 Value Asset 1.Total The Note Total CAPEX2014 Additionsdisposals and AssetTotal Value01/07/2014
de a consistentde basis for future reference, particularlyAudit in for September. - 16.
AssetValue30/06/2015
- offs for redundant assets. GIS mapping has been progressively carried out out carried progressively been has mapping GIS assets. redundant for offs - 15
- off off concrete riprap thatwas previouslyreplacedlining with rock
ted and has been input as Additions and Disposals and Additions as input been has and ted
- off date for the reporting the for date off - 5 icuig oe 4 o wrs eu in begun works of $4m some including 15, ed mapping of the South East Ruahine East South the of mapping ed $382,581,297 $372,443,830 uriteaUpgrade. + $7,892,184+ $2,245,283+ ple, the unit rate for tied for rate unit the ple, pae xsig AMS existing update
valuesand(Additions year. Separate bulk Separate year. r inspections had inspections r
Page Page
128
6.31. 6.30. REGULATORYADVICE 6.29. 6.28. 6.27. 6.26. 6.25. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River
ue 05 2015. June 30 to April 1 from period month three the in inspections annual following staff by OperationsAMS the into put was data condition The scheme. each for AMP current the of F and type asset each for results the to used been have and analysed been have assets all for ratings Condition LAPPregime. the under GNS by schemes several to erroneouslyapplied been had thatFactors Damage upd The values. asset in change the with line in adjusted AnnualalsoInfrastructural beenInsuranceAsset has premiumthe Allocation of be to needs factor programmedlater for this year. loss the therefore and planting revise protection of areas substantial the In schemes. affected portionline”“frontofthedamage to estimatedbebased onshould loss the flood that noted most the for Reserves Target S the particular, the to made also were Changes butcost nota scheme asset). write updates B. The have asset beenbasedthe onvalues 1 at ManagementPlansrespective (AMPs)the Part Asset of Appendixin G updated havebeen Whanganui Lower schemes all for Curves Loss Flood the completeness, For LMS, Schemes. Drainage Manawatu the some particularly of value asset the schemes, in changes were there process, capitalisation the of result a As andReport Audit purposes. 2014 allows and Run “snap providesa It value. scheme in report2014 and track helpto tool reporting new a AccountantManagementas SQL A This regulatory work involves specialist advice on flood risks and technical reports for for reports technical and risks flood on applications,consent re advice specialist involves work regulatory This matters quicklyassessed andnot recordeddue to otherpressing priorities. recorded advice providedsubstantive25 on matters. However, there werenumerous with period reporting previous the on down was completed work regulatory of amount The thei less than the targetedLevel Service. For example,of only scheme of 80% stopbanks meet be may 2015, June 30 at Measures,Performance the result, a As 2015. June 20 on flood r level r service of when thetarget is generallyor90% more. N fo Mr Sre Dan n ohr aecuss Uls mtgto works mitigation Unless watercourses. other and Ruapehu to Drain provided was advice Consequentially, exist. always will risk this proceed, Street Miro from NNE from vulnerable are lots these of Several Ohakune. Place, Awatea in subdivision residential rural lot 13 proposed a for required was assessment careful A LMSRural Project. Upgrade options; protection theseTwo of housesmay raisedaround be need to 1.5 as m, arethere no robust flood June. in experienced flooding mitigate to houses of raise required the of assessments fl 12 on Advice - fs uh s h tasomr prd rqie fr uks uptto ( scheme (a Pumpstation Burkes for required upgrade transformer the as such offs d. This anomaly will need to be addressed during the review of Target Reserves, Target of review the during addressed be to need will anomaly This d. - ae ecl pedhe hs en eeoe b Jse igo, Operations Singson, Jesse by developed been has spreadsheet excel based Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
h dt icue te eut o isetos o ses ot fetd y the by affected most assets to inspections of results the included data The
outh East Ruahine Scheme increased from $2.2m to $2.8m, however it is it however $2.8m, to $2.2m from increased Scheme Ruahine East outh
update the Level of Service and Performance Measures in Appendix E Appendix in Measures Performance and Service of Level the update o rs ad eae eqiis Tee nldd he requiring three included These enquiries. related and risk ood - 5 M dt t b raiy cesd y cons tf o Annual for staff Accounts by accessed readily be to data AMS 15 - the third will be protected by the proposed year 11 works for the the for works 11 year proposed the by protected be will third the zoningsand subdivisions including:
- shot” of the AMS data at the time of the Depreciation the of time the at AMS data the of shot”
ated allocation also corrects the Earthquake the corrects also allocation ated ie, ot Es Raie and Ruahine East South River, July allow2015significantto for
overflows to the the to overflows - 15 changes15 Page Page other 129
Item 7 Item 7 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River favouredoption. and realignment the in ford drain further a Mangaone. West latter This suitedandbysite isbetter appears be andthat to thea bridge Stream Makowhai stormwater the in fords two proposed on provided was Advice a on firstly subsequentlya piping option at a subdivisionin provided was Advice Highwayand57 Turitea Road intersection on provided was Advice visitwith PNCCandstaff hydraulic modelling. on (PNCC) site Councila includes This Stream. City Turitea the over bridge North a upgrading/replacing for options Palmerston to provided was advice detailed Further a in resulting very stages,favour formative the during staff (NZTA) Authority have Transport Zealand will bridges New and consultant These the with meetings numerous follows This freeboard. and change Bridges. River Manawatu and significa Trestle Whirikino the at Powerco c a are These bridgesreplacementproposed the for completed was at assessment technical detailed A a flood. works AEP was 0.5% proposed the in substationoperation. Powerco outcome ensureprovided detailed survey information. flood to to The unlikely are prepared substation were Stream. calculations Detailed Rangitawa the fellwell of within 500 the mm freeboard of original the assessment. tributary th increase further to a recommendation in lot from another flooding yet of to vulnerable is property the of Part flood. June the following reviewed wasHalcombe buyer prospective a minimum detailed The to provided was Tangimoana. advice risk Flood elevationthe rugged of mountain streamand also toensure erosion was a not threat. a This Stream. Korokoio the near Ohakune Street, Shannon in house proposed a on provided also was Advice proposedfrom inadequateof piping stormwater). aggravatedoes within not either flooding subdivisionexample the landadjoining or (for t that so of account taken be must risks flood that (RuDC), Council District rlne rifl ws xetoa. eeil pin ae en asse fr this Severalcompliance other mattersand diverse unr for assessed being are options difficult in job sand country. Remedial exceptional. was rainfall prolonged the that agree do they landowner, the by disputed is this Though AEP. 1% around at st design beyond well was flow the likely, Thus a providingstorm. the rain of of tail Trust the belt in struct sting a with magnitude, drop year) Places 70 in the (1 AEP 1.4% Historic of of was site some Road NZ to damage the significant causednearby the Forest at rainfallGlasgow Theconstructedhour48 the Santoft. on at Farm by flood declared 2015 June been The has this archaeologistas not being historic a midden. However, Beach. reques was Evidence avoid degradation. to extraction on controls and surveys riverbed regularly on conditions require will This consent. delineatedglobal site single a into consents their combine to RiverKawhatau propos the on completed was review technical A ntly longer spans, be higher, and pass the 1% AEP flood with forecast climate forecast with flood AEP 1% the pass and higher, be spans, longer ntly
able outcome.
ted on matters relating to a ‘so a to relating matters on ted floor level assessment for a proposed house in Godley Street, Godley in house proposed a for assessment level floor
ssessment had to take account of the turbulence and super and turbulence the of account take to had ssessment e clet oe te amt Sra ad t h State the at and Stream Waimutu the over culverts new
e minimum floor level by 150 mm mm 150 by level floor minimum e –
as partof a road safetyupgrade.
Reids Line West.
al by the sole gravel extractor on the on extractor gravel sole the by al ecordedenquiries. - called’ modern midden at Hokio at midden modern called’
– iia t the to ritical
he proposal he though this though
Page Page andards, ures 130
-
7.5. 7.4.6. 7.4.5. 7.4.4. 7.4.3. 7.4.2. 7.4.1. 7.4. 7.3. 7.2. 7.1. GENERAL 7. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 7.6.
2.229 stage). m and cumecs 26.6 (reaching July 25 on occurring m 2 above peak other one with August, 8 on stage) m (2.457 cumecs 32.595 of peak a reached Stream Mangaone the in rates Flow 1.6 of heights stage 1.775 m respectively. reached and August 16 and July 19 on were these did occur, freshes minor other two However, August. 26 on was Slackline this Almadale and the stage),at recorded m (1.852 cumecs 45.98 was, River Oroua the on peak highest The an With 2015. August 8 on recorded was additionalof whichpeak, justover 2 m, recorded on26 Augus stage), (2.487m cumecs 417.4 was period the recorderCollegesite for Teachers’ the at peakManawatuflow the the River, On the at recorded were heights stage and flows peak following the period, reporting this During Makawakawa at mm 183.5 304.5 (Pohangina); (Makino); Ridge Divide(Pohangina); and 158.0 mmat Rangiwahia (Oroua). Cheltenham Delaware at at mm 209.0 mm (Kahuterawa); 120.5 (Mangaone); Line Milsonat mm 107.5 was: 2015) August 27 to 2015 July (17 period this for rainfall total The which willundertakenbe as conditions allow. wor a developing while damage floodmonitor continuingto are staff and completed been haveinspections asset annualAll mostimportant emergency and temporary repair withinworks the schemes. be to rainfall conditionsha staff ground small result, and a of As high remain number saturated. to high table water a the received caused has has this area and Central events the weeks six last the Over aeaes eadn t ko wy oios ee increasi were Horizons why know to demanding aggrieved from ratepayerscalls of number large a received have engineers Central result, a as and 28 on sent wasamendment this of ratepayersaffected the advising letter A not. were b have should which houses, of number a that found was it which in category, rating this of audit recent a following made were amendments rate UAC HF The recentHF UAC rateamendment. large a to attended f also whilst floods). Staff the of programmes. Upgrade Reach non of amount City and Upgrade Rural the s period, reporting this During periodwas cumecs 22.98 (1.649 m stage)on 19 July. period,compared to the period same in the previous years.few Thepeak eventduring this r were There on stage) m (1.972 cumecs 18.78 of flow August.25 peak a experienced Stream Tokomaru The R at 8 August. a furtherWith peak of9.818 cumecs (1.33 stage) m occurring onAugust. 25 Stream Makino The CENTRALAREA
locationslisted below:
Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
ltvl hg fos anand n h Kwta tem uig hs reporting this during Stream Kiwitea the in maintained flows high elatively - scheme engineering advice and Environmental Grant enquiries (as a result a (as enquiries Grant Environmental and advice engineering scheme
ielding a large number of rates enquiries, largely in regard to the to regard in largelyenquiries, rates of number large a ielding is ie ece 1.1 cmc (.4 m tg) on stage) m (1.341 cumecs 10.118 reached Line eids
cheme engineers have continued to assist in the delivery of of delivery the in assist to continued have engineers cheme ve had to focus their work efforts on only undertaking the undertaking only on efforts work their focus to had ve ks schedule for other less urgent repairs and maintenance and repairs urgent less other for schedule ks
t.
ng their rates for flood flood for rates their ng
m t cts Road Scotts at mm een paying this rate, this paying een
69 m and m 69 Page Page
July
131
Item 7 Item 7 7.11. 7.10. 7.9. MANAWATURIVER 7.8. LOWER MANAWATUSCHEME 7.7. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 7.12.
Clean moni to continue engineers Scheme damage. damage andupdate works programs forthe coming construction season. flood for inspected be to River Manawatu the of stretches access to difficult allowed and event flood June the after occur to timelywas This July. in staff scheme by undertaken wasinspection boat jet annual The the include period following: this during scheme the within rivers various the on undertaken Works maintaininga goodwalking experience. hard some place will scheme the budget, our within stay andwalkway, this for service of level desired this mows already schemecos a summer, the during month a once bank The walk. to difficult it making walkway stopbank Whirokino Foxton Foxton the on grass of length the the about comment was There to Plan. Annual year’s next to Bridge a Trestle of Whirokino constructionHDC from that decided was It the stopbank Bridge. River Shannon discuss and to berm attended the also along DoC cycleway and Police the community, the of Horowhenua the which in officesLandcorp the at held was which meeting Committee Development Walkways a attended also have Staff issuesthese to be able to advise ratepayers that theyapplycan rate for relief. scheme’s drainage the h It river. the from exceeding than thesecapacity rather designed rainfall localised In of because was it instances, most undertaken. In being flooded. were they though even were rate UAC HF the pay to have still repairs they why to as satisfied while propertieswere they why to as made be their to had has enquiry an instances, of out months two spent have and event, June 20 the in flooded were they that given $512.65, by protection suac ta te aae il e eard s on s odtos allo conditions as soon as repaired be their will have processeswill improvedbe to prevent any furtherdamage. we damage and the occurred have that management assurance senior with Meetings properties. their on stopbanks maintaining of importance the understand not do companies large such that extreme is It bank. the into cut ramps by or stock by grazing uncontrolled by either ManawatuRiver, the alongstopbanks Landcorphavedamaged and Higgins Both exc stock that given However, weeks.currently still in place, therehas beenno mowingof rural stopbanks. which coming season planting the the for in harvested fencing being commences also of are m wands 2280 maintenance, and poles and Willow channel seeding grass work. drains, and cleaning maintenance; works and repairs protection sto ramp near edge gorse spraying floodgates, include; clearing and these inspecting and Gates Sluice Staffhave also undertakenothermaintenance tasksalong theriver and around the Moutoa plant growth. Crescent Buick and Bridge Fitzherbert between natives existing and new drain around bend; Fitzroy at disposal spreadbe and plannedto also is Compost planting.and shaping bank reshaping; and removalclearing debris groynes; Fitzroy to repairs bi damage next the by completed be - up and repair works throughout the City Reaches are continuing, and are planned toplannedcontinuing, andare Cityare Reaches throughout works the repair and up
- aig n h bn ti ya t rdc te rqec o mwn while mowing of frequency the reduce to year this bank the on facing
- otl rprig eid Te clean The period. reporting monthly
t of $3,500 a year. To meet the communities the meet To year. a $3,500 of t
District Council (HDC), interested membersinterested (HDC), Council District as been an enormous help in dealing with dealing inhelp enormous an been as would develop a Strategy Plan with links with Plan Strategy a develop would
bns sal tpak and stopbank small pbanks;
flooded and the ratepayer the and flooded
- p nlds flo includes; up uin eid are periods lusion
ly disappointing ly
, n that and w, Page Page o flood tor to boost to 132 od - - -
7.20. 7.19. 7.18. 7.17. OROUARIVER 7.16. 7.15. 7.14. 7.13. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 7.21.
rpry LC dwsra o Aaui rde n h tu rgt ak A ti location, this b At summer supporting and bank. works right tree tied true of m the 250 on approximately Bridge Awahuri of Co downstream Improvement (LIC) Livestock property at completion nearing are repairs damage Flood erosionin floodeve lateral to prone is bend This property. Whitelock’s Braeden on bank river opposite the off m 1200 located th m 20,000 to up extract to interest Bend, on Akers property Tocker’s at Jerry first Road on Jackeytown the at is site other sites; The bank. left two true the on Bridge at Opiki the of upstream were extractions The period. m 5,980 of total on A easements regarding issues legal several in involved subdivisionsalongside stopbanks and accretion claims. been also have Engineers Riverisa Site of Significance consultatio cultural proper groundwateronand certaintyeffect the about be to needs there granted, be eng can approval before and scheme team Consents thisour discussedwith have approached Engineers plain. flood have the in ground burial natural (PNCC) a site to proposal Council the City see North to encouraging Palmerston really is It protection. erosion extra providecommunity take interestan in theriver environment and adopt sections of the river. to bank the of was planting bank. the work, river the of of result a length retain been precaution,willowshaveas a as However, straight. a protectionon undertaken m of loss 300 no is a there ensure over To planted river. be will natives 1,000 Engin Over day. the for Engineersday.officersFreshwater workedtheplanting andteam fromtogether prepare to wi planted Foxton the of upstream undertakenManawatuwas the of bank upper the on willowclearance and mulching Willow lo o big ihn 0 o te o o te tpak 414 m 4,124 stopbank. the of toe the of extracted from m Bruce Macaulay’s Beach andcarteddownstream to the hole. 10 within being for Spil alsoKopane the to proximity close its of because filled was hole The true bank. the left on property Harnett’s Mike at gravel river with filled been has hole scour large A andup burnt.then and of amountstrees large clear to have smallexcavatorwere useda LMS significantlystaff June damagedin 2015flood. the and path flow spillway the in are lines fence damaged These block. Gorton’s Pauline and and DaphneTrevor Dahl, Marie CollisPearce, Edwards, Mike byowned properties Spillway Kopane underway the are on repairs Fencing meat AFFCO concreteriprap put into an erosionhole. the below directly located and Feilding, on plant processing in Street Awa opposite site a At Kuhne’s of repair recent the summerbank on the true left bank at 29.9 protect km. to placed been have riprap concrete of m) supporting (35 t 133 The bank. river the protect to place in put summerbank of 200 min length isunder construction at the mome been have groynes permeable m rope 15 x 5 wire and riprap; concrete of m 100 of consisting works New flood. June eers have checked, and this planting will not affect the flood carrying capacity of the of capacity carrying flood the affect not will planting this and checked, have eers
th natives by Whakawehi Marae on 12 September, during their annual riparian annual their during September, 12 on Marae Whakawehi by natives th Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
nts. 3 the true left bank, an existing concrete riprap asset has had 120 t of t 120 had has asset riprap concrete existing an bank, left true the f rvl a ex was gravel of
- Shannon Road Bridge. This was done to enable the area to be to area the enable to done was This Bridge. Road Shannon
–
Cultural. 3
of gravel from this beach. This would take the pressure the take would This beach. this from gravel of tu rgt ak Lnbr Sige a expressed has Shingle Longburn bank. right true e
debris scattered about in the spillway, which werepiled spillway,which the in debris scatteredabout rce fo te aaau ie i ti reporting this in River Manawatu the from tracted
Properties on the Kairanga Propertiesthe on
n with Iwi, as the Manawatu the as withIwi, n nt. ank had eroded in the in eroded had ank 3
of river gravel was was gravel river of - RongoteaRoad,
nes ih a with ineers ed at the toe the at ed - operation’s lway, and lway, Page Page
133
Item 7 Item 7 7.30. 7.29. 7.28. 7.27. 7.26. 7.25. MANGAONESTREAM 7.24. 7.23. 7.22. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 7.31.
the high berm. The area was shaped and rock placed to preve to placed rock and shaped was area The berm. high the to due slumping of danger in was ramp stopbank the where point the to eroded had area The Bridge. Road Botanical the of downstream bank, left the on was location second The help moreperm to time same the at undertaken was realign thechannel and pressure easeon the Rockthe repair. isplanned berm asa area this for opposite the of shaping Bank erosion. t the in placed was building of consisted works emergency Initial event. flood future a in failure or damage greater of risk a posed which Place. Cecil from point access the to adjacent bank right the in was first The City. the the within Reservealong Stream Mangaone locations two in undertaken been have works repair damage flood Emergency weather interrupting to due difficult normal.to quite The was se take this may completed.It silt. (including debris flood been and conditions, that now reported has Reaches, contractor City and mowing Stream Mangaone the of Mowing Vegetationspraying in the Oroua Riverisexpected torecommence in Bryan at completed alsoSaundersproperty helpto maintaina consistent was freeboardalong the Oroua. and river the of sides both on growth willow clear to m 500 upstream Road, Kaimatarau from out carried been also has Mulching isplanned for the trueleft bank where there are more macrocarpaand poplar trees. ri true the on River Oroua the scheme byfirewood a local the contractor.The exercisewasto same This cost no doneat on end Road Kaimatarau the therefore at have removed trees been macrocarpa large Thirteen provide mulched. that willows be could large that and protection area bank berm the in trees large several to attributed be may River.Orouathe on freeboard the in variation some showedevent Juneflood 20 The completed. Non fl monitor stopbanksbecomeswheretoriskimminent,Any areas emergencyReaches. will works be to continuing are engineers Scheme propertytheon trueleft bank. McKlean’s Allanat Stream Mangaone the from removed been has tree poplar large very A capacityand isusually controlled with sprayingor mechanical beach removal. channe maintain toevents.controlled be to needs channel the withinflood growthvegetationExcessive June the during removed were channel the within beaches vegetated Most willworks combinedbe where possible. cons be planned is walkway the and urgent, repairs less where are locations, other In PNCC. from contributions with repairs urgent undertakemore will the Horizons allow, conditions When assets. City around requirements repair ini and inspect to PNCC from staff with met also staff Scheme next the downstream inside bend alleviateto pressure on the opposite bank. on berm the shape to taken was opportunity The undertaken. be can fix permanent more
anentsolution.
-
urgent areworks planned for the coming constructionseason. oe from the opposite bank to temporarily prevent slumping and further and slumping prevent temporarily to bank opposite the from oe
- up the hole with filled fadges. When conditions allowed, rock rock allowed, conditions When fadges. filled with hole the up
mnr oe a dvlpd n h te f h stopbank the of toe the in developed had hole minor A
o dmg, seily ihn h City the within especially damage, ood tructed under the bridge, protection bridge, the under tructed veral mows to get the area back area the get to mows veral tiate discussions regarding discussions tiate nt further erosion until a a until erosion further nt
October. and downstream for downstream and
h bank. ght Page Page
This 134 l
7.39. KARASTREAM and MANGAPUKATEASTREAM 7.38. 7.37. STONEYCREEK JACK’S / CREEK 7.36. 7.35. MANGAORESTREAM, MOUTOA FLOODWAY AND TOKOMARU 7.34. 7.33. 7.32. MAKINOSTREAM September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 7.40. ASHHURSTSTREAM SCHEME
hkrno Rpiig hs ie il nov te eitiuin f tem rvl from gravels at stream Bridge of Highway redistribution State the involveb the will which bridge the willaround of site downstream this immediately Repairing is Whakarongo. site The Creek. Stoney rep to underway is Preparation bridgein theMoutoa Floodway. a farmreplace leaseholders andengineers to withscheme working Transpowerhavebeen floodevent. are and inspected been have Assets Makino the Stream in Feilding. alongside runs that extensionpool swimming Makino a with involved been have Engineers were which sites the than other repairedbe over the coming months. However, repaired. been damagedduring the flood are event,sitesthere close toother 30which progr are all have and sites Street four Rata These between of area reaches the long in The Kitc breaches damage. several asset caused significant in overtopping resulted stopbank has 20 June on flood The works. failure culvert a accessr the under of potential the remove and event flood large a in closed be to need that gatesslide of number the willreduce This spillwaystopbank. the throughculvert a remove currently are staff Operations the June the floodevent. wel performing are and inspected been have assets Scheme June the floodevent. following damage little with well, performing are and inspected been have assets Stream placed being riprap concrete of m 65 to amountedagainstthe trueright bank to protect agains boundary Jürgen’s Colin at onsite sustained erosion The excavator. an by removed mechanically be to had they so stream tree mainly The were channel. They the into slumping banks Creek. laden Jacks from removed been have blockages channel Two bethen placed in front toact as thebankprotection. hener Park i.e. three sites on the true left bank and another site on the true right bank. right true the on site another and bank left true the on sites three i.e. Park hener
Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
oad to the Makino structure. The landowner will be contributing theselandownerwillto Makino be structure.The the oad to
e placed in the erosion site as back fill. Concrete riprap will riprap Concrete fill. back as site erosion the in placed e
working with a landowner along the Makino Spillway to to Spillway Makino the along landowner a with working i 5 m f aea eoin n ay eges rpry at property Teague’s Gary on erosion lateral of m 50 air
performing well, with little damage following the June the following damage little with well, performing
tlateral erosion.
slumps were too big to be moved on by the the by on moved be to big too were slumps
l, with little damage following damage little with l, ammed to Page Page 135
Item 7 Item 7 LOWER MANAWATUSCHEME RURAL FLOODPROTECTION UPGRADE PROJECT 7.46. ENVIRONMENTAL GRANT WORK 7.45. KAHUTERAWASTREAMSCHEME 7.44. 7.43. 7.42. 7.41. LOWERKIWITEA STREAM SCHEME September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 7.47.
situated outsidesituated LMS. the are Applications Grant Environmental Three will aconsent.require but NZDF, the by funded fully be will undertaken works Any June. in consternation some flood significant of p in result m 10 over a as Camp by retreated has bank Lintonriver The event. June the during property NZDF their on incurred damage to advice providing are Engineers hascases b many in and realignment river the with help to undertaken been also has extraction Gravel permeable groynesand a further five siteshave had majorplanting works completed. tr tied used repaired, been have that these, of Six sites. erosion 10 at completed been have repairs Permanent completedat the same astime the channel clearance works. undertaking p to prior control gain to sites 11 at required were works realignment river and damage flood further avoid to cleared be to had have blockages debris tree/flood Multiple was Scheme scheme the area and the Kiwiteaestimated cost of repair is$400,000. Lower the since experienced largest throu 25sites atSignificantdamage wasrecorded 2004 floods. the postestablished, the was flood June 20 The rprto i wl udra fr h vr fl porme f ok fr h upcoming the for works of commentaryon present project status. programme full table veryfollowing The the season. construction for underway well is Preparation raet ear ad o vi frhr lo dmg. h rainet ok were works realignment The damage. flood further avoid to and repairs ermanent top end of Derby Creek. Smaller flood events have recently flooded the back section back the flooded recently have events flood Smaller Creek. Derby of end top Mr 100Derrick TeNgaioBunnythorpe.Woods, Road, Mr property Wood’s borders the prepared. of outside is property His property. his of end top the at erosion some and edge channel the on trees has large over concerns Hill Mr Stream. Mangaone the borders property Hill’s Mr Road. Spur Hill, Chris prepared.being A placement. riprap concrete some and redistribution gravel clearance, vegetation include will work The property. his on Stream Mangaone the over bridge the of downstream is damage The West. Line Reids Dalley, Steve Mr channel.A Grant stream the removalfrom vegetation being suggestion the with situation, his remedying on advice for Horizons approached has Derrick water. by surrounded is property the la Derrick’s of een doneto allowpermanent repairs.
laces, undermining the camps explosive store on one bend which caused caused which bend one on store explosive camps the undermining laces, nd around his workshop. In a 200 year flood event the main house on on house main the event flood year 200 a In workshop. his around nd
e ak rtcin ok, n te te fu uig oe n rail and rope using four other the and works, protection bank ee
Application isbeingprepared.
the LMS. A Grant Application is currently being being currently is Application Grant A LMS. the schedules all programmed works and provides and works programmed all schedules
being prepared for the following landowners following the for prepared being
rn Apiain s currently is Application Grant
Page Page
ghout 136
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River Stopbank Transition at Transition Stopbank Bank Right River Oroua Bank to Rangiotu Road Right Hoihere Upgrade, Stopbank River Oroua Bank Left to Rangiotu Road Hoihere Upgrade, River Stopbank Oroua V. Muncey, 821 Lockwood Lockwood Road 821 Muncey, Property, V. Individual Protect Lockwood Road 802 Astwood, Property, R. Individual Protect Lockwood 767 Road Bond, Property, S. Individual Protect Group, 56 Highway State 1601 & Farming 1591 Hopkins Properties, Individual Protect Bridge Road Hoihere at Raising Oroua B Road Hoihere
River Left Bank Road Road Bank Left River Project Title Project ridge
Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
the left bank of the Oroua River River Oroua the of bank left on the stopbank of m 5,200 Upgrade Lockwood Road Lockwood 821 at house Muncey the Protect Road Lockwood the Raise Road Lockwood the Protect Hopkins by two 56, Tiakitahuna Highway State on owned Group around Farming bunds houses Construct the to bank. left the Road on height stopbank upgraded Hoihere Raise bank right on the stoplog road install and stopbank upgrade wall, retaining Construct 56, Highway bank to Hoihere Rangiotu right Bridge the Road River from downstream Oroua the on stopbank of m 5,300 Upgrading 56, Highway to Hoihere Rangiotu Bridge the Road from downstream
Astwood house at 802 802 at house Astwood Description
Bond house at 767 767 at house Bond
etme. ein ok is work Entry October. mid in Design completion for programmed Land during September. progress and will Negotiations been have contacted landowners Affected affected all out. posted been have Agreements Entry Land All with works. the discuss to site on held landowners in have been Meetings completion September. early and for complete programmed is ten work Survey affected all are out. posted been have Entry Land All with works. the discuss to site on held landowners in have documents been Meetings completion September. early and for complete programmed is tender work Survey house if feasible. if house this raise to progress in currently is work Investigation landowner. with the held been have Discussions is agreement October. during undertaken be to consent programmed are works and sought being Building and currently reached. landowner the with held been have Meetings construction over are continuing. detail and negotiations principle in agreed been has been solution A landowner. have the with held meetings recent Two suitable in on conditions. ground commence depending October to programmed are Works out. posted Agreement Entry Land a and works protection the of details Manager discuss to contacted Farm The commence is to September. during programmed work Entry are comple Design substantially Land during September. progress and will Negotiations been have contacted landowners Affected e dcmns are documents der
Status
e n works and te
Agreements Agreements has been been has Page Page 137
Item 7 Item 7 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River Stopbank Upgrade, Karere Karere Longburn Road, Upgrade, Stopbank Bank Right River Manawatu Rangiotu Road Property, Property, Strahan Individual Protect Oostveen, Road Lockwood Property, Van Individual Protect Lockwood 892 Road Lynch, Property, G. Individual Protect & Tait Higgins Upgrade, Stopbank Bank Right River Manawatu Akers Linton Property, Upgrade, Bank Stopbank Left River Manawatu Upgrade, Road Whirokino Stopbank Bank Right River Manawatu Road Poplar Lease, Funnell 486, Bank BM Upgrade, Stopbank Left River Manawatu Lease, Funnell Rangiotu & Ervine Property Upgrade, Stopbank Bank Right River Manawatu
- Jamison, Jamison, Whakarongo
691 691
house at 892 Lockwood Road Lockwood at 892 house Farm Lynch’s the Raise ie rgt ak tpak at stopbank bank Whakarongo right River the of m 4,880 Upgrade immediately property the Road, Akers Linton of upstream at stopbank Akers bank left Manawatu River the of m 550 Upgrade to proximity in 1. Highway State of bank upstream Road Whirokino right stop of sections individual 17 Upgrading adjoining on Funnell Mr Opiki Poplar Road, stopbank by leased bank Council left River Manawatu the of m 1,600 Upgrade stopbank D. Basin Taonui into property Ervine bank the of Opiki downstream right immediately River Manawatu the of m 3,600 Upgrade the in Longburn Karere Road, of vicinity stopbank bank right River Upgrade to farm Strahan concrete buildings dairy protect on of m floodwall 65 Construction Road Lockwood 691 at house Oostveen Van the around bund a Construct
bank on the Manawatu River River Manawatu the on bank
Bridge and through the the through and Bridge - owned land currently currently land owned
5,100 m of the Manawatu the of m 5,100
Manager’s Manager’s Manawatu
affected landowners on site to to been have Agreements Relief Rent site and Entry Land on works. the discuss landowners all affected with held been have Meetings early October. in completion for scheduled to date returned been having Entry half with Land to out posted works. been have Agreements site the on discuss landowners all affected with held been have Meetings that requested 2016. May in be undertaken works has The landowner complete. is Documentation sale a of offer. outcome the pending delayed be will consultation further and market the on is property This September. mid in awarded be to expected is work Some this for contract the a but encountered principle. been have difficulties with engineering in reached landowner Agreement to discuss the potential works works be not year. this financial undertaken potential may project the this however discuss to contacted been have Landowners for scheduled and is December. in mid Survey completion work posted. design been Agreement Entry has Land A works. the discuss to landowner affected with held been has meeting A farming their design early December. and sche is potential work Survey on and operations. works impacts of contacted the discuss scope be to September during will Landowners for scheduled is his and November. in mid completion work Survey on design operation. impacts farming potential scope the discuss and to leasee the discuss been have Works design October. late and in Survey completion for scheduled is work out. posted Sre ad ein ok is work design and Survey .
duled for completion in completion for duled
d with ed Page Page
the the 138
8.7. 8.6. 8.5. 8.4. 8.3. 8.2. 8.1. GENERAL 8. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 8.8. RANGITIKEIRIVER CONTROL SCHEME
the dam the and the works that mayrequired.be by affected injuriously been has land owner’s the that acknowledge to paid is fee A land. work the and dam the reconstruct to necessary, if and, dam existing the maintain otherwise or repair clean, examine, to order in equipment or machinery other and an Agreement Licence submit Councilunder rights has enter statuteowner’s to the reasonableland at times with vehicles The owners property fee. that Agreement request Licence the These for invoice period. this during out sent been have property their on located dam detention scheme a have who owners property all to Letters and forms); inspection developed newly (using inspections asset for training busy IPad Floodgates; been have Staff ongoing verif be to continues there issues, related flood to addition In busyvisitingand providing help tothese ratepayers. longer for on advice and looking repairs damage with and event flood initial the from recovering now are landowners as floods June the following significantly increased also has advice engineering for Requests schemesrespective sections of this report. other however Park, Kowhai at breach stopbank planned the locations suchas some damage, in made temporaryhavethisbeen repairsOf the mechanism for staff to programme the coming seasonswork efforts works bee the has information inspection throughout The damage areas. significant been has there that shows data inspection the and ground or boat, air, by, done been has This Schemes. on Drainage and River focused Northern have staff flood June the Since NORTHERNAREA the river stripped of vegetation and man and vegetation is of stripped river the photography aerial of reaches many when left have floods September The alignment. river in in changes the enhancedshowing completed further be will This maintenance. floo of assessment accurate more a collate staff helped have boat jet and land air, by inspections extensivemonths two past the Over for Preparation formatting. 2014 final for staff administration with and complete is Report assessments. andThe sediment dates flow and flushing moni include;ecologicalare Genesisdiscussedmeeting to the at be to Items AnnualReport. 15 2014 the on work and Energy) Genesis by (convened September 17 on Hall Community Ot showing community Wanganui thatwe careand supportthemduring flood recovery. importantly, more but, members staff fellow with building team for experience positive very and organising group FIVE” participatin “BIG the with involved heavily were staff Northern Recently e tss on frad nld, meig hc i t b hl i te Moawhango the in held be to is which meeting a include, forward going tasks her
ig acmn budre fr ar fr uis ekn nw r mne consents. amended or new seeking units farm dairy for boundaries catchment ying FirstAid training. toring and consent appliance; Fish and Game drift dive results; willow management; willow results; dive drift Game and Fish appliance; consent and toring - 2015Report commencedhas withcompletion a dateexpected before Christmas. g in the Kowhai Park planting and clean and planting Park Kowhai the in g Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
tedn; prtos uy fies riig o te Makino the for training Officers Duty Operations attending;
y hectares lost to bank erosion. Landowners have erosion. bank to lost hectares y
-
term mitigation solutions. Staff have been kept been have Staff solutions. mitigation term n used to update the AMS and this will provide will this and AMS the update to used n d damaged sites and areas requiring general general requiring areas and sites damaged d
npcig h canl ad ses f the of assets and channels the inspecting works will be discussed below in each each in below discussed be will works
- up project in Wanganui. This was a a was This Wanganui. in project up 2013 - 2014 Northern Area AnnualNorthern2014Area cnwegs ht th that acknowledges eussfravc on advice for requests .
s on the owner’s the on s
assistance Page Page
139 the e -
Item 7 Item 7 8.15. 8.14. POHANGINA 8.13. 8.12. 8.11. 8.10. 8.9. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 8.17. TOTARARESERVE 8.16.
There hasbeenno gravelextraction Horizonsfrom consents during period.this actions,resources and th minimizePlananybeen prepared to measures,of outlinesThe further effects flooding. the remedialanother eventbefore canworkoccur flood a Contingencycompleted, be Plan has co to works physical for prepared be to contract allowa to prepared currentlybeing are drawings and surveydesign result, a As verybeing wet, it isnot currently possible complete to this repair work. and $100,000. at exacerbated estimated now cost further repair the was toe batter stopbank the to damage flood The respectively. m 7.05 and m on6.26 recorded sites, hydrological McKelvie later, and Mangaweka the at month readings a Then, River $30,000. was damage 20 Rangitikei flood the repair the to cost estimated contract, The upgrade toe. stopbank the to erosion Stopbanks. of length m 400 stopbank a causing upgrade Parewanuistopbank new the against at the The works 2015. May 15 of on capital event flood significant a experienced the completion been the has concern Following particular of area An thatprevented the floodgate wo channel water Drain Amon the from cleared post concrete a and ramps, stopbank several de been have drains sites, erosion major w continuing is has work possible, Where river the June, Since impossible. exceeding one is 4.5 the alarm. m with level alarm machinery m 4.0 Mangaweka with the over events sites flow five experienced to access and high r flood many of start the delaying are conditions wet Ongoing solutions and actionto work as soon as possible. economic find to them with closely working are staff and loss latest the at concern shown next few weeks and this is to be funded by the He Tina Awa Trust program, an initiative an program, Trust Awa Tina He the by funded be to is this and weeks few next are substantial A where property Ward the at completed been Aker’sproperties. has work River, Carrolland onthe begin improveshortlystability bankisto whereplanted poles to and 750 Pohangina the On plan pole with along properties Nesdale multiple sites. and Malcolm Manville, Hoggard, the at weeks coming the over begin Horizons’ will and approved now is work protection appreciate bank tree addition, genuinely do they and owners as property other many with present been has attitude This flood. the after action prompt for Horizons to thanks his expressed the On approval undertaketo required bankprotection repairs. gain ownersandwith propertyliaise quickly to ablehavebeen staff flood, the of result a as operations farming most to disruption little been has there because Also, floods. June the PohanginaRiverssufferedandrelatively OrouaFortunately, damage the both during minor sistance to repair the the In repair damagesistance increaseerosion quickly to holes as costs before enlarge. - 22 June, the Rangitikei River recorded a further f further a recorded RiverRangitikei the June, 22 - OROUARIVERCONTROL SCHEME Oroua River, repairs have been completed at Mr. Christie’s property and he has has he and property Christie’s Mr. at completed been have repairs River, Oroua
a within the reserve has been set aside for native tree planting over the over planting tree native for aside set been has reserve the within a
e contactdetails of property owners.
rkingduring theJune flood. mmence in early November. In the meantime, should meantime, the In November. early in mmence ith channel clearance on inside bends completed at completed bends inside on clearance channel ith
- itd n loe aes rpis netkn on undertaken repairs areas, flooded in silted
However, with weather and ground conditions ground and weather with However,
lood event. This time the stage heightstage the time This event. lood
flood waters flowed 1 m high high m 1 flowed waters flood
epairs as river levels remain levels river as epairs
Page Page ig at ting 140
8.26. TUTAENUIFLOOD CONTROL SCHEME 8.25. 8.24. 8.23. 8.22. MATARAWACONTROLFLOOD SCHEME 8.21. TARINGAMOTURIVERMANAGEMENT SCHEME 8.20. UPPERWHANGANUI RIVERMANAGEMENT SCHEME 8.19. 8.18. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 8.27.
prepareda list of work toundertakenbe when conditionsallow. have and events, these to response in inspections dam of rounds 2 completed have Staff i repairs flood for access making June, since flows significant five experienced run surface of levels is high area the experiencing and water up soak longer no can land the saturated, completely soil the With bank investigating stabilityoptionsat Gudsell’sbetweenfarm theRail are andBridge No.1 Line. Horizons where structure diversion the around severe particularly left the and exceeded capacity channel diversion channel the through conditions Flow clean the implemented. in being busy tasks now are staff flood June the Following schemeworks area. monitor to continue staff period, this during undertaken work no been has there While was vegetation also some management in same the area. wor been has far, thus flood the of result a as work of onlyitem The June flood. the from damage onlyminor confirming inspections field with quiet very remain area Taumarunui the in activities Work No gravelreturns have been receivedextraction for in thereserve thi improve to planting willow for identified localisedriver bank protection. is scheduled Work to begin September. in been also have reserve the within sites Several their expressed has who community local the by thanks toH favorable very upon viewed is which furthersign of damage tothe structures. pondand the staff removeddebris culvertfrom inlet grills. On a positive note, therewas no hi in retained smaller being water some of evidencewas there following visits, both On August. completed8 and July 19 were inspections dam of rounds Two clearto channel blockages where accessallows. priorieswork have concentratedensuringon dam remain assets workinggood inorder and rem areas many in Paddocks scheme. clean flood delay to continues August and July throughout weather Wet these removedas access allows. s particularly is This channel. the blocking trees of received being are reports of number a progresses, time As the for problem a workingclosely with the onfarmer becoming a possible solution. now is stopbank landow Blinkbonnie the behind ponding Water e. tf ae urnl loig t h ise ascae wt ti polm and problem this with associated issues the at looking currently are Staff ner. Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering orizons.
k to repair a section of fence near Turaki Street. Other than that, there that, than Other Street. Turaki near fence of section a repair to k
i te og ce n Mtrw Vle ae ad tf ae having are staff and area Valley Matarawa and Acre Long the in o xesv aes f ak lmig eurn rpi. hs is This repair. requiring slumping bank of areas extensive
-
ain too wet to allow heavy machinery access so so access machinery heavy allow to wet too ain f wt ec ri eet n te acmn has catchment the and event rain each with off
- p hs wt dmg repair damage with phase up
speriod. h lw vns on events flow gh -
up throughout the throughout up
mpossible. Page Page
141 the the
Item 7 Item 7 TURAKINARIVER MANAGEMENT SCHEME 8.34. 8.33. 8.32. WHANGAEHUMANGAWHERO RIVER MANAGEMENT SCHEME 8.31. 8.30. POREWACONTROLFLOOD SCHEME 8.29. 8.28. MAKIRIKIR September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 8.36. 8.35.
hopefullyother willthe avoidsame the withfate extensiveon plantings theriver bank. t have will shed dairy the case, one In bank. the vicinityof immediate the within sited whichcreateddairyare Junetwosheds problemsfor floods The access sites the without causingexcessive damage. drying subsequent a and conditions weather in change a awaiting now is work repair planned the However, identified. been has damage further s A advising busy been have relationship withcommunity. the staff repair, to scheme the to landownersrepairtheiron serviceoptions. This isvaluedbuildand up greatlyhelps positive a not is it although and June the throughout occurred damage bank river Extensive the reinstate and thenremove thesame sectionof stopbank to enable constructionof egress to the gate. not owner property significare the with made was egress structure the was breachedof until stopbankThere a decision future known. the on decision a meantime, the In allev Road to andthe Redmayneproperty. options funding possible on deliberating still are contributionDistrictRangitikeiprojecta thewouldtowardCouncilwhile (RDC) the makehe that indicated also has owner property The stopbank. Stream Makirikiri the in gate egress Horizonsapprovedhas Environment an of Grant $27,500 towardsinstallme the Currently, drain. to floodwaters trapped allow to structure, floodgate proposed a regarding discussions and investigations ongoing been has there event flood June 20 the Following debris from the riverabank as result of the flood when conditionsallow. Whangaehu, the Like and Horizons RDC, by instigated was meeting the Although FederatedFarmers were present with offersof assistance. flood. June the of wake the in assistance emotional and financial practical, for go could they farming where the on community from questions answer to July 7 on Hall Makohau the at held was meeting A dryer on waiting are Engineers bridges. downstream in against mobile conditionsbefore commencing this task. becoming this lodging of risk and flood a of is events removal there the as banks on river focus the will along year debris this scheme the throughout work Maintenance becoming costly. too as industry the of out pull may they that said also haveorchardists Kiwifruit stopbank. a with marae the encircle clean has site The location. current its in marae the retaining of viability the overIwi Kaungaroa withplace taking are Discussions econd round of dam inspections has now been completed since the June floods and no and floods June the since completed nowbeen hasinspections dam of round econd I FLOOD I CONTROL SCHEME - p ot o te cuat. n fod rtcin pin en cniee i to is considered being option protection flood One occupants. the on costs up ant repairwouldto savingsprudent toscheme with the be as it decision, not this
the cost of de of cost the aneac wrs n h Trkn wl cnetae n removing on concentrate will Turakina the in works maintenance
en loe o svrl cain paig significant placing occasions several on flooded been
- silting their orchards after each major flood event is event flood major each after orchards their silting
- oe rahs f hs cee in scheme this of reaches lower u o si t alw ahnr t machinery allow to soil of out ae loig o uaia Beach Turakina to flooding iate
o be relocated further away but, further relocated be o
smaller flow flow smaller nt of a of floodnt Page Page
142
o
8.44. TAHUNASTREAM (NON 8.43. HAUNUIDRAINAGE SCHEME 8.42. FORESTROAD DRAINAGE SCHEME 8.41. PAKIHISCHEME 8.40. 8.39. 8.38. PROTECTION FLOOD AND 8.37. MANAGEMENT VEGETATION PROGRAMME WHANGANUI LOWER September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River
npcin o te a floig h Jn fod ae ofre ta tee a be no been has there that confirmed damage to have the scheme assets. flood June the following dam the of Inspections access the channel isdredged. Again,once isathis non useable be only will ramp boat the Bridge Street Dublin the of upstream someand before created has waters flood Whanganui in unu loading silt considerable the interest, Of needin the Environmental for Grant assistance nextyear. result mayscheme) the of responsibility a not is (which Road Papaiti on slumping that and clean extensive more a needs site Jetty Upokongaro the at siltation while that show Inspections types to securethe banks slumping.from th and Wanganui in of stability number riverbank large around a enquiries been have There corridor. riparian the from lost been have podocarp and oaks poplars, of metres of hundreds whilst alder) and willow flax, shrubs, (native wellro high a with vegetation whole, the on However saturation. ground of periods long after unstable become to not is weight biomass combined the if especially post for need the underlined hasevent flood June 20 The with continues collaboration close WDCstaff A around work planneda this in drain. to area Parade Anzac the allow to breached were works protection when floods June the after implemented repair sandbag temporary the At impro conditions Until opened. commence. be to to stopbank repairs allow had to wet stopbank too remain the Park Kowhai result, within conditions a ground moment as present and floods June the during Park other through and previously, mentioned As Two bed control structures on Alex Glasgow’s property suffered damage when an an when damage suffered property damage with Alexand are now Glasgow’slookingat repair options him. for Alex on esti structures control bed Two to continue staff and scheme this to damage monitorthe situation. flood any identified not have Inspections monitorthe situation Inspections mated100 sual problems. Sand bars have appeared in places where they have never been been never have they where places in appeared have bars Sand problems. sual - up, up, workthis will have wait to untilbanks the bearcan the weight of heav
Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
ae o ietfe ay lo dmg t ti shm ad tf cniu to continue staff and scheme this to damage flood any identified not have
- year return period event hit the catchment in June. Staff have Staff inspected inthe June. year catchment return the period event hit - SCHEME). .
rea.
means, there was an overtopping at Kowhai at overtopping an was there means, ve, staff are keeping a close watch on the the on watch close a keeping are staff ve, - scheme issue. e variability of different vegetation different of variability e
- planting management of poplarsof plantingmanagement
ot/branch ratio fared ratio ot/branch ymachinery Page Page 143
Item 7 Item 7 9.7. 9.6. AKITIOSCHEME 9.5. 9.4. 9.3. 9.2. 9.1. GENERAL 9. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 9.9. 9.8.
aiu lctos n h Mnaank, ot Esen uhn ad Upper and Ruahine Eastern Tararua South the within underway currently District. Mangatainoka, are which material projects this Fonterra and of the roading lot various A in Schemes. Mangahao Manawatu/Lower locations various from taken was exttotal in gravelof m³ 9,400 months, 2 last the been Over consent.scheme under has gravel of amount fair a again, Once Emergency of $715,745 and budgets existing Reserve funds. of worth $249,955 of reprioritisation a by funded be to iswork extra This damagerepairs. flood of $965,700worth extra an includes works scheme undertaking and for, preparing busy are staff forward, Looking followed the EnvironmentalGrant assisted works. programmes, to given planting notification scheme official with Th undertaken team. been Compliance have works emergency spawning trout with value, locations In works. repair emergency undertaking and programmes s floods June the Since periodlast year. same the location for same the at recordedwas than more slightlyis This Tararuas. the in site recording hydro Mangahao Upper the at recorded was this and mm 400 to close was catchme Eastern the in recorded rainfall total highest The floodingit has made the paddocks wet, making it hard completeto some urgentworks. further any cause to enough heavy been not time has rainfall this consistent the for fortunately, typical while, fairly been has weeks six last the over weather The EASTERN it, stoke it, andit load ashes the on toa truck for rem burndebris, pile the to time digger of worth weeks allow a to consentbased a gain to need the on dollars of thousands of tens be to estimated are material the remove to Estimates problem. theaddre to warrant council district to the canvased issue have residents enough other it, big removing a of expense causing really wasn’t debris the the and 2015, that March was in consensusMeeting, General Annual last the at raised was issue this While beach the and in extremean event on the road. on up ending is material this that concerned are residents Akitio sea. to has out washed been that material dead the of portion the regarding raised queries some been have there aims its achieved has scheme the and condition good a in is channel the while However, to out washed or decomposed burned, sea. either now material tree woody the of most the with with condition good a in is floodi of channel instances the regrowth, and willow for treated completely scheme the and beenhas area workswhole previously, mentionedthe As aims. interruptionfinancial and programmes little with freely flowed pos good a in has be to continues Akitio the season, this far So
AREA
ng now greatly diminished. There is very little debris left in the channel the in left debris little very is There diminished. greatly now ng s eid tf hv as md a tr o te esn various seasons the on start a made also have staff period is taff have been busy inspecting scheme rivers, reprioritising works reprioritising rivers, scheme inspecting busy been have taff
ition in regard to meeting both its short and long and short its both meeting to regard in ition
- p eea eqiis n mngd several managed and enquiries general up
oval ato clean site.fill atd rm cee ies hs period this rivers scheme from racted nt over the last six week period week six last the over nt a be tkn o the for taken been has
of the year and year the of -
term works term which now now which Page Page ss the ss
144 ,
9.17. 9.16. 9.15. MANGATAINOKASCHEME 9.14. 9.13. 9.12. EASTERNMANAWATU SCHEME 9.11. 9.10. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 9.18.
u, t il ae prxmtl oe ek o opee Canl elgmn ad bank and realignment Channel complete. to week one approximately take will it dried has out, area the once that estimated is it and level. completed been acceptable has work an establishment to compacting from material fill preventing were which conditions ground damp to due suspended be stopbank. to had Hamua work this the Unfortunately, being completion some requiring still site only the with completed, Junefloo the of result a asrequired emergencyworks the of majority The w capital priority of works the but historically have the hadlittle cover. that now planting part as from cleared vulnerablewerenot thatoutside bends are thesethatnote important is to It complete. any benefit identifying could in that had be bends to outside benefit was there that Liaison felt Meeting. members General Annual Committee last the at had discussions with accordance in is This week coming the for programmed been has planting of amount small a ahead, Looking Akitio the to position similar willfocusedbe on maintaining the capital works which were verycompleted season.last a in is Scheme Sche Manawatu Eastern the essence, In from clear again is channel the and cleared been blockagesand flowingwell. has found was that debris only The damage ordebris blockages found,the of way the in little with and inspected been now has channel full the flood June the Since Area the Barrow), (John Councillor Horizons’ discuss the matter. to September issue, 3 on meet the to organised have addressCommittee Liaison the and and Engineer the try protecting to by order good In some doing be may debris the that belief vulnerable road thefrom current foreshore erosion. the also is There scheme’s resource consentconditions. the with compliance ensure to extractors with working been have Staff Road. Halls at extracte site was this of m 4,000 m³. 4,400 extracted amount total four the only with to takes, limited been has period this Scheme Mangatainoka the on extraction Gravel of reprioritisation the require will this Reserve funds. Funding repairs. wo damage $159,000 flood $389,000 extra include now of which works worth scheme for preparing busy are staff forward, Going the than faster much established become quickly. and hardier much the such, As stakes. traditional weeks. are coming the logs in sites difficult large more into These driving for cut been also have logs willow plant natives 4500 and willows 4000 approximately saw and period remains this completed also was site programme planting scheme the The completed be can work reinstatement full particularlyvulnerable. the until er however been has bund bank, a and complete, is site the at work protection me, it is also ahead of its longits of aheadalso is it me,
Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
t o bdee fns n te diin f 2000 ot o Emergency of worth $230,000 of addition the and funds budgeted of rth
y are used in places where good willow growth is required required is growth willow good where places in used are y - term works and financial programmes, and this season this andprogrammes, worksandfinancial term ed throughout the scheme. As well as this 1500 large 1500 this as well As scheme. the throughout ed
worksprogramme hasbeenleft largely unchanged.
ce i te oe n the in hole the in ected
oee, ot f the of most However, d have now been been nowhave d d from one from d Page Page rs are orks
145 s.
Item 7 Item 7 9.26. 9.25. 9.24. TAWATAIA 9.23. 9.22. IHURAUASCHEME 9.21. 9.20. 9.19. SOUTHEASTERN RUAHINE SCHEME September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River
Over the coming months staff will continue to monitor the stream and prepare for works for prepare and stream inlater the season. the monitor to continue will staff months coming the Over clear clearlybenefit.been of to Work flowing. con free small and and blockages clear several is last channel level, the winter that normal ensured a have at works flowing seasons is Ihuraua the while that show inspections Recent $40,000 of reprioritisation the require will this worthbudgeted of Fundingfunds and theaddition of $357,900 worth repairs. damage flood of worth $397,500 include now which works scheme for preparing busy be will staff forward, Going will which locations bi those to enquiries any thisconsent direct scheme’s the under extracted was m³ 2,700 to greatest. the scheme the benefit working are staff and place taken block further any prevent to extraction managed for need the confirms situation the blockages, prevent and Mang and Tamaki ex established the filled has but above, described blockages the causing only not is which headwaters) the from likely (mostchannels the entered gravelhas amount of large a shown that havealso Inspections has originalin the channel at all. this Generally flood. ab streams June werenot that severethe these Oftenblockages wereso waters. the flood by gravel and the debris with blocked were following that sites of number needed large a clearing were involved that repairs emergen damage the complete flood to been has weeks six last the over focus main Management’s uh te cee a ol cniu t peae iacal fr hs eurmn i the in requirement this for financially prepare to continue suppositionwillit needed.be only can a scheme achieve the to such, aim As finalised. the was legislation draft the in if required been undertaken have would works been further capacity, has upgrade spillway. the partial of upgrading a further a While need to likely dam was ‘Referable’ Impact’, a ‘Potential as medium classed a been with had which Dam, Tawataia the regulation this Under SafetyRegulations which wereplanned to finallyintocome forcein Jul Dam the revoke to decision recent Employment’s and Innovation Business, of Ministry the of relevance the of us remind does it event, this in flow not did spillway the while that and Inspections alsodetention show the Juneconsiderablein flo dam that a the filledto level as freely as flow channels the that ensuring are possible. works seasons last and levels winter w theIhuraua, the with As - mo - nthlyperiod.
MANGAONESCHEME
ages occurring. As such, a small amount of gravel extraction has already has extraction gravel of amountsmall a such, As occurring.ages
-
ta tem. ie ta te xrcin ie ae eind o il first fill to designed are sites extraction the that Given Streams. Atua
ater levels in the Tawataia and Mangaone Streams have risen tohaveMangaonerisen Streams andTawataia the levelsin ater
rcin ie, seily hs i te uei Raparapawai, Kumeti, the in those especially sites, traction
titos a ietfe i te 01 cee ui, have Audit, Scheme 2011 the in identified as strictions,
ofEmergency Reserve funds. y2015.
i 10 year 100 in 1
le to flowle to Page Page 146 od cy
10.3. 10.2. 10.1. GENERAL 10. 9.32. 9.31. 9.30. ENVIRONMENTAL GRANTAND WORKS ENGINEERINGADVICE 9.29. 9.28. 9.27. UPPERMANAWATU September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River
the agenda the document. status The ofall Environmental worksGrant will be reportedfurther inon a separat Grant and Environmental rope two work, approved tree tiedrails and a substantial amount of planting. of previouslyconsisted and area) twoworks the (above Mangahao of the on works t the at were these monthscompleted, been have Applications two last the In assistance.Grant Environmental for qualify likelyto some withenquiry drainage and river general in increase be to continues been has there levels river higher and rain in increase the With sites thatare actually suitable extracting for from. a for allows consent the months. While extraction. gravel of 2 relief the needed long has which last location a from extracted the over place takenPahiatua.Fortunately, at sitesdue close to proximity the factory, the beenhasto metal has extraction M the from extracted gravel again was m³ 2,300 of amount reasonable Emergency A of worth $128,245 of addition the and funds Reserve funds. budgeted of worth will $50,995 this Funding include repairs. now damage which flood works of scheme worth $179,200 undertake to preparing busy are staff forward, Going are these however 2,500 willowpoles plantedin tenlocations throughout schemes the two worksareas. underway, tw last the over are completed been have planting of form the works in works repair damage Maintenance levels. river high constantly and paddocks wet the to flood, slowlydue progressing June the Following needto investigatedbe and consultedon. will service of levels existing the to change any spillway Clearly, Drains. Main and Burkes from around are waters capacities design flood drain of Current 2 flows overtopping. overland riverbank or and/or operations event rainfall with localised buildings, extreme of the long of result flooding a as flooded have and provideScheme Drainage theManawatu the within are properties to regarding options received seeking been landowners also have enquires Several wantingare to report damage. of amount significant a Generally consume time. staff to continue enquiries, related flood and drainage Both floodingand to keepmostdrains uplong periodsfor of time. consistent the events,rainfa rainfall significant no been have there While year. the of time this for typical fairly been has weeks six last the over weather the Region, the of much with As SOUTHERN - 5 year rainfall event, with stopbanking only in place in the lower reaches of the scheme the of reaches lower the in place in only stopbanking with event, rainfall year 5
l n led strtd rud odtos a be sfiin t cue surface cause to sufficient been has conditions ground saturated already on ll Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
AREA
–
LOWER
, landowners are seeking advice on how to remove ponded water or, or, water ponded remove to how on advice seeking are landowners , total of 8,000 m³ to be extracted from the Mangahao, there are few are there Mangahao, the from extracted be to m³ 8,000 of total
MANGAHAOSCHEME
angahao for use at the Fonterra factory upgrade factory Fonterra the at use for angahao
- em rtcin I ms ca most In protection. term
he Bennett’s and Norman’s properties Norman’s and Bennett’s he
eur te eroiiain of reprioritisation the require o weeks with a total of total a with weeks o
ae o a on based e, these ses,
a marked a Page Page e itemin
147
Item 7 Item 7 10.10. 10.9. 10.8. 10.7. OHAU 1 10.5. 10.4. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 10.11. 0.6.
- underway. River heights of note were: 1.39 m, 81 m³/s on the Ohau on 25 August, an August, 25 on Ohau the 1.2 m (33 m³/s)on the withWaikawa;on Manakau the reaching1.7 m(8.4 m³/s)28on July. m³/s 81 m, 1.39 were: note of heights River underway. river various worksremedialdamage flood the getting indelays caused protection,havethey the edge river within freshes numerous seen have cha rainfall heavy of periods Recent the brings numberofnow stations with thissystem to 11. This station. s each at and issues generate regarding staff to Council system to notifications the alarm allowing as well as Dixon’s pumpstation, the and of Donnelly’s status current 2, No. Koputaroa the determine to at staff allowing system messaging text new a is EDAC installed This Pumpstations. been have systems EDAC New byCouncil staff. undertaken being currently is which report comprehensive a in included of be will results audits The the audits. and consultancy, training, systems, safety offer that professionals pumpstations. scheme three at audits site safety and health three completed now has Safe Site from inspector safety A producinga comprehensivewhich report covers the followingaspects of thepumpstations: hazard New cleaned to remove weedand silt build machinewas StreamManakau the of section lower the and Drain Takapau the of Sections partof channel as needed work and works existing extend,the or repair,on to Stream sites Waikawa and six River Ohau at riprap concrete of, placement the and River, Ohau the on sites four at Ohau the on works Other repairs these of notable most wasThe Bishops on which Bend, requirednew16 irons andadditional trees to repairthe asset. irons. railway lost or damaged of replacement the or placementrees,existing the layeringof the either required have work protection the attentionThis reinstate involved edge providedhasto assets. these by sites four flood, June the Following protection. edge provide and damage t along extensively used been has protection tree tied Historically, bank channel the on trees willow maintain ahealthy coverage, which provides linefront protection against existing floods. that ensures mulching, and along layering involved completed was protection edge maintena This the Waikawa. on of sites twoand Ohau the on sites sevendifferent maintenance programmed period this During MANAKAUSCHEME nnels mentioned below. Although these flows have not caused any further damage to damage further any caused not have flows these Although below. mentioned nnels o asses to fulland detailed visual inspection of pumpstation the and all its components; o se wahr h pmsain et te urn hat ad safety and health current the meets pumpstation the weather requirements,and not,if howwill issuesthese be mitigated. asses to operationaland maintenance efficiency of pumpstation; the and the to made be to need that improvements all of list comprehensive a produce to of level servicerequired the provide to continuing is pumpstation the whether discuss to due for renewal; items and life, useful remaining the on commenting parts, mechanical and pumps,
in hv be isald t l shm pmsain wt te ups of purpose the with pumpstations scheme all at installed been have signs
realignment. for the drainagefor scheme;
h pmsain cmoet, uh s h eetia wr, building, work, electrical the as such components, pumpstations the
- Manakau include the construction of several large tree groynes tree large several of construction the include Manakau
ie ae s ntowd ta o hat ad safety and health of team nationwide a is Safe Site - up. up.
t of additional trees (to bolster the works),bolster the (toadditional trees of t he Ohau River to repair to River Ohau he
nce, which nce,
Page Page
end 148
d
10.19. 10.18. 10.17. 10.16. 10.15. 10.14. 10.13. MANAWATUDRAINAGE SCHEME 10.12. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 10.20.
in design standards will have an impact on the current level of service and will require require will and service of level current the consultation with the onwider scheme ratepayers. impact an have will standards design in st design appropriate an determine toinvestigation Furtherrequired design willbe existing culverts. floodgated through Drains Main and Burkes into back get to stopbanks behind trapped water abilityof the from stems f June the following properties their on ponded was water that time of length the regarding landowners several with held been have Meetings and re t down runs that drain A stabiliseto the toeof the slump itthen was back filled. used were irons railway and poles Power slumping. significant to due Road Oroua along pr were Bank Road Oroua off crossings culvert additional two replaced with on new sand bagwalls and the top re Headwalls replaced. were significan to Due access Road. three damage, Oroua over along drains the to and damage and overtopping rainfall localised Heavy sit alreadyworks these underway severalat of these sites. and erosion or slumping of result good in remained have channels the condition casesallowing the free flowingtheSomedamageoperation of drain. occurredhas a as most In required. if repairs prioritise to and inspecting busy been have staff floods, June the Since downstream. flood channel Manakau and the Waikawa River, Ohau the from the followingStreams removed were debris of amounts Large isl eeao pms ne rvt dang ws prtn. h to mains two The operating. pumps remainedoperation in until early the washours of Monday morning. drainage gravity once pumps generator diesel when afternoon Sunday late until operate to continued they and issue without operating were pumps four all morning mid By up. fired levelspumps were bythe Drainwere the again Burkes earlymorning Saturday that such in t across levels in resulted August 7 on rainfall Heavy inspected. be since have could pumps Bothbeen repaired and were installed backinto station the 3onbox. August. junction they the into and so cable the down units seep to water allowed affected two t the to damage identified withdraw inspections Subsequent to made was decision undertakenjunctiontests, the box.The by confirm and MaxFlygt, the both and a fault Tarr r a as faulted pumps supplied mains two running While May, 15 On PumpstationBurkes was up fired timefor the response infirst heavyto rainfall. has slumping the reviewoptionstheir regarding the maintenance or futureofuse theroad. locations, they once arranged be several will staff PNCC with At meetings lane. Further single a to down road the close Line. to PNCC forced has and Flygers road the onto encroached alongside Creek Whiskey on th discuss to PNCC from representatives with met have Staff - dugin orderto improve water the flow. tcin ok a crid u aog or tece o te pe Arni Drain Aorangi Upper the of stretches four along out carried was work otection Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering
- lw ra t esr ta i de nt as ay sus further issues any cause not does it that ensure to areas flow
June floods. The majority of this debris was moved to the outside ofoutside the to movedwas debris this majorityof The Junefloods. - way culverts, off Oroua Road, that cross the Upper Aorangi Drain, Aorangi Upper the cross that Road, Oroua off culverts, way he middle of five Campbell Road properties was machine cleaned machine was properties Road Campbell five of middle he
andard of any potential future upgrades. Any changes Any upgrades. future potential any of andard - lw fo te ru Rvr asd significant caused River Oroua the from flows
s ae en dniid n pirtsd with prioritised, and identified been have es
dcso ws ae o wth f te two the off switch to made was decision a
he casing of the main power cables which cables power main the of casing he - gravelled.
lood event. In most cases the issue the cases most In event. lood he Manawatu on the raise again and and again raise the on Manawatu he
esult of moisture being detected in detected being moisture of esult scheme drains to identify damage identify to drains scheme
e slumping that is occurring is that slumping e have had an opportunity to to opportunity an had have
structural t - Page Page supplied 149
Item 7 Item 7 10.29. TEKAWAU DRAINAGE SCHEME 10.28. MOUTOA 10.27. 10.26. KOPUTAROASCHEMEDRAINAGE 10.25. 10.24. 10.23. MAKERUADRAINAGE SCHEME 10.22. 10.21. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 10.30.
various schemepumpstations being makingit easier for future maintenance. as report, renewal a condition of recent a during part is upgrade The available.longer no were which identified componentscontaining and outdated was which board, switch/control instal the electrical The upgrade at Koputaroa 2 PumpstationNo. isnowcomplete followingdelays to require several floodgated culverts beto extended toenable theproposed changes. Tane and Road Drain theMain Linton to of intersection improvements proposed discuss to HDC from representatives with met have Staff removed from Okukuand BoundaryPumpstations. build weed clearing busy variousof the front kept been have the staff and meantime, machinery Council the Both, In improve. conditions ground once serviced remainingpump at the site is fullyoperational. and pulled be will operation its during vibrating was pump the discovered staff after off switched be to had has Pumpstation Donnelly’s at pump a period, this during Also event. June the during identified were problems after reinstalled and overhauled been have Pumpstations Coombes Birnie and Boundary both form pumps submersible period reporting this During beenhasdone in conjunctionwith AaronMadden,Environmental Programme Coordinator. plants. native selected with planted be to site the for preparation in sprayed been have Pumpstation Burkes around areas Grassed of Burkes the Pumpstation generator, wasthis carriedout by Goughs PowerSystem. been has period, reporting this during occur to Also has alsohas hadto completed.be work repair so undermined, to significantlyplaced rock and back, cut being concrete headwall also the involving had Pumpstation Dixon’s from outlet The outsideof pumpstation. the do the on put the iron sheet to relined, being building Repairs the of inside the with refurbished. completed been fullyalso have building pump the and installed been since have electrics New under submerged completely was all saturating Pumpstation waters flood Dixon’s June, in event flood the During ac culvertisused by both the scheme restricting andthe landowner, repair costs were shared. and drain the blocking collapsed partially had headwall the after 5 No. Drain on crossing culvert a on completed been have Repairs assist exis the will gate extra This outlet. Drain 1 No. Aratangata to adjacent installed was culvert new A -
WHIROKINODRAINAGE SCHEME ain u t te ue los Te prd hs elcd h existing the replaced has upgrade The floods. June the to due lation
ting gate with theegress of water fromsurrounding the paddocks. program which aims to standardise the electrical components across the the across components electrical the standardise to aims which program or, the door rehung and base course placed and compacted around the the around compacted and placed course base and rehung door the or, pumpstationweedscreens.Unfortunately, be deadlivestock hashad to of the electrics, causing damage to the pump and the building. the and pump the to damage causing electrics, the of
The organising and supervision of the planting the of supervision and organising The
Road. The proposed improvements will improvements proposed The Road.
the scheduled maintenance inspectionmaintenance scheduled the cess across the culvert. As the the As culvert. the across cess
stabilise the outlet pipe outlet the stabilise
. The pump The . - p rm in from up
Page Page
150
10.38. HOKIOCATCHMENT DRAINAGE SCHEME 10.37. 10.36. 10.35. FOXTONEAST DRAINAGE SCHEM 10.34. 10.33. 10.32. 10.31. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Drainage and River 10.39.
loig sus ht curd uig h Jn eet Wie h Bad n several and Board the While event. the June discuss f the to of level the about HDC concerns during expressed attendees from occurred representative that a issues with flooding along Library, College Manawatu the t of meeting a attended to invited were Staff However,all of issuesthese have since beenresolved canal andis the fullyoperational. issues. issues The identified include: Purcell of length full the and drain the of inspection along full a completed have flooding staff Drain, Street and Township, Foxton the off back Kings the along at occurring Canal overtopping in resulted which June in rainfall heavy the Following into the paddocks and the Fonterra from of water the request pump the to At used Kopane Drain No.3. were ponding. pumps tractor substantial two in landowner, resulting August in fell p Basin, Kopane the in property, Reesby’s At secureto itin place. over concreted and place in back lifted was pipe The property. his to in backflow to water allowing drain the into slumped had pipe culvert a property, Dawn’s on No.6, Drain Along discoveredduring the flooddamage inspections. has This since been repaired. on Scouring been have property, Duncan’s Willy within drains, scheme repaireddue to undermining and suffering structural damage during theJune event.flood cross that culverts Three f h cmn saos ok porme o prd vros riae hnes and channels drainage various upgrade to programme culvertsthis season. works seasons coming the of impactsand funding the around discussions progress to HDC the with held was meeting A ch the channelcapacity. of side the along completed work channel minor some and back addition In Arawhata. of out hadDebris caught that on vegetation overhanging recentduring the flood have beenpulled be could changes these require before would and consultation HDC and and Board Community investigationimplemented. the design both of significant support full the require schemes the of ch to unlikely upgrading be would this significant infrastructure of without capable and not magnitude is that scheme of current events the with dealing that explained HDC and Horizons both from staff pumpingundertaken during the June event. t damage and erosion bank slumpingand dumping of household rubbishPurcell in Street Drain; and build the Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering the right bank of Drain No. 1, which feeds into the Te Kawau Main Drain, was was Drain, MainKawau Te the into feeds which 1, No. Drain of bank right the -
up ofup sand in the invertof canal the fromNye Street throughto Union Street;
te ult uvr a te n o Prel tet s rsl of result a as Street Purcell of end the at culvert outlet the o
to the removal of the debris, a number of trees were also cut cut also were trees of number a debris, the of removal the to E
ange. Any changes to the level of service would service of level the to changes Any ange. he Foxton Community Board on 17 August, at August, 17 on Board Community Foxton he umping was carried out after significant rain significant after out carried was umping
looding that occurred during that event, that during occurred that looding
have identified several identified have annel to improve to annel
Page Page 151
Item 7 Item 7 12.1. 12. 11.1. 11. 10.41. 10.40. HIMATANGIDRAINAGE SCHEM September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River A ANNEXES AREAENGINEER EASTER Richard Apthorp
K Norman G Bennett MathewsT and N Tripe Lodge Blackfern Name
Schedule of Completed Works Completed of Works Schedule
last yearlast but deferred, is as shownthe in table below: 2015 the during approved grants of status One ENVIRONMENTAL GRANT WORK is members Trust the with relationship the on scheduled11 for September. work to continue to and options discuss outflow the Lake Koputara from and enhancetheto environment. lake A meetingfurther to t lake, the accessto improve tooptions investigate to agreed have staff members, Trust with meetings several After Koputara. Lake in level the lowered has it and lake the the between water of flow lakes, free the in resulted has channel new the While channel. new a construct to was solution tobest the that agreed was damage it teams, Environmental and Science significant in resulted have would lake existing channels existing the Accessing farms. surrounding on flooding surface causing and lakes the between flow the restricting Raupo, wasdrain newlink The and 382 Koputara the LakeKoputara andthe two of lowerlakes. representatives with met between drain link new a of construction havethe regarding concerns their discuss to Trust 383 staff weeks six last the Over hs s o a infcn dcso acrig o h Cucls oiy n infcne and Significance on Policy Council’s the to Engagement. according decision significant a not is This SIGNIFICANCE
new project was approved for Environmental Grants during the reporting period. The The period. reporting the during EnvironmentalGrants for approved was project new
the Trust members are concerned that this has impacted on their ability to access access to ability their on impacted has this that concerned are members Trust the River Mangahao Upper River Mangahao Upper Stream Mangatipona River Ongarue River
de eeain s atr icsin wt rpeettvs rm Horizons’ from representatives with discussions after so vegetation, edge
Type Work of N N protection Erosion protection Erosion control Grade stack. and up cut removal, Tree
constructed after the existing link channels had become blocked byblockedbecomehad channels constructedlinkexistingafterthe
E
Approved Date 17/7/2015 12/6/2015 30/4/2015 12/8/2015
- 16 year to date, together with those approved those with together date, to year 16 GROUP MANAGEROPERAT AllanCook
commence to Yet commence to Yet commence to Yet commence to Yet Status Work
Actual Estimated/ $7,360 $22,370 $15,440 $1,800 ($) Cost Works estimated estimated estimated estimated
IONS Grant of Value estimated $2,208 estimated$6,710 estimated$4,632 estimated $540
Page Page o restricto
152
LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER 2.1 km 2.9 km 3.0 km 9.0 km 12.0 km 12.0 29.6 km 35.0 km 38.8 km 39.5 km 39.5 km 49.0 km 61.2 km 65.0 km 66.0 km 66.0 km 83.0 km 8.5 SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER AREA CENTRAL 16 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River River Distance Distance River - September2015 99.0 km 99.0
km
(km)
R/B R/B L/B R/B R/B R/B R/B L/B R/B R/B L/B R/B R/B R/B L/B L/B R/B L/B L/B R/B Both River Bank(LB/RB)River
SCHEDULE OF COMPLETED WORKSSCHEDULEOF COMPLETED
JULY
Akers (Mangawhata) Akers Tocker Whitlock Whitelock Bend Fitzroy Various Foxton LIC (LIC) operation Co Improvement Livestock AFFCO RIVER OROUA Beach Foxton Wilson/Irvine Wilson/Irvine Cut Whirokino Pumps Pleuger and Diagonal Pump) (Diagonal Landcorp Marae Whakawehi Olsen Barber Parlato Parlato Kemps MANAWATU RIVER MANAWATU Property / Property Owner –
AUGUST 2015
Location
-
Ashhurst
Lagoon
-
Gravel extraction Gravel extraction Gravel seeding grass and Compost repairs Stopbank drain maintenance Groyne Checks Floodgate Inspection Boat Jet rope groynes wire Permeable bank Summer riprap Concrete repair Berm SB Lap Wave Lap Repair Wave flood Re Spraying Gorse Maintenance Stopbank Mulching Maintenance Floodgate Maintenance Floodgate cutting Willow Wand cutting Pole Willow Maintenance Floodgate Type of of WorkType - fencing after after fencing
repair and and repair
Repair
Quantity Page Page
5730 m3 5730 153 250 m3 90.5km 2280m 200 m 100m 200m 300m
75 m 30 m 20m 40m 20m 10m 75m 75m
400 100 1 1 1 8
Annex A Item 7 Annex A Item 7 LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER 17.0 km SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER 6.3 km 6.5 km 6.7 km 6.8 km Spillway SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER 7.4 10.0 km 8.9 km 20.7 km 20.7 km September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 2.9 km 4.3 km - 7.5 km 7.5
CH RB CH CH R/B L/B R/B L/B L/B R/B L/B R/B L/B R/B L/B R/B R/B L/B R/B R/B R/B L/B L/B L/B R/B
City Reach City Reach Bridge Ave Benmore Line Flygers Knight Various Kopane spillway Amey Saunders Road Kaimatarau Harnett Macaully Kuhne LIC Teague/Eagle/Joe Teague CREEK STONEY MANGAONE Simpson / Jurgen Simpson / Jurgen CREEK JACKS Road Council District Manawatu Awahuri Road Henderson Awahuri Road transport Stock Awahuri Road transport Stock 1) gate Slide Clare (Makino MAKINO Mc Klean Mc
–
Kawakawa Kawakawa
–
– –
-
damage monitoring damage channel Continued Mowing shaping Berm disposal and debris clearing maintenance, Floodgate seeding Grass debris flood Clearing Fencing Mulching Mulching removal Tree hole Fill scour extraction Gravel riprap Concrete Concrete Gravel extraction Gravel redistribution gravel with riprap Concrete blockage channel Remove blockages channel Remove riprap Concrete Repair Stopbank Repair Stopbank Repair Stopbank Repair Stopbank Inspection culvert CCTV
riprap
Macrocarpa trees Macrocarpa Large poplar tree Large Page Page 100 m (400t) 100 m 35 m (130t) 35 m 4124 m3 4124 m3 4124 13 large 13 large 154 100 m3 14.5km 200 m 500 m 500 m 55 m 65 m 60m 15m 50m 60m 70m 50m
2 1
9.1 km 9.3 km 9.7 km 9.8 km 10.0 km 10.6 km 11.0 km SCHEME STREAM KIWITEA LOWER SCHEME STREAM ASHHURST SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER SCHEME MANAWATU LOWER 16 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 1.9 km 2.0 km 8.8 km September2015
L/B R/B L/B R/B L/B L/B R/B R/B L/B R/B
ASHHURST RIVER TOKOMARU Gurines KARACREEK STREAM MANGAORE FLOODWAY MOUTOA Structure Floodway Apron Structure Floodway Structure Floodway GATES MOUTOA Road Hocken Road Hocken Road Kimbolton Williamson Road Wilkin Road Wilkin Road Wilkin Road Wilkin Road Kimbolton / Campion Wilkin Road Gorton /Gorton Hare KIWITEA
– – – –
–
– – Kimbolton Kimbolton Kimbolton Kimbolton Kimbolton
Makino Makino
Kimbolton Kimbolton Kimbolton –
-
MANGAPUKATEA –
clearing Floodgate Floodgates Check Repair Floodgate Floodgates Check floodgates all Check weeks Run gates removal Debris spraying and building of Maintenance General permeable groynes permeable rail and Rope groynes permeable rail and Rope Planting plus planting groynes permeable rail and Rope planting plus protection treebank Tied planting plus protection treebank Tied existing Willow of Layering planting plus protection treebank Tied planting plus protection treebank Tied planting plus protection treebank Tied Fencing
every 6 6 every
160m /255 ea 160m Page Page 60m /15 ea 60m /70 ea 75m /50 ea 90m 155 9 gates 30 ea 200m 250m 30m 60m 80m 20m
1 7 1 2 9
Annex A Item 7 Annex A Item 7 140 tokm 1.0 km 1.2km September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River
LB/RB L/B R/B
Scheme Reach Scheme Road Hocken Road Bailey
–
– Pharazyn Pharazyn
Kimbolton Kimbolton
blockages – clearance Channel groynes permeable rail and Rope protection treebank Tied
debris / tree /tree debris
Page Page 156 14.5km 188m 70m
18.80 16.00 13.70 NAME RIVER NAME SCHEME 59.30 48.20 45.50 41.20 40.00 35.00 35.00 22.30 16.70 14.90 8.25 2.80 2.15 2.15 2.00 NAME RIVER NAME SCHEME AREA NORTHERN September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 17.00 5.00 NAME RIVER NAME SCHEME 34.50 River Distance Distance River
(km)
RB RB LB LB LB RB RB LB RB LB LB LB RB RB LB RB LB RB RB RB RB
River BankRiver (LB/RB)
Roberts Malcolm OROUA POHANGINA Rutherfurd Carroll Ward Leamy RIVER POHANGINA POHANGINA Floodgates River Rangitikei Bull Thompson Marshall Pines Waituna Lovelock Rolston Aggregates Rangitikei Bulls Bridge O’Donell Whiskers McKelvie Floodgate Amon Ferry Scotts No 2 Floodgate No 1 RANGITIKEI SCHEME CONTROL RIVER RANGITIKEI Property / Property Owner
Floodgate
Location
–
–
Groynes
Groynes
- - OROUA SCHEME OROUA SCHEME OROUA
recover concrete recover concrete Beach clearing Pole planting Pole planting gate from rubble concrete remove floodgate Repair township water in out Pump outlet drain Clean outlet drain Clean Pole planting Pole planting work protection bank Live tree Pole Pole planting work protection bank Live tree all floodgates and clean Check inspection Boat Beach clearing Pole planting Pole planting Pole planting Beach clearing Pole planting Beach clearing drain clean Mechanical blocks Type of of WorkType
planting
–
–
Quantity 1060 poles 1060 1000 poles 1000 poles 1000 poles 1350 poles 1050 poles 1800 850 poles 850 700 poles 700 poles 750 poles 920 Page Page
1.5 ha 120 m 110 m 460 m 50 km 90 km 2 ha 2 ha 3 ha
X 2 X 157
Annex A Item 7 Annex A Item 7 244.80 RIVER UPPER WANGANUI NAME SCHEME NAME SCHEME NAME SCHEME NAME SCHEME 28.10 28.00 8.30 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River NAME SCHEME 244.80
LB RB RB LB RB LB
Hoggard Christie Upokongaro Jetty Upokongaro SCHEME MANAGEMENT RIVER WHANGANUI LOWER Development St Turaki Development St Turaki SCHEME MANAGEMENT RIVER UPPER WHANGANUI to Marton Top Bulls to Marton Bulls All Dams SCHEME CONTROL FLOOD TUTAENUI Structure Diversion All Dams 1.2 Dam 1.1 Dam 3.1 Dam 3.1 Dam 3.1 Dam 3.1 Dam SCHEME CONTROL FLOOD MATARAWA All Dams River Rangitikei Rata to SCHEME CONTROL FLOOD VALLEY POREWA Manville
River Mouth River
bridges silt from Remove inlet drain from trees Remove drain from back silt Remove – grill inlet Open up repairs Spillway Clean channel from trees Remove work protection bank Live tree work protection bank Live tree work protection bank Live tree residues Burn slash fence damaged flood Repair stopbank on weeds paste Cut and channel from trees fallen Remove channel from trees fallen Remove channel from metal Remove all dams inspect and Clean culvert off rubbish Clean all Dams inspect and Clean bridge silt from Remove
twice
and inspect and
–
twice
–
– twice twice
Page Page 250 m 100 m 300 m 30 m 40 m 35 m 20 m 75 m X 15 X 35 X 18 X 27 X 45 X X 1 X 4 X 4 X 158 3
10.70 NAME SCHEME 24.90 NAME RIVER NAME SCHEME September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River
LB LB RB LB LB LB
Kowhai Park Kowhai Jetty Upokongaro M Greene SCHEME CONTROL RIVER TURAKINA R Travers WHANGAEHU SCHEME WHANGAEHU Balgownie Park Kowhai
-
MANGAWHERO RIVER RIVER MANGAWHERO
Plant 175 willow Plant 175 Plant 825 Plant shrubs inspections Culvert breach to stopbank repairs Temporary access maintain to Heap silt
willows
Page Page 170 m 50 m 20 m 300 X 2 X 159
Annex A Item 7 Annex A Item 7 RIVER NAME: RIVER NAME: SCHEME 8.1 7.9 5.4 NAME: RIVER 5.9 NAME: RIVER SOUTHERN AREA SOUTHERN September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River River Distance Distance River 18.25 17.65
18.5 18.3 17.8 17.2 16.6 16.1 15.3 14.8 14.7 14.4 14.2 13.2 12.2 12.1 11.5 11.2 16 15 15 14 8
(km)
RB RB BOTH RB RB RB RB RB RB RB LB RB RB LB RB LB RB RB RB LB LB LB RB RB RB LB BOTH
River BankRiver (LB/RB) farm Gardner MacArley farm STREAM WAIKAWA Kay Farm STREAM MANAKAU Estate Ohau Estate Ohau Estate Ohau Senior Craddock Triplow Jacobs Webb Estates Levin Estates Levin Kilsby Estates Levin Kilsby Barries Barries Barries Kilsby Campbell Rowe Koot Bryant Bryant Ohau Dairies RIVER OHAU OHAU
-
MANAKAU
Property Property Owner
/ Location /
Repair and layering to to layering and Repair to TTW Repair layering Tree groynes Tree TTW existing Layer groynes Tree layered trees and constructed New TTW groynes Tree of to toe reinforcement and Repair of debris of removal and layering Tree Riprap Concrete Riprap Concrete blockage of Removal layering Tree Riprap Concrete in dug groynes new tree trees more holes replacing and TTW of Layering Riprap Concrete willows of Layering riprap repair to willows and of Layering riprap repair to willows and of Layering Riprap Concrete Concrete layering Tree layering Tree layering Tree layering Tree TTWexisting
stopbank
Riprap Type of of WorkType
large debris debris large
Quantity
Page Page 1200m 100m 300m 200m 400m 100m 300m 500m 500m 200m 300m
50m 50m 50m 20m 50m 50m 80m 20m 50m 20m 50m 20m 20m 160
SCHEME NAME: SCHEME NAME: SCHEME NAME: SCHEME NAME: SCHEME NAME: RIVER NAME: FOXTON SCHEME NAME: SCHEME NAME: SCHEME September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River
EAST DRAINAGE EAST Purcell St outlet outlet St Purcell Drain St Purcell Cannel Kings drain Arawhata DRAINAGE HOKIO Dixons Pumpstation Dixons Pumpstation Dixons Drain No3 Kopane No 6 Drain No 1 Drain KAWAU DRAINAGE TE Property Easton MOUTOA drain Aratangata Pumpstation No.2 Koputaroa DRAINAGE KOPUTAROA road Campbell Drain Aorangi Upper Drain Aorangi Upper Drain Aorangi Upper DRAINAGE MANAWATU Okuku Pumpstation Birnie Coombs Pumpstation Donnelly’s Pumpstation Boundary DRAINAGE MAKERUA DRAINAGE
Pumpstation -
WHIROKINO DRAINAGE WHIROKINO
Installation of new electrical electrical new of Installation cleaned Drain machine repaired slumping repaired Culvert headwalls replaced, way culverts Assess livestock dead and removed weed of quantities Large reinstalled pup Submersible wall chamber to back secured pump reinstalled pump Submersible drain of clean Machine Outlet repaired with rock rock with repaired Outlet cleaned Machine cleaned Machine trees of trimming and debris of Clearing repaired structure Outlet Overhauled Pump installed New electrics Pumping Tractor Culvert repairs scouring Bank to culvert Repair culvert floodgated new of Installation board switch/control
headwall
2* 900mm & 750mm 2* 900mm Page Page 4* 200m 1,100m 2 days 2 days 2.5km 600m 800m 100m 161 2
Annex A Item 7 Annex A Item 7 2.4km 1.8km /REACH: RIVER 50km 50km 48.4km 46.2km /REACH: RIVER 40.8km 38.6km 34.9km /REACH: RIVER 29.5km 29.5km 28km /REACH: RIVER 13.6km 12.5km 10.2km /REACH: RIVER 7.9km 6.3km 2.9km 1km 1km 0km /REACH: RIVER SCHEME MANGATAINOKA AREA EASTERN September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee and River 4.8 km 4.8 km 4.7 /REACH: RIVER SCHEME RUAHINES EASTERN SOUTH 4km River Distance Distance River - 4.9 km 4.9
(km)
Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage
LB LB Both (M1) Stream Raparapawai
RB RB RB Makakahi RB RB LB RB 6(UH) Reach River: Mangatainoka RB RB LB 5(UH) Reach River: Mangatainoka LB LB LB 4(MH) Reach River: Mangatainoka RB RB LB 2(MH) Reach River: Mangatainoka LB RB LB RB LB RB 1(LH) Reach River: Mangatainoka
River BankRiver (LB/RB)
–
TARARUA SCHEMES TARARUA
River (KL) River
Tui Farm Tui (Halls Rd) O'Brien Farm Bradley Angelini Docherty Burmeister Yates Burmeister Diamond Diamond Diamond Totaranui Totaranui Totaranui Oakley Oakley Long Carter Bells Rd Bengstons, Hutching Moore Rd Pukewhai at Taratahi Rd Pukewhai at Taratahi Rd Pukewhai at Taratahi McDonald Property / Property Owner
Location
PMUs & Shaping Channel Plant Willows Plant Willows Plant Willows Natives & Plant Willows Plant Willows Plant Willows Plant Natives Stop Bank repair Bank Stop riprap Concrete (E.W.) Shape Channel Plant Natives Plant Natives Plant Willows Plant Natives Willows Burn & Remove Plant Willows Plant Willows Natives Plant Plant Willows Natives & Plant Willows Stopbank Rebuild PMUs Channel Natives & Plant Willows Plant Willows Type of of WorkType Willows & Willows
Shaping & Shaping
Page Page Quantity 162 1500ea 2000ea
200 150ea 150ea 300ea 100ea 850ea 250ea 200ea 200ea 300ea 150ea 200ea 300ea 150ea 150ea 500m 160m 80 m 40ea 20ea 80 T 60m 60m
m
14.0km / REACH: RIVER 8.1km /REACH: RIVER 138.0km 135.7km /REACH: RIVER 130.5km / RIVER 117.8km 114.5km 114.2km 110.5km 110.5km /REACH: RIVER / UPPER MANAWATU 40 Drain 34 Drain /REACH: RIVER 14.5km /REACH: RIVER 8 km 4 /REACH: RIVER 2 km 1 km /REACH: RIVER 19 km 18.9 km 18.8 km 11.5 km 5 km 4 /REACH: RIVER 13.5 km 8.5 11 km 8.5 km /REACH: RIVER 9.8 km 8.1 km 6 1 /REACH: RIVER - - - - September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage and River 17 km 19.6 km 10 km 2 km - 13.5 km 13.5
REACH:
LB (M2) Reach 2 River: Mangahao LB (M1) Reach 1 River: Mangahao RB LB (U3) Reach 3 River: Manawatu LB (U2) Reach 2 River: Manawatu LB RB LB RB LB 1(U1) Reach River: and Mangahao Manawatu Channel Drainage Channel Drainage (DR) Drainage Both (M5) Streams Northern RB Both (M4) River Tamaki LB RB (M3) Stream Rokaiwhana LB RB LB RB LB Both Manga Both Both LB RB (M1) Stream Kumeti LB LB Both Both (M1) Stream Oruakeretaki LOWER MANGAHAO SCHEME MANGAHAO LOWER
- Atua (M2) Stream
Edwards Longfield Auroam Mabey Lyon/Johnston Johnston Bloor Boyden Various Bond Christianson Boyden Harding Brown S. Charmley Johnston various HRC various Philips Stephenson J. Walker Sinclair Castle Last Miller Parks K. Charmley B. Charmley Various Gimblett/Gunson
TBPW TBPW & rail Rope PMU Repair riprap Rock Clear Debris Diversion Clear Debris riprap rock riprap rock (E.W.) repair. TBPW (E.W.) TBPW Clear Debris(E.W.) Clear Debris(E.W.) Planting TBPW Planting Planting Planting Planting Planting Planting Planting Planting Clean Mechanical Clean Mechanical Clear Debris Gravel Extract (E.W.) Clear Debris Gravel Extract Gravel Extract
repair.
structure
Page Page 13.5 km 200 m3 200 m3 100 m3 13 km 300 T 130m 10 m 50 m 55 m 30 m 80 m 50 m 80 m 5 km 4 km 1 km 163 25 T 10 T 40m 30m 50m 300 200 400 300 400 300 600 50 50
Annex A Item 7 Annex A Item 7 Mangahao River Mangahao River Mangahao /REACH: RIVER GRANTS ENVIRONMENTAL 189.1km /REACH: RIVER SCHEME MANAWATU EASTERN September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee and River
Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) 01 (PRD Report Engineering Drainage
Both (EU) Upper Reach River: Manawatu Marima RB Marima LB Marima
Norman Bennett Barry
Planting + Rail and Rope + Planting TBPW Clear Channel
Page Page 164 24m 70m 60m
5.4 5.3 5.2 5.1 5. 4.2. 4.1. 4. 3.1. 3. 2. 1.1. PURPOSE SUSTAINABLE USE LAND September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable
h Mnsr fr rmr Idsre (P) a a e rl i fnig n oesen this overseeing and funding in role key activity a has (MPI) Industries Primary for Ministry The Consultation was carriedout through 2012 the COMMUNITYENGAGEMENT update does Membersaon number it of financial mattersassociated with SLUI. however report, this with associated impacts financial direct no are There FINANCIAL IMPACT a. That Committee the recommends thatCouncil: RECOMMENDATION committeemeeting). Use August Land 28 Sustainable2014 outcomesfrom to Council’s July 1 on period progress the for about (SLUI) Members Initiative update to is report This The2015 is This the firstyear of a fouryear contract until June 2019. througha contracted works programme which setstargets forplans and works completed. partn in delivered is Hill SLUI Government’s Central from funded is erosion, CountryErosion Fund (HCEF), Horizons’ rates and country contributions.farmer hill targeting initiative, The Use Land Sustainable The BACKGROUND
receivesinformation the contained in
- 19contract targetshave
- last the of time the at available werenot figure all as yearfinancial15
INITIATIVE (SLUI) ership with the HCEF and Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) Industries Primary for Ministry and HCEF the with ership
Initiative (SLUI) has been in operation in our region since 2006.since region our in operation in been has Initiative(SLUI)
yet be to agreed with MPI. ReportNo. 15
- 22Long
Information Only Information Report No. 2015 (NB, this report will give final final give will report this (NB, 2015 - - TermPlan submission process. 183
andAnnexes.
-
No Decision Required No Decision
Page Page 15 - 183
165
Item 8 Item 8 6. Thesuggested contract targetsare shown table in 1 September16 2015 Catchment (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable
by mapped WFPs of year,while Maps 1 and2 (appended) refer to the progresson area development. WFP the shows 1 Graph completed. been have maps final the until toward progress summarises 2 Table plans. possisnot it 62 as developmentplanbyWFP mapped has Ltd LandVision mapped. 2014 The WholeFarm Plan Development REPORTPROGRESSON Notes Other non retirement (ha) non retirement Other (ha) planting by protected pole Area space planted (no.) Poles (ha)Managed Retirement (ha) Retirement Riparian (ha) Retirement (ha) Afforestation (ha) mapped incatchments target Area area mapped (ha) WFP (no.) Completed WFP Table to FarmAugustTable 2:Plan 28 Development Whole 2015 Table 1: Contract Cumulative * Cumulative * Delivered Plans * Completed Plans Mapped * Farms
Operations Committee :
*4 Cumulative total Cumulative of *4 completed WFPs delivered landowner ( to and presented Plans *3 plans of Number *2 completed,financial,including mapping, document, and enteredphysical HRC into *1 Contract Target Contract Number of farms of physicallyNumber (the these mapped of majority contracted to are LandVision Ltd). 1 of SLUI SLUI of having completed).1 been system. tracking -
5 agt o cmltn Woe am ln (F) a 3,0 hectares 35,000 was (WFP) Plans Farm Whole completing for target 15 4
1 3
Targets 2
Contract 1 Contract
2006 289 289 289 289
- 10
Whole FarmPlan DevelopmentWhole
2014 2010 536 247 247 247
- 15 variation contract
- 14 2 Contract
ible to accurately calculate the area of theoffarms accuratelyarea to ible the calculate 20,000 26,250 35,000
1000 100 670 100 400 200 n/a
this signals implementation Stage signals process this of start and
2014
583
39 47 62
-
15
Proposed Proposed 2015 Contract 3 Contract 2015 583 18,750 25,000 0 0 0
n/a - 16
- Page Page 16
166
6 6.2. 6.1. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable .3.
ln ae ihn hs cthet. hs os o ma te ln otie h priority the outside plans the mean not does This (80%) 10 catchments. the of these 8 within date are To areas. plans catchment priority the within undertaken be will area, ma our of 75% that states Industries Primary for Ministry with contract The (32%of the hectare target). 2015 for list priority The priorit manage to spreadsheet A year1:byGraph NB: mapped Area reflects WFPs line area of annual Red (hectares). target indication of how successful the programme is in getting completed plans delivered to to nextplanting season. delivered plans completed getting an availablare finances in when either give start will agreed.Works and isdiscussed to clients, programme aims table the with This successful plans. plans how completed of their recently indication from of uptake the list at full looks 3 a Table receive to about are Staff so. instructionsto update each plan’sstatus or year re is landowner every the and contacted reviewed are time some for active been haven’t or active been deliver plans all reviewing continually are We area on based now is target of planuptake orimplementation. indication an give The to presented are below target. tables The plans. plan of number not completion, the against originally production, plan is emphasis the 2 major Table In the programme. planting complete pole a complete to to longer years and works SLUI five The least at taking WFP. implementation the on of budgets programme completion following year the begins generally Implementation Implementation catchmentnotdo have priorityland within them.
- 16 WFPs currently has 10 plans covering approximately 8,159 ha 8,159 approximately covering plans 10 has currently WFPs 16
y assessment is continually updated for proposed WFPs. WFPs. proposed for updated continually is assessment y .
ed to landowners and those who have never never have who those and landowners to ed
pping effort, by effort, pping
e or at the at or e Page Page 167
on on -
Item 8 Item 8 6.5. 6.4. September16 2015 Catchment (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable
15 financialyear. 2014 the for (MPI) Industries Primary for Ministry the with contracted work of Completion Incentivesand Works recorded then is This available. grant the for againstthe Incentives claim and pro Works a make landowners help the inspect and will staff work completed been has work the Once works. on the do will advice who and how give to landowners visit he work, for needs willtechnical and location staff begin, programmes implementation Once Notes Table 3:Progress toImplementation August 2015 28 Table againstContract;Table 4: Targets Progress 2014 MPI % Plans Doing Plans % Works Doing Plans Works Completed Plans Governance reports Governance reports and meetings MPI to Reports reports to Internal council works (ha) non retirement Other by protected pole Area (ha) planting planted (#) Poles Managed retirement Riparian / (ha) Wetland (ha) Retirement (ha) Afforestation (ha) mapped incatchments target Area area mapped (ha) WFP
Operations Committee :
are as follows;are Targets requirements. contractual no are there but measures these for set been have targets Internal retirement (ha)retirement Contract Target Contract Measure
- - - -
following January 1 following October 1 July1 following year the followingtheIn plan being completed works”the plans% “doing
(bimonthly)
Implementation of Plans by of Implementation Completion of Year
–
50% doing works – –
2013 Target 90% doing works90% doing works75% doing gramme as shownTable 4. in At June 30 20,000 26,250 35,000 1,000 - 96% 14 Plans 100 670 100 400 200 53 55 lp assess costs and agree on grant rates and on and rates grant on agree and costs assess lp na
3 5
-
15 Actual
24,370 32,463 35,174
1,375 717 133 409 619
0 3 5 3 at 28 Aug 28 2015 at
2014 No meetings No Mettarget Ops Committee,Catch mettarget target not meet Did 3% 107% target Exceeded 124% target Exceeded 133% target Exceeded 102% target Exceeded 310% target Exceeded 138% target Exceeded 124% target Exceeded Met100% target - 48% 15 Plans 30 62
Comment
2015
To date To will be
- 16 Plans 0 0 0
Page Page
168 -
6.8. 6.7. 6.6. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable
treated hectares and cost summarisedare in Table 6. types, work projectsThe $76,463. implementation of individual cost 16grant a the had 2015have completed August 28 to year financial new the For retirementand by number were space and gull 2013 to compared cost grant by 2014 in workscompleted for Claims projects implementation individual 370 the 2015 summarisedare in June Table 5. 30 to treatedand hectares cost types, work$1,285,050. ofThe cost grant a havehad completed year financial the For Incentivesand Works (GrantProjects and CouncilFunded Projects) Thebreakdown ofwork completedby type and grantare Table 6: 1 Types Grants July Work and 2015 Table 5: Types Work and Managed retirement Sediment / Wetland trap retirement Riparian Retirement Afforestation Grand Total Grand Other & earthworksStructures Gully Planting planting Space Managed retirement Sediment / Wetland trap retirement Riparian Retirement Afforestation Total Grand Other & earthworksStructures Gully Planting planting Space
Work Type Work Type Work
Grants 1 1 Grants July 2014 Number of Number of Number Claims Claims 370 159
11 32 14 98 30 18 16
1 2 3 1 0 6 3 0 1 7
- 14. The bulk of claims by dollar value were for riparian for were value dollar by claims of bulk The 14. Total Cost Cost ($) Total To - 15 were are approximately 133% by number and 99%and number by approximately133% are were 15 3,946,147 1,391,707 1,473,374 tal Cost Cost tal ($) 315,275 135,287 380,368 153,722 70,686 12,000 84,030 83,421 19,028 47,461 78,091 3,705 4,808 – – 630
30 June 2015 28 August 2015
yplanting of poles.
Grant Paid Grant Paid ($) Grant Paid
1,285,050 127,217 721,536 172,254 20,087 41,500 30,275 72,858 93,324 76,463 23,333 39,045 6,000 1,853 2,404 9,514
315
shownGraphs in 2 and 3.
($)
Grant Rate Grant Rate Grant Rate Grant Rate Average (%) Average (%) 33 28 50 49 40 36 54 52 45 50 50 50 50 50 49 50 6
– –
Treated (Ha) Treated Treated (Ha) Treated Hectares Hectares Hectares Hectares Page Page
3,255 1,375 169 126 591 133 372 619 0.1 37
3
Item 8 Item 8 September16 2015 Catchment (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable MapCannexed this to report shows proposed the worksagainst works to date. 2:Graph 2015 Area completed in SLUI of works Graph 3: Cost of SLUI 3: SLUI Graph 2015 of completed Cost works in Operations Committee
- - 16 16
Page Page 170
MANAGER Grant 7.1. 7. 6.16. 6.15. 6.14. 6.13. 6.12. 6.11. 6.10. 6.9. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFI LeanneMacdonald
Cooper lre lm a Uiu opst te odri sup hs en h cue f some of cause the been has slump) road/rail the (opposite Utiku wi latelydiscussion at slump large A of sets Five informationwere delivered discussed.to prospective clients. WFP programmes work and the farmers to in delivered were plans forests SLUI Six to damage inspecting Goodhew) (Jo meeting Forestry Whanganui second are of The plantings. Minister to the damage included for assistance Horizons around discussion to achievedbu date, had SLUI work the of supportive were five farmers with These (Mangamahu) present. Polsonsfarmers SLUI at one meetings, flood specific SLUI two the attended Staff to submit to potential issues. the review with to funding be along and Envirolink cost the on literature for apply outlined to undertook was Horizons Strategy. Pest works forthcoming control erosion and th in vegetation on having were they impact the and goats feral of issue the discuss to Council District Wanganui at workshop a attended Manager Protection Habitat and Biosecurity and Manager Land The August.21on 20 August 8 on MPI to sent was report SLUI final The planting correct of demonstration and site technique. on poles out laying with assist staff will clients had new have or arranged contractors had have will gr planting, on with had assistance haveor advicewill many clients, place. SLUI takes to planting distributed tree been ashave polesstaff 25,000 for Over one busy very a is September to June period The Activityand Contract Management amount total of grantallocate the year this date To landowner. the by made be must applications where grant, $20,000 over works any for system allocation and approvalcentralised a isthere addition In clients. to which in allocation grant a have Staff and Significance on Policy Council’s the to Engagement. according decision significant a not is This SIGNIFICANCE Thecontract deliverto over theWFP next years four has gone outto tender to sites monitoring and survey coll up set have Horizons and University Massey farmer, the outleta suitable,safe was outcomeof any lack stageThe is aboutthis for drain. concern at ect moreect information theon rate of movement. –
LAND
t had significant damage to unplanted and newly planted areas. There was some was There areas. planted newly and unplanted to damage significant had t
a.
CER th the landowner keen to drain a wetland at the top of the slump. There slump. the of top the at wetland a drain to keen landowner the th
e Whanganui catchment. The impact that goats have on SLUI on have goats that impact The catchment. Whanganui e
nefits of goat control, in terms of environmental and economic and environmental of terms in control, goat of nefits d hasbeen $1.020 Ma of poolout of $1.560 M.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGE GROUP MANAGER MitchellCraig
aae niiul ok rgams ih their with programmes work individual manage
15, with the final payment received payment final the with 15,
MENT
Page Page ound 171
Item 8 Item 8 D C B A ANNEXES September16 2015 Catchment (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable
SLUI Works Tracking SLUI Works Land Priority Mapped SLUI Progress Plan and SLUI Overview Parcels SLUI Target
Operations Committee
Page Page 172
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable
Page Page 173
Annex A Item 8 Annex B Item 8 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable
Page Page 174
September16 2015 Catchment (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable Operations Committee
Page Page 175
Annex C Item 8 Annex D Item 8 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee (SLUI) Initiative Use Land Sustainable
Page Page 176
6. 5.1. 5. 4.1. 4. 3. 2.1. 2. 1.1. 1. WHANGANUI CATCHMENT September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Whanganui Land improvement(hectares Land protected) farm new withEstablish on nurseries pole WRET DemonstrationFarm FieldRun Day progress toComplete reports (2015 WRET Annual Reportto Complete (2014 WRET agreedprojects Grant farm /plans WCS completed delivered
COMMUNITYENGAGEMENT There isno FINANCIAL IMPACT a. That Committee the recommends thatCouncil: RECOMMENDATION F quality. address RiverEnhancement Trust (WRET)is managed to assist programme.this water to downstream aims affect strategy that the spots’ Ultimately ‘hot erosion to area. aim the and in catchments programme River incentive Whanganui an upper to prioritise the on relates focus project which 1997 (WCS) in introduced Strategy Catchment Whanganui The EXECUTIVESUMMARY period the 1 July August 28 to 2015. for Strategy Catchment Whanganui the on progress on members update to is report This PURPOSE OUTPUTS is This a public item and thereforeCouncil may deem sufficientthis to inform the public.
Catchment Strategy Catchment receivesinformation the contained in
MEASURE
financialimpact associated with recommendationsin paper.this
STRATEGY
- 15)
- 16)
1 31 0 1 0 0 1 0 ReportNo. 15 st
REPORTING PERIOD
2 nd
Information Only Information Report No.
3 - rd
184
.
nig rm h Whanganui the from unding
4 th
-
No Decision Required No Decision t ‘taey activities ‘strategy’ its ACTUAL YTD 31 0 1 0 0 1 0
TARGET 150
25 2 1 2 1 2 Page Page 15
- 184
177
100 124 50 %
0 0 0 0
Item 9 Item 9 7.12. Implementation 7.11. 7.10. 7.9. Implementation: 7.8. 7.7. 7.6. 7.5. 7.4. 7.3. 7.2. 7.1. Activity: 7. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Strategy Catchment Whanganui 7.14. PlanOne Implementation: 7.13.
The2015 Ministerspresentation on theRegional Growth Study. Sustainable Taumarunui the attended Staff wetlandretirements, these programmeswill WCSbe and funded.WRET and riparian in planting native and programmes planting pole coordinating been have Staff works winter the and damage programme less much suffered Pipiriki) (above catchment upper The Whangaehu and Whanganui the in majority the catchments. possible Where twoattended staff each meeting. meetings, flood seven attended Staff land. pri and public both on infrastructure damaged have trees and debris slip where issues inspected and up clean flood with assisted meetings, Support Rural of number a attended Staff confirms withthis theworstreport erosion confined toa thin bandup to 20 inland. science km GNS The Wanganui. around and area river the in damage erosion severe r The - - - were:15 work Egrant some as figures year of end the all include not did report Operations Catchment June The DISCUSSION n Pa ipeetto cnius ih eeain laac ad at disturbance earth and clearance vegetation with consentsissued. More continues implementation Plan One be will nursery Woodville Horizons’ plantedin September. from material and completed been has site new the spring this continue will nurseries farm supported WRET of establishment The producedReport outliningfor fundWRET shared programmesworks in the WCS. 10 the on held was AGM WRET The was 3,020. plus winter this area this in poles for Demand nurseries. private and Horizons of variety ($53,000) a from sold poles 855 with completed been WRET has area Ruapehu the in material nursery of Harvest and $50,000) (allocated theOf 31 grantsapproved Horizons between demonstration costs.farm shared are projects$170,710These of and have$69,875.costs cost grant of total funding grant a The Managementreceivedhas and approved Environment31
Total cost grant of $75,638 of which will WRET invoicedbe budget$58,753, $50,000. 191of ha works achieved, target250; projects49 approved, target 25;
have respondedadvice requests 29 for to holderssmall block from around Wanganui, ecent flood event has been a major issue for the lower Whanganui catchment with catchment Whanganui lower the for issue major a been has event flood ecent
- (WRET):
16Operational Plan was completedand ispresentedto Council in thisagenda.
for for staff has beenbasically business as usual.
programmesbeenenteredhad system. not intothe The finalfigures 2014 for
detailisprovided the in Regional and Coast report.
no claimsno have beencompleted date.to
th
September, staff attended and spoke to the Annual the to spoke and attended staff September,
ad aaeet ru meig n the and meeting Group Management Land
alapplicationsGrant 2015 for
. Fencing of Fencing .
Page Page vate - 178 16.
-
There are no attachments for this report. this report. for attachments are no There ANNEXES CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFI LeanneMacdonald MANAGER CooperGrant 8.1. 8. Other: September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Whanganui
and Significance on Policy Council’s the to Engagement. according decision significant a not is This SIGNIFICANCE
Catchment Strategy Catchment –
LAND
CER
ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP MANAGER MitchellCraig
MANAGEMENT
Page Page 179
Item 9
8.1. 8. 7.1. 7. 6.1. 6. 5.1. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. WHANGANUI CATCHMENT September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFI LeanneMacdonald MANAGERLAND CooperGrant
COMMUNITYENGAGEMENT annual Council’s of part as approved budgets endorsed planningand long termplanning processes. previously reflect item this in referred plansoperational The item. this with associated impacts financial no are There FINANCIAL IMPACT b. a. That Committee the recommends thatCouncil: RECOMMENDATION draft this on iteration for formaladoption at a future Strategyand Policy meeting. feedback and comment seeking are Management Plan2015 for Operational Strategy Catchment Whanganui draft the members, to present to is item This PURPOSE This is This not a significant decision according to the Council’sPolicy Significance.on SIGNIFICANCE Strategyand Policy meetingand then released to public. the Plan, Operational This NEXTSTEPS the of via Council’swebsite they as are formallyreleased. aspects budgetary community the to available made on be will Copies processes. planning term long the commentduring to opportunity the Plan Operational had have community The
Strategy OperationalPlan 2015 for that recommends receivesinformation the contained in
-
16.
referred to in this item as part of the engagement and submissions run submissions and engagement the of part as item this in to referred CER
with amendments, will be presented for formal adoption at a future a at adoption formal for presented be will amendments, with oni fral aot n rlae h Wagni Catchment Whanganui the release and adopt formally Council STRATEGY OPERATIONAL
GROUP MANAGERENVIRO MitchellCraig
- 16,with amendments,as annexed to thisitem. ReportNo. 15
-
16
Information Only Information Report No.
- 185
PLAN 2015 PLAN NMENTAL MANAGEMENT
andAnnex. -
No plan to inform the final final the inform to plan
Decision Required Decision - 16
Page Page 15 - 185
181
to
Item 10 Item 10 A ANNEXES September16 2015 Catchment Operations Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
Whanganui Catchment Strategy Operational Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
Committee
- 16
- 16
Page Page 182
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 183
Annex A Item 10 Annex A Item 10 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 184
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 185
Annex A Item 10 Annex A Item 10 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 186
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 187
Annex A Item 10 Annex A Item 10 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 188
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 189
Annex A Item 10 Annex A Item 10 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 190
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 191
Annex A Item 10 Annex A Item 10 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 192
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 193
Annex A Item 10 Annex A Item 10 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 194
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 195
Annex A Item 10 Annex A Item 10 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 196
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 197
Annex A Item 10 Annex A Item 10 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 198
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 199
Annex A Item 10 Annex A Item 10 September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Strategy Operational Catchment Whanganui
- 16
Page Page 200
5. 4.1. 4. 3.1. 3. 2. 1.1. 1. ANDREGIONAL L COAST September16 2015 Catchment Operations Land and Coast Regional Land improvement(hectares Land protected) plans) Plan ImplementationOne (forest Plan ImplementationOne (in field consents) for and bulking trial provide sites new clones technical supporttoProvide ResearchTrust P&W to Source winter produced 2015) produceManageto HRC poles nurseries (poles poplar partnerships industry Other supported complete annual to programme and Ballance Fund support FarmEnvironmentAwards PoplarFund and Trust Willow SOE Soil programmeImplement projects grant Environmental EnvironmentalProduce Farm Plans plans soil Produce health health workshops Soil
OUTPUTS is This a public item and thereforeCouncil may deem sufficientthis to inform the public. COMMUNITYENGAGEMENT There isno financialimpact associated with recommendationsin paper.this FINANCIAL IMPACT a. That Committee the recommends thatCouncil: RECOMMENDATION activities1 Julyfrom 28to August2015. update to is report This PURPOSE additional poplar polesadditional poplar (poles sourced)
receivesinformation the contained in
MEASURE
Committee
sediment control
AND
members of the progress on Council’s Regional Land and Coast and Land Regional Council’s on progress the of members
ReportNo. 15 1 34 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 st
REPORTING PERIOD
Information Only Information Report No. 2 nd
-
186 3 rd
.
4 -
th
No Decision Required No Decision
ACTUAL YTD 34 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TARGET
Page Page 13,000 14,000 15 150 NA NA 50 1 2 1 1 1 5 2 2 - 186
201
68 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Item 11 Item 11 6.7. 6.6. 6.5. 6.4. IndustryPartnerships 6.3. Implementation 6.2. 6.1. Activity: 6. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Land and Coast Regional 6.9. 6.8. Nursery:
No claimshave been completed. Theprojects34 approved to date inc sources.appropriate funding more as Biodiversity Freshwaterteams and the to transferred be may Someprojects $68,439. of cost grant a and $259,868 of cost total a with approved a seen has Land) (Regional group activity This the riverand appears to mitigatingbe any runoff at stage.this and area feed the between buffer large the a created has in year last completed fencing cattle riparian of grazing winter the on eye an kept have Staff - - - - were:15 into entered been not had programmes E work some grant as figures year of end all include not did report Operations Catchment June The DISCUSSION rud ,0. vrl tee hne hv be mngd hog us n do and ups through managed been various suppliersnumbers. have changes these of Overall orders new by offset 1,000. poles, around 2,500 around of cancellation the to lead event storm The nurseries. bu to either pole harvestThe iscomplete. Asusual this for time ofyear we have enquiries late forpoles identifyways liftto productivity thesheepof and beef sector within the region. has group This Workshop”. Beef and Sector Sheep Project, Productivity “Land the in involved been has Manager Land The appearing relating tothe Horizonsprogramme over June and July. this carries Trust NZFE The time. over articles media track to is sponsorship for value tracking of way One Ajudges upskilling workshop isplanned for30 forthe financialyear. Entries areopen for2015 is programme (BFEA) Awards Environment Farm Ballance The
607 hoursof in field OnePlan and Forestry staff time. Total cost grant of $60,056; 171of ha works completed; projects48 approved; 23 space23 planting. 2 afforestationLUCon Class land; 7 4 riparian retirement; 5 bush retirement forerosion control;
:
y or sell but we are relatively happy with the way the harvest went at our own own our at went harvest the way the with happy relatively are we but sell or y
:
u o a ainl ai bt o rgoal. hr wr n articles no were There regionally. not but basis national a on out
lude: been tasked by the Minister of Primary Industries to to Industries Primary of Minister the by tasked been
th -
16. September. oa o 3 Evrnetl rn projects Grant Environmental 34 of total
the system. The final figures for 2014 for figures final The system. the
upper Rangitikei. The SLUI The Rangitikei. upper underway on a new cycle new a on underway
Page Page wns in in wns 202 -
6.14. 6.13. PlanOne Implementation: 6.12. Training: 6.11. Adviceand Information: 6.10. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Land and Coast Regional
Sixhave staff totalled20 hours work on OnePlan i Staffattended a number workshops of and trainingopportunities: planting,and have completedsix claims grant for Biodiversityand Freshwater. ripari on advice givelandowners haveto visited eight Staff Approximately completion. nearing be 28,000 poleswere delivered year.this should planting and complete are deliveries Pole Totalconsents issued to aredate recordedby type and area: Total degrees >20 disturbance Land degrees 20 < disturbance Land degrees > 20 Cultivation clearance Vegetation ......
A dairy conversion operation was inspected, existing tracking was being upgraded. being was tracking existing inspected, was operation conversion dairy A was required; consentnoconsequently and proposal the to changes some resultedinspection One use land andconsent no was required; afforestation, th discussion site for on out the During carry waterbody. to purchased a within proposing work was been contractor the and has tracking for property required were consents the where farm One Twoassessments odour outcarried on behalf of compliance at Wanganui. FoxtonBeach carpark; regarding Council District Horowhenua to Advice Five forestryinspections werecompleted; Discussionwith Policyoverproposed the NES Plantation for Forestry; and “maintenance”and a consent was issued; landowner the Both
Consent Type Consent Two staff membersattended an OverseerNloss workshop organisedby Horizons. Forestry Farm Districts Middle Earnslawwith One harvestbeginning on their East the Coast (Weber) forests; attended staff Three Course; Management Nutrient Advanced the for exams his completed has Todd Malcolm SLUI the on Policy to Land programme;work from presentation a with up followed Team, Advice presenta implementation Plan One and Overseer an Internally
Committee
otatr ee oiid ht hs a mr than more was this that notified were contractor WCS Area WCS
6 3 0 0 3
Location
mplementation year.this includes: This
Regional and Regional Coast Coast ad ul u o te e wl at wall sea the on up build sand an fencing, soil erosion and pole and erosionsoil fencing, an 1 1 0 0 0
Area e work plan was changed was plan work e
il dy otd by hosted day field tion from the Rural the from tion
Total
7 4 0 0 3
Page Page
203
Item 11 Item 11 There are no attachments for this report. this report. for attachments are no There ANNEXES CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER LeanneMacdonald MANAGEMENT GROUP MANAGERENVIRONMENTAL MitchellCraig 7.1. 7. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Land and Coast Regional
hs s o a infcn dcso acrig o h Cucls oiy on Policy Council’s the to Engagement. according decision significant a not is This SIGNIFICANCE
MANAGER CooperGrant -
LAND
infcne and Significance Page Page 204
MANAGERLAND CooperGrant 8.1. 8. 7.1. 7. 6.1. 6. 5.1. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. ANDREGIONAL CO LAND September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFI LeanneMacdonald GROUP MANAGERENVIRO MitchellCraig
The community have had the opportunity to comment on budgetary aspects of the the of aspects budgetary community the to available made on be will Copies processes. planning term long the during comment to opportunity the Plans Operational had have community The COMMUNITYENGAGEMENT annual Council’s of part as approved budgets endorsed planningand long termplanning processes. previously reflect item this in referred plansoperational The item. this with associated impacts financial no are There FINANCIAL IMPACT a. That Committee the recommends thatCouncil: RECOMMENDATION final the inform to plan draft this on iteration for formaladoption at a future Strategyand Policy meeti feedback and comment seeking are Management for2015 Plan Operational Coastal and Land Regional draft the members, to present to is item This PURPOSE This is This not a significant decision according to the Council’sPolicy Significance.on SIGNIFICANCE Strategyand Policy meetingand then released to public. the Plan, Operational This NEXTSTEPS via Council’swebsite they as are formallyreleased.
receivesinformation the contained in
- 16.
CER
referred to in this item as part of the engagement and submissions run submissions and engagement the of part as item this in to referred
NMENTAL MANAGEMENT
with amendments, will be presented for formal adoption at a future a at adoption formal for presented be will amendments, with ASTAL OPERATIONALPL
- 16
ReportNo.
Information Only Information Report No.
15 AN 2015 - 187
andAnnex. - ng. 16 -
No Decision Required No Decision
Page Page 15 -
187
205
to
Item 12 Item 12 A ANNEXES September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
Regional Land and Coastal Operational Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
- 16
Page Page 206
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 207
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 208
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 209
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 210
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 211
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 212
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 213
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 214
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 215
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 216
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 217
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 218
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 21 9
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 220
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 221
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 222
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 223
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 224
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 225
Annex A Item 12 Annex A Item 12 16 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional September2015
- 16
Page Page 226
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Plan 2015 Operational Coastal and Land Regional
- 16
Page Page 227
Annex A Item 12
5.3. 5.2. 5.1. 5. 4.1. 4. 3.1. 3. 2. 1.1. 1. SUSTAINABLE USE LAND CLIMATECHANGE IMPAC September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Sustainable the from Outcomes Quality (SLUI) Initiative Water on Impacts Change Climate 5.4.
cec porme netgtn te ik ewe te ciiy f LI o drs hill address to SLUI active of an activity had the has between link Horizons the programme investigating SLUI programme the science of implementation the Throughout BACKGROUND is This a public item and thereforeCouncil may deem sufficientthis to inform the public. COMMUNITYENGAGEMENT this of component Research Landcare The paper. this researchwas fundedvia successful a ap of impact financial no is There FINANCIAL IMPACT a. That Committee the recommends thatCouncil: RECOMMENDATION SLUI of effectiveness the of modelling further around council consideringthe potential impactsof climate change. inform to is report This PURPOSE 5% as the impacts of climate change increased from minor to major (Figure 1). The The 1). (Figure majorRegion the are shown in Figure2. to minor se from in change increased percentage the change for predictions climate of impacts the as or 5% 12% 19%, to reduce would improvements the predicted and 3 scenario for major) and thr of impact the investigated project This beenmade available councillors to theon Hub. has Dymond2015) and (Manderson report resultant The modelling. earlier the on building climat the complete 2014 the Over that forestry of amount couldcompleted be annually the partas a of SLUI. in Industry Primary of Ministry the by limit contractual no and sc grants Afforestation no being there year, per completed being Plans ofFarm Whole ha 35,000 modelled 3 Scenario 2014). al. et (Dymond 2043 by loads sediment river in SL 2013 Manawatu In the from data measurement sediment region. term long to calibration refined been progressively has work throu This outcomes. quality water and erosion country
UI and the most likely scenario (referred to as scenario 3) predicted a 31% improvementlikelypredictedscenarioa 31% scenario(referred 3) most as and to UI the receivesinformation the contained in h eeomn o te eNt oe fr e Zaad odtos including conditions, Zealand New for model SedNet the of development gh
- 14 modelling was completed investigating five scenarios for the continuation of of continuation the for scenarios five investigating completed was modelling 14
- 5 iaca ya, adae eerh a cnrce va nioik to EnviroLink via contracted was Research Landcare year, financial 15
e change scenario modellingconsidering impacts the of climatechange
TS ON WATERTS QUALITY INITIATIVE (SLUI)
plication to theEnvirolink fund. ReportNo. 15 e lmt cag seais mnr moderate (minor, scenarios change climate ee diment loads for water management zones in zones management water for loads diment
Information Only Information Report No.
OUTCOMES FROMTHE OUTCOMES - 188
.
- Land Use Use Land
No Decision Required No Decision
- Whanganui Whanganui
Page Page 15 - heme 188
229
Item 13 Item 13 therefore biased by the storm event in that year. that in event storm the by biased therefore long pre it as used is 2004 Note date. start a as 2004 using scenarios management SLUI with scenarios change climate of Comparison 1: Figure September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Use Land Sustainable the from Outcomes Quality (SLUI) Initiative Water on Impacts Change Climate - term averages rather than annualised results for any one year and the result for 2004 in SedNet is not not is SedNet in 2004 for result the and year one any for results annualised than rather averages term
- dates SLUI, while 2004 experienced a experienced 2004 while SLUI, dates
major storm event SedNet presents presents SedNet event storm major Page Page 230
September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Sustainable the from Outcomes Quality (SLUI) Initiative Water on Impacts Change Climate baseline. the as #3 SLUI scenario 2014, et al, (Dymond scenarios climate change yie sediment projected baseline from change Percent 2: Figure
ld by water management zone for the three three the for zone management water by ld
Land Use Use Land
Page Page 231
Item 13 Item 13 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFI LeanneMacdonald GROUP MANAGERENVIRO MitchellCraig FRESHWATER&SCIENCE RoygardJon 6.1. 6. 5.6. 5.5. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Use Land Sustainable the from Outcomes Quality (SLUI) Initiative Water on Impacts Change Climate this report. for attachments are no There ANNEXES
non porme o eie n ue h Sde mdl s eomne t further to recommended is model SedNet the use improveusefulness its in informingdecisions and around the implementation of SLUI. refine to programme sediongoing on SLUI of the impact the of to available relation in science predicted the are that on trends basedgeneral councillors inform to of is modelling range this a of on intention reliant is outcomes SLUI The future. the into region the of in works of placement the and of amount modelling including assumptions that the however ways model, the the in refine to recommendation further a provides years several over made pointsbeen have effortsConsiderable refined. be can model SedNetNZ bullet the of last The . . . . . potentialclimate change effects. Key to relation in programme SLUI the adjusting around suggestions provided also report The hs s o a infcn dcso acrig o h Council the to Engagement. according decision significant a not is This SIGNIFICANCE
adcp cmiain i te Manawatu respective triggerlevels. the in literatur combinations the landscape from taken mm 150 of being report value a used report This the region. Horizons the for triggers magnitude storm Identifying of time the at available not completed. were Zealand New for assessment 5 (IPCC this to update an on latest the from drawn are 4 (IPCC information scenarios available change climate representative The available. Furthermodellingclimate of im change levelprotection of against erosion. greater a provide methods these as regeneration natural and retirement land as such long promote that work of types in investment Increased Consideradopting more intensivemanagement SLUI scenar in increasessedimentload underclimate change. A ranked list beenhas provided highest for thispurpose. and rates yield sediment highest the with zones of Prioritisation
CER
MANAGER NMENTAL MANAGEMENT
th
th
assessment),
assessment). It is understood that work is underway underway is work that understood is It assessment). suggestionsincluded:
ad cnwegs ht h dfeet climate different the that acknowledges and e pactsisrecommended when information is new - hnau rgo wl hv ter own their have will region Whanganui however downscaled results from this 5 this from results downscaledhowever
s oiy n infcne and Significance on Policy ’s
-
term protection from erosion from protection term ios.
ment loads. An loads. ment
Page Page 232 th
5.1. 5. 4.1. 4. 3.2. 3.1. 3. 2. 1.2. 1.1. 1. STORM 2015 JUNE RESP September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Response Storm 2015 June 5.2.
FINANCIAL IMPACT d. c. b. a. That Committee the recommends thatCouncil: RECOMMENDATION return period a declaredsevere weather event and or / receivinga hour24 rain fallexceeding a 100 year either by affected been have that region the in areas at targeted is package proposed The storm 2015 June the event. by affected worst landowners for programme pole poplar enhance an targeting package mitigation proposed a for support Members from seek to is item This PURPOSE eil uvy f h wrt fetd ra o te ein n hs aeoie th categorised has and region the damage in threecategories ranging fromsevere, of moderate andslight. areas affected worst a the following and of damage survey this Industries aerial of Primary extent and for severity the Ministry assess to the GNS with contracted (MPI) along Council Regional Taranaki and Horizons of band AKai Iwi)southeast extending to Turikina. (i.e. Taranaki region. with boundary the regional our of from area an part in evident western was erosion severe south lower the across widespread t was hit erosion event storm severe a 2015 June In BACKGROUND Thecommunity will ablebe view to itemthis online. COMMUNITYENGAGEMENT this years two the over $123,000 to up programmewould operate. of expenditure proposed the cover to reserves years.suffi areofnumber There a SLUIprogrammeover the savings inmade from up built reserves from available is but budgeted not is item this in discussed expenditure The There are noimmediate adverse financialimpacts associated with item. this
budget. 2016 a Approves budget. 2015 a Approves section 7.1.7of this item. to 7.1.1 section in noted as funding pole free for outlined criteria funding the Approves receivesinformation the contained in
- -
16 allocation of up to $26,000 for supply of free poles from the SLUI the from poles free of supply for $26,000 to up of allocation 16 alloca 16 ONSE
tion of up to $97,000 for supply of free poles from the SLUI the from poles free of supply for $97,000 to up of tion
ReportNo. 15 e eta Nrh sad n a a consequence a as and Island North central he
Information Information Report No.
- 189
Only .
-
No Decision Required No Decision
erosion e
Page Page 15 - 189
cient 233
Item 14 Item 14 5.7. 5.6. 5.5. 5.4. 5.3. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Response Storm 2015 June 5.8.
- - - Theresponse from these - - - their contacted staff Land clientsin these worstaffected areas and made Horizonsthe followingoffers: period this W During lower needs. ongoing the damage there their in assess asses and weeks could landowners two until for catchments Turakina suspended lower was and Whangaehu delivery pole result a as and infrastructure farm on and roading to considerabledisruptioncaused itselfevent storm The 30,000about poles for the season. pole and filled and received been had willow and poplar the orders All season. plantingdeliver winter the for clients) to EGrant and (SLUI landownersbegun to material just had staff Land GEM storm the of time the At the in catchments Turakina and HorizonsRegional Council area” Whangaehu Whanganui, the of reaches mid and lower the in occur and mm, 150 exceeded totals rainfall hour 48 where areas with corresponded (1 moderate slopes hill of (<1% slight of scale severity a using severity, and extent landslide showapproximate to A) annex attached (see produced wasdistribution landslide of map A due tothe need to repairand replantdamaged areas. had this and infrastructure farm to impactedon abilitytheir year,thiswhile plant to long theiralso programmeit term put back, and plantings past man to but damage programme considerable SLUI suffered the of supportive generally were meeting 19 this attended the on property Polson’s who thatThose erosion severearea. mapped GNS withinmeetingsquarelysit the this attended landowners The Bo Scheme. Mangawhero the at of members held and Chair, the was landowners, meeting a addition In small with meetings two held block holdersat Okirae staff and Matarawa Valleyand 24 made individual site visits. Land response In Wanganui. around and in holdings from largely was This clients. new from material planting for and assistance advice, for enquiries in increase large a was there storm the of impact initial the Following The - - However,offsetting these costswas: -
inextra an ‘income’of $9,212. resulting stakes m 2 80, and poles m 3 856, adding orders new placed who clients 26 3 clientswho increased their order by 175 poles; Thecosts of these changeswere $27,462. per $2 about added This poles. pole) 2,970 covering resources extra required clients 12 EGrantclients); 2 and clients SLUI (14 poles 2,235 to equating orders reduced or cancelled clients 16 300 poles werelost to the floods (1 client); normal the above and over grant full a as covered agreed grantrate. be would poles) incurred the costs in extra fly any and(e.g. planting arrange would Horizons with, deal to priorities p with proceed to keen still were landowners If wouldcharge;no be there circumstances, changed to due orders years this cancel to wished landowners If losses;these If
overallcost net to Horizons these initialfor mitigation measures was $18,250. poles had been delivered and subsequently lost in the flood, we would not invoice for invoicefor not wouldwe flood, the insubsequently lostdeliveredand been had poles ;
- 0) n svr (1%. ra o svr ln siig generally sliding land severe of Areas (>10%). severe and 10%)
enquires was:
.
supply was roughly equal to the demand finishing at finishing demand the to equal roughly was supply
lanting but had no access or had other had or access no had but lanting
th
f Au of
smaller land smaller
hanganui, ut with gust affected),
Page Page y had had y 234
7.1.2. 7.1.1. 7.1. 7. 6.5. 6.4. 6.3. 6.2. 6 6. 5.9. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Response Storm 2015 June 7.1.3. .1.
n rgoa bss e i t pat rud 000 oe ti ya wt a oa cs of cost total a with year this poles 30,000 around plant $534,000 anda subsequent grantcontribution of between to aim we basis regional a On grantlandowners for is30 affected t a or plant to $4.50 plus worstsleeve,protective those a for for $5.50 plus planting pole, per $9.00 be pole would outcome this achieve freeto costs broad The fund areas. Horizons that is suggested proposal A nowcould welloraffect lock Co set criteria the so costs, larger much a with faced be would we occur to was 2004 of scale the of event an if and isolated reasonably was storm this that consider to need We region. inevi when responses future for basis response the anyform Furthermorewill which developed be desire. to needs criteria we clear of set outcome a and consideration the careful requires achieve approp will in they are that so they protected purposes, erosion for planted are isend that it if this given felt be polesaway,To we to are ensureto shouldbest they our do instance manyof the free poles givenaway by neighbouring councilswere not planted. relations public costly a eve of erosion future oftreatment to response targeted a more than rather exercise, be to tends material free blanket that feeling an a is year There this again and 2004 conservation in soil poles ‘free’ free Hawkes BayRegional Council provided farmers 3,000 freepoles in 2011 the storm. providing provided Taranaki of support, practice some provide a made do Councils neighbouring Our not events. weather extreme following havelandowners to materials Horizons past the In be to DISCUSSION continued works protection erosion important worst ensuring the implementedat in a timewhen landownerswere significant facing costs. those thus support and areas, help to affected planting and poles free provide could Horizons re and supply water tracks, fences, as such repairsinfrastructure to diverted expenditure control erosion planned any with priority gene The – planting), includesthis SLUIand EGrant customers; sleeve pole, of (cost free be to are winter this out carried plantings all area this Within cause onmajor farm and off disruption.farm will which level the be will but standard high a is erosion Severe given. be will assistance – return Year 100 a than more to equivalent periodover hours;48 rain receiving area those and map severity de area the within whole) or (part property any for be will offered be will poles where area affected The of farms. numbers small affecting thunderstorms summer example for considered be not will events – Anyproposal onlycan be offeredunder MPIan defined event; following the under applicants to protected criteria: and planted poles, free offer Horizons That PROPOSAL
reasoning,formsthis th the a criteria basis of esnn, hs es br n i a eie ae ad hrfr set therefore and area defined a is and bar a sets this reasoning, iiig upy i a ae hr pls r lmtd as w ko tee landowners these know are we we also limited, programme are a poles where to case a committed already in supply, those limiting to supplying only by reasoning,
a cnessws ht ra wt svr eoin aae a otn e low a be often can damage erosion severe with areas that was consensus ral fined as “severe erosion” as defined by the GNS status articulated in the storm the in articulated status GNS the by defined as erosion” “severe as fined
- 50%or $5.70 $9.50to per pole.
uncilin to future responses. - grassing flats etc. At this meeting it was sugge was it meeting this At etc. flats grassing otal cost of around $19.00 per pole. The normal The pole. per$19.00 around of cost otal
at sets a bar for a storm event,for very isolateda bar at sets tably we get another such event(s) in our in event(s) such another get we tably
it lctos wl patd and planted well locations, riate $160,000 and$267,000.
iis s o where to as limits nts. In 2004 for 2004 In nts. Page Page
sted and 235 d
Item 14 Item 14 7.1.7. 7.1.6. 7.1.5. 7.1.4. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Response Storm 2015 June 48 withareas hour a rainfallexceeding 100return year a period). 1: Map
Proposed area for poplar pole mitigation package (NB: area in red indicates area affected by severe erosion erosion area affectedby severe indicates red in area (NB: mitigation package pole poplar area for Proposed Planting forwinter 2016 willlimitedbe to 2,500poles the in area defined previously; retirementor afforestation are more appropriate). suppor not do we and succeed will work ensuring into input – databases forerosion and sediment reductionpurposes. suit deemed land 7e or 6e Class LUC on be will Land, EMO the of satisfaction the to out carried be to have will planting All clientsand ensures new poles planted willlookedbe after. maximumof200 poles perclient; Alimited number of new clients will eligiblebe to applypoles for winterfree in 2016, up to a - poleswinter in 2016, u free for eligible be will (cancellations) issues access due year this plant to unable Anyone – –
reasoning,allows some equity tothose severely affected.
esnn, nue pls r patd o eoin oto proe ad u saf have staff our and purposes control erosion for planted are poles ensures reasoning, reasoning, tryingto matchsupply demandwith aon regional basis. esnn lmt dem limits reasoning isa highchance poles the will provide effective erosioncontrol into thefuture. program the to committed already were
p to thecancelled number poles; of n i ftr yast esr e a cniu o upy existing supply to continue can we ensure to years future in and
be o pl patn ad il e eodd n Council in recorded be will and planting pole for able me and will plant and care for their poles, there poles, their for care and plant will and me
t poles where other works (eg works other where poles t
Page Page
236 and
9.1. 9. 8.2. 8.1.2. 8.1.1. 8.1. 8. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Response Storm 2015 June 9.3. 9.2.
It is It EGrantpoles at 2016 year Budget 1,000 EGrantpoles at a of $19.00cost per pole. 2015 year budget the In Underthis proposal the likely costs COSTAND SUPPLY IMPLICATIONS stage thereare proposalsno JV for isalso This where anynew VentureJoint couldwould forestry or howeverthisfunded be at programmes. works SLUI budgeted non other limits potentially reserves SLUI on call Any forup $26,000.to Overallisproposedit tocap reserves SLUI from covered and way similar a in reflected be also would budget SLUI 17 2016 The reporting. all in item line special a as shown be will Expenditure reserves. SLUI 2015 the fund to proposed therefore is It of outside share cost for MPI from variation currentSLUI /HCEF arrangement. a or permission require specifically would fundin SLUI/Grant Only” “Council a from made be to need would payment any poles EGrant includes also proposal 2015 the As seasons. expenditure unbudgeted is program nature SLUI this the however of package mitigation or allocation pole free Any BUDGET increaseddemand. endeavour obtain earlyto with supply contracts neighbouringRegional this Councils fulfil to is proposal this if so clients, other our all to supply of continuity maintain 2015 than lower slightly be will supply SLUI already made of cost Net EGrant SLUI EGrant proposedto limit the 2016
TOTAL TOTAL
offers offers
a costof $19.50 per pole
-
7 hs il nov apoiaey ,0 pls ne SU ad 500 and SLUI under poles 2,000 approximately involve will this 17 Number Number - 6 LI ugt s ul alctd o gat xedtr ad this and expenditure grant for allocated fully is budget SLUI 16 2,000 1,000 7,000 g allocation (i.e. not from funds jointly supported by the HCEF) or HCEF) the by supported jointly funds from not (i.e. allocation g - 500 6 hs il nov apoiaey ,0 pls ne SU and SLUI under poles 7,000 approximately involve will this 16 me has built up a small “untagged” reserve over the past 2 past the over reserve “untagged” small a up built has me
- 17 allocation17 as it is understandingour at this stage our pole $19.50 $19.50 $19.00 $19.00 Cost Cost Cost pole pole per per
are: forestryat this stage.
- $133,000 6 n w ne t b cgiat f h ne to need the of cognisant be to need we and 16 $39,000
- $19,000 $9,750 Total 16 cost of this prop this of cost 16 Total Total cost cost
theentire expenditure at $123,000.
Less grant Less budgeted) (already (already grant paid) Less Less 30% 50%
30% 50%
osal for up to $97,000 out of out $97,000 to up for osal $62,300 Cost of of Cost Grant $19,500 Cost of of Cost $5,700 Grant $2,925
approved we will we approved $26,325 $19,500 council cost to cost council $97,212 $13,300 $66,500 $17,412 cost to cost Extra Extra Extra Extra $6,825
Page Page 237 - 3 -
Item 14 Item 14 There are no attachments for this report. this report. for attachments are no There ANNEXES CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER LeanneMacdonald GROUP MANAGER MitchellCraig MANAGER CooperGrant 10.1. 10. September16 2015 Catchment Operations Committee Response Storm 2015 June
hs s o a infcn dcso acrig o h Cucls oiy n infcne and Significance on Policy Council’s the to Engagement. according decision significant a not is This SIGNIFICANCE
–
LAND
–
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Page Page 238
Catchment Operations Committee 16 September 2015
Public Excluded Section
RECOMMENDATION That the public be excluded from the remainder of the Council meeting as the general subject matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48 (1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows. This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:
General subject of each matter Reason for passing this Ground(s) under section 48(1) to be considered resolution for the passing of this resolution PX1 Confirmation of Public s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the s48(1)(a) Excluded meeting held on information is necessary to The public conduct of the part of 29 July 2015 protect the privacy of natural the meeting would be likely to persons, including that of a result in the disclosure of deceased person. information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. PX2 Council / Committee to consider whether any item in the Public Excluded minutes can be moved into the public domain and define the extent of the release PX3 Members’ Questions
Public Excluded Page 239