Agenda of Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting

UNCONFIRMED Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting Minutes

13 October 2020

MINUTES

Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting

Tuesday, 13 October 2020

Order Of Business

1 Apologies. 3

2 Public Forum.. 3

2.1 Public Forum - Ben Hague - On Demand Transport 3

3 Acceptance of Late Items. 4

4 Confidential Business to be Transferred into the Open. 4

5 Change to Order of Business. 4

6 Confirmation of Minutes. 4

6.1 Minutes of the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee meeting held on 1 September 2020. 4

7 Declaration of Conflicts of Interest 4

9 Business. 5

9.1 Adoption of Plan Change 26 (Housing Choice) for Notification. 5

9.2 Adoption of Plan Change 27 (Flooding from Intense Rainfall) for Notification. 6

9.3 Adoption of Plan Change 30 (Earthworks) for Notification. 7

9.4 Te Papa Spatial Plan. 7

9.5 Transport & Water Strategy and Planning Projects Progress Report - October 2020. 9

8 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions. 9

8.1 Presentation - Freshwater National Policy Statement and National Environmental Standards. 9

8.2 Presentation - Greenfield Urban Growth Planning Update. 11

10 Discussion of Late Items. 12

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council

Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting

HELD AT THE Tauranga City Council, Council Chambers, 91 Willow Street, Tauranga

ON Tuesday, 13 October 2020 AT 9.30am

PRESENT: Cr Larry Baldock (Chairperson), Cr Heidi Hughes (Deputy Chairperson), Cr Jako Abrie, Cr Kelvin Clout, Cr Bill Grainger, Cr Dawn Kiddie, Cr Andrew Hollis, Cr Steve Morris, Cr John Robson, Cr Tina Salisbury, and Mr Te Pio Kawe

IN ATTENDANCE: Marty Grenfell (Chief Executive), Nic Johansson (General Manager: Infrastructure), Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy & Growth), Andy Mead (Manager: City and Infrastructure Planning), Janine Speedy (Team Leader: City Planning), Alistair Talbot (Team Leader: Transport Strategy and Planning), Claudia Hellberg (Team Leader: Waters Strategy & Planning), Campbell Larking (Team Leader: Planning Projects), Carl Lucca (Programme Director: Urban Communities), Corinne Frischknecht (Senior Policy Planner), Karen Steer (Planner), Manasi Vaidya (Policy Planner), Robyn Garrett (Team Leader: Committee Support) and Jenny Teeuwen (Committee Advisor)

1 Apologies

Committee Resolution UR6/20/1

Moved: Cr Kelvin Clout

Seconded: Cr Tina Salisbury

That apologies from Mayor Tenby Powell be received and accepted.

Carried

2 Public Forum

2.1 Public Forum - Ben Hague - On Demand Transport

External Ben Hague – On Demand Transport

A copy of Mr Hague’s presentation for this item can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this committee meeting.

Key points

· Tauranga had an unique topography with strong population growth.

· On-demand transport allowed vehicles to move dynamically within a zone picking up and dropping off passengers. There were no set routes. A personalised service was delivered that was configurable to meet different needs.

· Fixed route services would still provide the majority of service.

· On-demand transport was about how we moved people around Tauranga, not how we moved vehicles around Tauranga.

· A pilot trial would test the platform, get direct feedback from customers and bring new solutions and advanced technology to reshape public transportation.

In response to questions

· The Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC) was currently considering running trials.

· Waka Kotahi (New Zealand Transport Agency – NZTA) had provided some funding for the Timaru trial.

· A pilot could be ready for trial in eight weeks. Costs were dependent on locality and how many vehicles would be required.

· Full access to data from a trial would be available.

· Infrastructure required for the on-demand service would be dependent on the uptake and access points for the service.

The Chairperson thanked Mr Hague for his presentation.

Attachment

1 Presentation - Ben Hague - On-Demand Transport

3 Acceptance of Late Items

Nil

4 Confidential Business to be Transferred into the Open

Nil

5 Change to Order of Business

The Chairperson advised that the two staff presentations in Section 8 - Deputations, Presentations and Petitions, would be taken following the end of Section 9 - Business.

6 Confirmation of Minutes

6.1 Minutes of the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee meeting held on 1 September 2020

Committee Resolution UR6/20/2

Moved: Cr Tina Salisbury

Seconded: Cr Kelvin Clout

That the minutes of the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee meeting held on 1 September 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

7 Declaration of Conflicts of Interest

Nil

9 Business

9.1 Adoption of Plan Change 26 (Housing Choice) for Notification

Staff Andy Mead, Manager: City and Infrastructure Planning

Janine Speedy, Team Leader: City Planning

Corinne Frischknecht, Senior Policy Planner

A copy of the staff presentation for Plan Changes 26 (Item 9.1), 27 (Item 9.2) and 30 (Item 9.3) can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this committee meeting.

Key points

· Engagement on the plan change commenced in early 2019 and included the wider public, development community, Central Government agencies, SmartGrowth partners and forums and tangata whenua.

· The publicly notified submission period was from 16 November 2019 to 18 December 2019.

· The proposed Plan Change 26 would amend and introduce definitions, objectives, policies and rules to the City Plan and included suburban residential zone, Te Papa Peninsula, and commercial zone aspects.

· The Residential Outcomes Framework was a non-statutory document.

· Following a city-wide risk assessment to understand natural hazards within the Suburban Residential Zone, exclusion areas had been applied for some areas that had been identified as not suitable for future growth because of their high natural hazard risk.

· Technical work undertaken included development capacity, architectural testing, feasibility assessment and infrastructure modelling.

In response to questions

· The Residential Outcomes Framework document was non-statutory to provide more flexibility to developers and applicants.

· The proposed Plan Change 26 had been aligned to the recent changes to the National Policy Statement–Urban Development (NPS-UD).

· Development was constrained along a significant area of the coastal strip east of Golf Road; however, development was still possible if compliance with requirements was met. West of Golf Rd had been included in the plan change.

· A number of scenarios were modelled through the feasibility assessment to determine future population and housing requirements across the city.

· Engagement with tangata whenua started in 2019. Eight hui occurred across April and May 2019. Further engagement was carried out to better understand the aspirations of tangata whenua for multi-owned Māori land and what their housing would look like. Support from iwi and hapu had been received for the direction of the plan change.

· There was no specific evidence to indicate that the plan change would result in property value increases.

· Indications were that standalone dwellings would still be the most popular, however the plan change enabled a greater choice of housing for the community including apartments and duplexes.

Committee Resolution UR6/20/3

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Kelvin Clout

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee:

(a) Recommends to Council adoption of Plan Change 26 (Housing Choice) to the operative Tauranga City Plan for public notification.

(b) Authorises the General Manager: Strategy & Growth to arrange the public notification process in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991, once the Plan Change has been adopted by Council.

(c) Delegates authority to the General Manager: Strategy & Growth to approve any minor and technical changes to the Proposed Text Amendments contained in Attachment 2, as required prior to public notification.

(d) Endorses the non-statutory urban design guide (Residential Outcomes Framework) for consultation.

Carried

Attachment

1 Presentation - Overview of Plan Changes 26, 27 and 30

9.2 Adoption of Plan Change 27 (Flooding from Intense Rainfall) for Notification

Staff Andy Mead, Manager: City and Infrastructure Planning

Janine Speedy, Team Leader: City Planning

Manasi Vaidya, Policy Planner

A copy of the staff presentation for Plan Changes 26, 27 and 30 can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this committee meeting.

Key points

· TCC developed and adopted the Integrated Stormwater Project in response to major flooding events in 2005 and 2013. The project considered how flood risk could be managed citywide.

· The proposed Plan Change looked to reduce the risk of flooding from intense rainfall events to life and property across Tauranga.

· The Flooding from Intense Rainfall Guideline would be a non-statutory document.

· Technical work undertaken included risk assessments in accordance with Regional Policy Statements (RPS), cost analysis, earthworks controls, impervious surfaces, and freeboard requirements.

Committee Resolution UR6/20/4

Moved: Cr John Robson

Seconded: Cr Tina Salisbury

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee:

(a) Recommends to Council adoption of Plan Change 27 (Flooding from Intense Rainfall) to the operative Tauranga City Plan for public notification.

(b) Authorises the General Manager: Strategy & Growth to arrange the public notification process in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991; once the Plan Change has been adopted by Council.

(d) Endorses the non-statutory guidance document (Flooding from Intense Rainfall Guideline) for consultation.

(e) Notes the provisions in Plan Change 27 (Flooding from Intense Rainfall) as having legal effect from the time of public notification under Section 86B(3)(a) of the Resource Management Act 1991.

Carried

9.3 Adoption of Plan Change 30 (Earthworks) for Notification

Staff Andy Mead, Manager: City and Infrastructure Planning

Janine Speedy, Team Leader: City Planning

Karen Steer, Planner

A copy of the staff presentation for Plan Changes 26, 27 and 30 can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this committee meeting.

Key points

· The proposed plan change was a technical plan change only, with a limited scope that covered the issues of control of earthworks at all stages of development, and managing sediment on sites.

In response to questions

· Sediment on sites would be managed with a City Plan rule that set out permitted activity standards with the requirement to keep sediment on site.

· Earthworks in subdivisions would be controlled by closing the loophole allowing subdivision consents to be used as a blanket approval for earthworks.

· The BOPRC controlled bulk scale earthworks approximately 5,000 cubic metres and above. The City Plan dealt with earthworks below that threshold.

Committee Resolution UR6/20/5

Moved: Cr Jako Abrie

Seconded: Cr Steve Morris

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee:

(a) Recommends to Council adoption of Plan Change 30 (Earthworks) to the operative Tauranga City Plan for public notification.

(b) Authorises the General Manager: Strategy & Growth to arrange the public notification process in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991; once the Plan Change has been adopted by Council.

(d) Endorse the non-statutory guidance document (Sediment and erosion control guideline) for consultation.

Carried

At 11am, the meeting adjourned.

At 11.15am, the meeting resumed.

9.4 Te Papa Spatial Plan

Staff Andy Mead, Manager: City and Infrastructure Planning

Carl Lucca, Programme Director: Urban Communities

A copy of the staff presentation for this item can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this committee meeting.

Key points

· The Te Papa Spatial Plan (the Plan) was a 30-year blueprint to support growth and focussed on integrated land use, transport, social infrastructure, culture, and Three Waters.

· The Plan was prepared in partnership with mana whenua and key stakeholders – Waka Kotahi (NZTA), BOPRC, and central government agencies.

· Community engagement was undertaken between mid 2019 and early 2020 and would be ongoing through the Long Term Plan process (LTP) and future projects.

· Benefits of the Plan included a stronger culture and identity, improved environmental quality, housing that met the community’s needs, economic growth and employment, and social and economic opportunities.

· Engagement with mana whenua had been ongoing throughout the project, and recognised and built on the Tauranga Moana Design Principles.

· The Te Papa Spatial Plan Implementation Plan brought together outcomes of existing and proposed projects, the Design Sprint process, engagement outcomes, and indicative business case outcomes.

· Next steps priorities included the Cameron Road Multimodal Project Stage 1, implementing Plan Change 26 - Housing Choice, and ongoing discussions and planning with key government agencies and stakeholders in relation to housing regeneration.

In response to questions

· An urban design panel was being considered as part of the wider city plan review, and could also be considered for Te Papa projects.

· All projects will be worked through the LTP process, however some projects would be delivered through existing operational programmes.

· Current water and wastewater supply would be sufficient for development over the next ten years, however, if development in the area was successful, then it was likely that significant upgrades would be required as some point in the future.

· The Opex figure outlined in paragraph 75 of the report was a BOPRC Opex figure primarily relating to public transport and did not specifically connect to the Capex transport figure outlined in paragraph 74 of the report.

Committee Resolution UR6/20/6

Moved: Cr Bill Grainger

Seconded: Cr Larry Baldock

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee:

(a) Approves the Te Papa Spatial Plan.

(b) Agrees in principle to the Te Papa peninsula 30-year Implementation Plan to support the recommended urban form, movement and broader spatial plan outcomes, subject to further investigation and funding availability.

(c) Notes that investment timing, costs and cost sharing are subject to Long Term Plan funding prioritisation and further investigations and agreement between the project partners which will come before Council for approvals as the Te Papa programme progresses.

Carried

Attachment

1 Presentation - Te Papa Spatial Plan

9.5 Transport & Water Strategy and Planning Projects Progress Report - October 2020

Staff Andy Mead, Manager: City and Infrastructure Planning

Alistair Talbot, Team Leader: Transport Strategy and Planning

Claudia Hellberg, Team Leader: Waters Strategy and Planning

Key points

· UFTI and Te Papa transport business cases had been endorsed by the NZTA Board.

· The Transport System Operating Framework (TSOF) component of the Transport System Plan project had been completed.

· There had been limited progress on the Early Works and Long Term business cases for Tauriko, noting potential implications for the timing of the plan change to rezone Tauriko West for development.

· Engagement continued with NZTA on matters associated with the Tauranga Northern Link (TNL), such as interchange design, resolution of remaining safety issues and access to Smiths Farm.

· The new National Policy Statement (NPS) and National Environmental Standards (NES) for Freshwater had been gazetted in August. They introduced a strong focus on the protection and enhancement of wetlands and streams.

· Focus was currently on the LTP and Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) processes.

In response to questions

· As part of the Te Maunga Ocean Outfall Project, “before-and-after” surveys would be carried out for identified properties. The engagement process for this had already begun. Statistical information for “before-and-after” surveys carried out in general over the last five years would be distributed to councillors.

· Blue/green networks were identified overland flow paths. These areas were usually alongside stream networks and were not suitable for development, but could be used as green corridors which could be planted to enhance biodiversity and provide space for cycle and footpath connections, becoming a real amenity value for the area.

Staff Action

Statistical information for “before-and-after” surveys carried out in general over the last five years to be distributed to councillors.

Committee Resolution UR6/20/7

Moved: Cr John Robson

Seconded: Cr Andrew Hollis

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee receives the Transport & Water Strategy and Planning Progress Report – October 2020.

Carried

8 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions

8.1 Presentation - Freshwater National Policy Statement and National Environmental Standards

Staff Andy Mead, Manager: City and Infrastructure Planning

Claudia Hellberg, Team Leader: Waters Strategy & Planning

A copy of the staff presentation for this item can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this committee meeting.

Key points

· The NPS for Freshwater Management 2020 (Freshwater NPS 2020) provided local authorities with updated direction on how they should manage freshwater under the Resource Management Act 1991.

· The Resource Management Regulations 2020 (Freshwater NES) regulated activities that posed risk to the health of freshwater and freshwater ecosystems.

· The new regulations came into force on 3 September 2020 and applied to both urban and rural activities.

· Freshwater NPS 2020 managed freshwater in a way that ‘gives effect’ to Te Mana o te Wai. Te Mana o te Wai was the fundamental importance of water:

- protected health of freshwater protected the health and wellbeing of the wider environment and the mauri of the wai.

- restored and preserved the balance between the water, the wider environment, and the community.

· Local authorities must co-operate with each other and must change district plans to promote positive and address negative effects of urban development on freshwater and receiving environments.

· Councils would now be required through their regional plans to avoid the loss of river extent and values. It was important to note that there was no differentiation within the policy between a large river and a very small stream.

· There was also greater protection for natural inland wetlands whereby loss of extent of natural wetlands was to be avoided, their values protected and their restoration was promoted. The new requirements were complex and more onerous than current regional plan requirements.

· Decisions that were impacted by Freshwater NPS and NES included regional council consents for earthworks, discharge, and stream works, TCC’s responsibility for integrated planning, and partnerships with tangata whenua on freshwater matters.

· There would be implications for the Tauriko West and Te Tumu developments as it was uncertain how far streams could be re-directed to enhance development land.

In response to questions

· Wetlands were currently being recreated in the Kopurererua Valley so had very good alignment with the new requirements. The realignment of the Waimapu Stream required some of the details to be worked through.

· Territorial authorities were able to influence National Policy Statements coming out from Central Government via the formal submissions process. Following the release of the draft documents TCC had aligned with other growth councils and had written to the Minister for the Environment and the Ministry’s Chief Executive to express concerns with the drafts and to seek a pathway of working together. A substantial amount of change was achieved through that process. TCC was continuing to have conversations with central government officials and colleagues at other councils regarding implementation challenges with a view to opportunities for further refinement.

Attachment

1 Presentation - Freshwater National Policy Statement and National Environmental Standards

At 12.37pm, the meeting adjourned.

At 12.37pm, Cr Larry Baldock left the meeting.

At 1.10pm, the meeting resumed.

Cr Heidi Hughes assumed the Chair.

8.2 Presentation - Greenfield Urban Growth Planning Update

Staff Andy Mead, Manager: City and Infrastructure Planning

Campbell Larking, Team Leader: Planning Projects

A copy of the staff presentation for this item can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this committee meeting.

Key points

· The purpose of the presentation was to outline the Urban Growth Agenda, how this was implemented, how cultural, social, economic and environmental issues were provided for, and to provide an update on the growth area planning for new community growth.

· The presentation primarily focussed on the Te Tumu and Tauriko West growth areas. Planning was already underway for these areas.

· Future growth areas included Keenan Road, Tauriko Business Estate extension, and Ohauiti South.

· Urban growth areas needed to meet the requirements of National Policy Statements, deliver a higher standard of urban planning, and ensure an integrated, staged and cohesive delivery.

· The urban growth programme considered land use, transport networks, infrastructure, social and community infrastructure, open space, culture and heritage, and environment and sustainability issues. It did not include inclusionary zoning and affordability.

· Cultural principles included engagement with Tangata Whenua, understanding the place, understanding aspirations, developing design principles, and working with land trusts.

· Environment principles included identification of significant features and values, and protection, enhancement and connection through design.

· Social principles included creating safe, resilient and connected communities, planning for social infrastructure in partnership with external providers, and enabling opportunities for facilities to be located in new community areas.

· Economic principles included a centres based approach, connection to commercial and employment areas, feasibility assessments, and infrastructure funding.

· Transport principles included connecting communities to employment areas, focus on modal shift, multi-modal planning, walking and cycling infrastructure, and the use of travel demand management.

· Design principles included structure plans, integrated land use and transport networks, the use of balance to deliver multiple benefits, and the protection of values, and valued areas.

· Housing choice/density principles included a focus on providing for increased housing choice and densities and providing a mix of land uses to support the increased density delivery.

· Planned notification for Te Tumu and Tauriko West was scheduled for late 2021.

In response to questions

· Affordable housing would be considered at a macro level, through supply. It would be up to the market to determine the need.

· The minimum density of 20 houses per hectare would increase over time.

· Base population needs and densities would determine which of the three social scenarios would be required.

· To ensure community facilities were included in development, long term plan funding needed to align with timing projections. TCC would continue to work collaboratively with central government agencies to ensure a whole of government approach to amenities implementation for Tauranga’s priority development areas.

· TCC did not use a weighted attribute table to choose amenities. Amenities were considered as part of the wider design of the growth area. The beach environment and coastal areas were recognised in the level of service policy.

· Needs analysis work was benchmarked against other councils.

· Travel demand management was primarily around land use. Increased density would better support local facilities and public transport.

· A local convenience centre would be provided for in the Tauriko West growth area.

· The planning for Te Tumu from a technical point of view had never anticipated that it would come on stream prior to 2016. The timing of land zoning was important as this unlocked everything else that was needed going forward.

· Kainga Ora was keen to participate in partnership opportunities with TCC for the urban growth areas.

Attachment

1 Presentation - Greenfield Urban Growth Planning Upgrade

10 Discussion of Late Items

Nil

The meeting closed at 2.34pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed at the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee meeting held on 24 November 2020.

...................................................

CHAIRPERSON

Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting Agenda

24 November 2020

9 Business

9.1 Evaluation of free 2-hour parking trial

File Number: A11901941

Author: Russell Troup, Manager: Transport Network Operations

James Wickham, Team Leader: TTOC

Stuart Goodman, Team Leader: Regulation Monitoring

Peter Siemensma, Senior Transport Planner

Authoriser: Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Purpose of the Report

1. To provide the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee with an evaluation of the free 2-hour parking trial and provide recommendations.

Recommendations

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee:

(a) Receives the Evaluation of Free Parking Trial report

(b) Notes that development of a citywide parking approach project is in progress, and that this report relates to the current economic stimulus provisioning free on-street 2-hour trial only.

(d) Notes that a further performance evaluation report will be provided before the end of April 2021.

Executive Summary

2. In July 2020, Council resolved to implement a 2-hour free parking trial in the CBD area. The primary objective of the trial was to provide economic stimulus to support recovery from Covid-19. The success of the trial was to be reviewed and reported back to Council in November, ahead of the busy Christmas season.

3. Marketview data showing the value of payment card transactions is used as an indicator of economic activity. That data has been obtained for all the main centres within Tauranga from October 2015 to present, so it is possible to reconcile Covid-19 recovery relative to historic activity and trends.

4. The Marketview data show that the economic recovery profile of the CBD is similar to other centres in Tauranga. By June 2020, economic activity in all areas broadly recovered to levels that aligned with the historic trend profile observed since October 2015. It is not therefore possible to draw a definitive conclusion regarding the extent to which the free parking trial has been beneficial, particularly given the complexity of issues affecting economic recovery. Accordingly, there is a subjective and equally valid case that without the free parking trial the recovery profile of the CBD may have been slower or reduced.

5. In principle, the 2-hour free parking is designed to incentivise visits and economic activity, whilst assuring availability of spaces through turnover. Enforcement of the time limit was found to be a significant factor. The first part of the trial was limited to manual, warden enforcement and the two-hour limit was found to be abused with people simply moving their car through the day. The introduction of automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) technology in October was found to considerably increase compliance and therefore turnover, so far. ANPR implementation feedback from businesses has been typically positive, although that was contrasted by negative sentiment from commuters who had used on-street parking all day.

6. Another common feedback theme was that 2 hours was not enough time. However, pedestrian dwell times recorded suggest that 91% of people visit for less than two hours, which is also consistent with 2019 data. Further, under-utilised parking capacity exists in some off-street carparks, and particularly at the Elizabeth Street parking building, for those who wish to stay longer.

7. This report considers three options and recommends option 1 that proposes extension of the current trial conditions. An evaluation report with further recommendations would be provided to Council before the end of April 2021.

8. The key benefits of the recommended option are that it will enable a longer assessment period of the trial under ANPR enforcement conditions, which seem to be driving turnover, which may provide economic stimulus. It also retains some consistency for people who are increasingly becoming familiar with the current trial conditions.

Background

9. As part of the Annual Plan deliberations on 16 and 17 July 2020, Council assessed several submissions relating to parking. Key points included that free parking in the CBD, amongst other measures allowed shoppers to support local traders after Covid. Several submissions urged Council to remove parking fees in the CBD.

10. The report from July 2020 referred to the long-term direction provided through the Urban Form and Transport Initiative (UFTI), as council’s longer-term approach to parking management across the City is still in development. The UFTI final report identified: “With the increase in multimodal use and improved access to the urban centres, the need to provide the same quantum of carparking could reduce. Parking costs are targeted to help encourage people to use the personal mobility or public transport options available to them. For the commercial areas throughout the sub-region, an appropriate level of turnover is the focus of parking management policy and activities. The UFTI report provides actions to implement the recommended programme, which include a key move between 0-5 years to: ‘Complete carparking strategy changes to support increased parking turn-over’.

11. The report further noted that, in respect to the wider research on parking management, parking is just one of the factors that influences people’s choice and reasoning for visiting a location like the City Centre. Other factors include the quality of the attractions on offer . Given this, while parking management changes can contribute to economic activity, it is suggested that these would need to be part of a broader package of interventions targeted to attract people to the City Centre.

12. Three options proposed for Council consideration in July 2020 included:

(a) Option 1: Retain the status quo (as per pre-Covid)

(b) Option 2: Baseline measures – as per post-lockdown stimulus measures

13. Council decided to implement Option 3, which comprised of reinstatement of Covid post-lockdown stimulus measures:

(a) Free on-street parking (with time restrictions) and time restricted off-street car parks (Library, Masonic, Devonport Road car parks)

(b) The P180 on street carparks were changed to P120 for the duration of the trial to prevent vehicles being able to move once to obtain all day free carparking.

14. It should be noted that the Annual Plan (adopted in July 2020), also included a change of parking user fees. These came into effect in September 2020 during the trial. In September, Council also started to test a new technology for parking enforcement: a vehicle equipped with cameras and ANPR technology (automated number plate recognition). Whilst this vehicle was only in test-mode in September, it was introduced during the trial.

15. The current 2 hour free trial only changed the management of on-street parking spaces. Parking management of the parking buildings and most off-street car parks were not included or changed through the trial.

16. The trial made changes to the paid parking spaces with a 3-hour time (P180) and spaces without a time limit. Spaces with other time limits were not part of the trial, as these time zones are a result of consultation with local businesses. This refers to spaces with a 15, 30 and 60 minute time limits in particular.

17. Parking spaces outside the city centre were not part of the trial, and this evaluation report does not consider those spaces.

Evidence gathered: key lessons learnt from the trial

18. Economic activity: back to the levels pre-Covid in the City Centre compared to other centres.

(a) MarketView data indicates that spending in the City Centre is back at a pre-lockdown level. It should be noted that other local and commercial centres are also at approximately the same level as pre-lockdown. Please find a detailed overview of economic activity in the City Centre as well as other centres in Attachment 1A.

(b) The economic data for other centres shows a similar pattern, i.e. back to pre-Covid levels. So, there is no obvious difference between the recovery rate of the CBD, that was subject to the parking trial, and other areas.

(c) It could be argued that the parking trial has had no discernible benefit, but it could equally be argued to the contrary that, without the parking trial recovery of the CBD would have been slower or reduced.

19. Occupancy and turnover data on-street and off-street

(a) ANPR equipment was only available in late September due to supply chain issues and it was being mobilised and calibrated through to mid-October. ANPR enforcement started mid-October and has improved the reliability of occupancy data since that point.

(b) We now have data until the end of October, which begins to allow more detailed insights. We anticipate that the ANPR technology will significantly improve the reliability of data and enable more detailed understanding of the impacts and nuance of measures in the future.

(c) This data is currently being cleansed and analysed for occupancy and turnover purposes. However, our consultant has provided a small sample of cleansed occupancy data. There are some minor anomalies relating to the number of carparks on each street particularly for Hamilton St where the ANPR may also be counting taxis, loading bays and motorcycles.

(d) The overall number of occupied spaces ranges from 662 to 795 which is a 74-90% occupancy level. Industry standard optimal occupancy is 85%, so these initial indications are positive in terms of our objective to achieve turnover.

(e) On-street turnover: we have observed that when ANPR enforcement was introduced, we saw more fines, but also observed that occupancy levels dropped. Given that no downturn in expenditure is evident, this suggests increased compliance with the 2-hour limit and higher turnover. This implies higher turnover and therefore more spaces were available for visitors and shoppers.

(f) Large differences in occupancy were observed in different parts of the city centre. Some streets are generally under-occupied, such as The Strand South (near the railway bridge), whilst other streets, such as First Avenue, are at a desirable occupancy level (closer to 85%).

(g) Based on staff observations, there is an increased number of cars parked on residential streets around the city centre.

(h) Off-street carparks and parking buildings:

(i) Parking management of the off-street carparks and parking buildings was not part of the trial, but as on-street space was no longer available to park all-day, utilisation of the off-street carparks and parking buildings did change.

(ii) Off-street carparks: both before and during the trial, off-street car parks are generally at capacity by 8.00am every working day. The increase in price through the annual plan did not affect occupancy.

(iii) Spring Street parking building is consistently at capacity during working days. Elizabeth Street parking building is generally under-utilised, with sufficient capacity of approx. 40-50% during work days.

20. Infringement data pre and during trial

(a) There are three infringement offences that apply to the CBD parking area: (1) failing to pay for parking; (2) parking longer than paid for; and (3) overstaying a (free) time restriction.

(b) The data (Attachment 1E) provided applies to the area of the CBD where payment for parking was required.

	Pre trail (Mar-19 to Feb-20)	During trial (Aug-20 to Oct-20)
Failing to pay for parking	439	51
Parking for longer than paid for	158	5
Overstaying a (free) time restriction	39	1016

(d) Note that the majority of parking infringements for overstaying a time limit are between $12 and $15. They can be up to $57 for extended overstaying. .

(e) During the trial period, the “failing to pay for parking” and “parking for longer than paid for” only applies to off-street car parks, where payment for parking is still required: Waterfront, TV3, Dive Crescent and Cliff Road car parks.

(f) ANPR system testing and calibration started 23^rd September. During this initial period an average of 300 overstay offences were identified per day. On 19^th October live enforcement commenced with an average of 150 infringements being issued for overstay offence per day since then. The presence of the ANPR system in the CBD and our communications to the public are the likely reason for the improved compliance levels. We anticipate that compliance will continue to improve over the next few weeks as vehicle owners receive these infringements via post.

21. Pedestrian dwell times

(a) A comparison of pedestrian dwell times in the CBD (refer the graphs below) between September 2019 and September 2020 shows consistent dwell times throughout the day. In 2019, 91.7% of pedestrians stayed in the CBD for less than two hours and in September 2020 this figure was 91.8% (based on people count sensors in the CBD).

(b) The data is derived from bluetooth sensors in the CBD which is constantly varying but a normal day peaks at around 1200 pedestrians per hour. This presents a decrease of around 13% from 2019 data.

’

Figure 1: pedestrian dwell times within the CBD in minutes (September 2020)

Figure 2: pedestrian dwell times within the CBD in minutes (September 2019)

22. Observations and complaints received from businesses, commuters and visitors [1]

23. We have received several emails and phone calls, including complaints, observations, and feedback in relation to the trial itself and in relation to the Annual Plan price increases. Comments were received via email, phone, meetings and informal discussions, and came from both visitors, business owners and commuters. This section provides a summary of the main type of comments we received.

(a) Some people find the system too complicated, and information provision was considered too limited. People find it confusing that there is free parking, but that there are also parking machines. Other comments include a lack of clarity on when time limits apply, whether moving a car to another spot is allowed and when enforcement applies. Progressively through the trial, these type of comments reduced as familiarity with the changes improved.

“It is unreasonable to expect visitors to Tauranga, casual shoppers and residents to troll your website looking for the rules when they are more intent on finding a parking spot”

(b) Businesses in the vicinity of Elizabeth Street (through the consultation on the planned works) have shared positive feedback about the free trial, and some mentioned improved business and would like to keep the free parking. Several business owners in the vicinity of Elizabeth Street and Grey Street have suggested that the free parking trial is maintained until construction of the new Farmers Development and streetscape upgrades have been completed. During construction, several on-street spaces are currently not available. Once the construction works have finished, the on-street spaces would be available again, as well as the provision of new off-street parking as part of the Farmers Development.

(c) Some businesses noted that parking in other centres (Mt Maunganui and Greerton) is free and it was suggested to keep parking free for now. Others suggested considering keeping 2-hour free parking in Grey Street and Devonport only, and allow longer parking in the nearby streets. Some suggested to allow free 2-hour parking, but with an option to pay if people want to stay longer.

(d) Some commuters complained at a perceived lack of all-day parking in proximity to their workplace:

“you have made it far too hard for the commuters who have no option but to drive to work. I did not mind paying for all day parking on street. The all-day parks are full or too far from my workplace”.

“I normally park in the off-street car parks but yesterday I needed to be closer to work as I had an important appointment after work and I was already going to be pushed for time leaving work early and I couldn’t add another 10min to walk to the nearest off-street car park. I was happy to pay but I was unable to put my registration into the parking machine. Before you put these time limits on, I was able to pay and park along that road. If you are going to give out parking tickets, I think that it is only fair that you give the option of being able to pay to park there as normal”

(e) Visitors and some businesses complained that a two-hour limit is generally not sufficient for business meetings, going shopping or visiting the cinema. Some people indicated they would like the ability to stay a third or fourth hour (on-street), even when these additional hours would not be free.

“I would even prefer to have paid the parking meter for my time rather than getting a ticket for staying too long”.

(f) Some visitors with walking difficulties or minor disabilities (but no CCS card) would like an opportunity to park closer to their destination or work and park there all-day.

(g) Businesses observed that ‘free parking’ resulted in a lack of available parking for clients and customers. This was particularly noticeable early in the trial, before the ANPR technology was implemented.

“As a small business owner in the CBD I've always been vocal regarding free 2hr parking for customers and clients in the main high street. I applaud your action of doing so in the last couple of weeks. But I never thought I would be saying this, but it seems to have made things worse. Walking to my shop at 9.30am this week there have been no empty spaces along Grey St but empty streets of people and shoppers. Clients have had to park further away than usual.”

(h) Workers in the city centre explained they used to move their car every two hours, which they can no longer do with the digital enforcement. Others expressed concern that they get a ticket after two hours, and would rather have the old system back.

(i) Due to the time limits, some people found it hard to find a space where they can park all-day: off-street carparks, including the Spring Street parking building are often at, or near capacity. Streets around the city centre also have time limits, which makes it harder for staff to park anywhere.

24. It should be noted that many complaints arrived in the same week that the prices were adjusted as a result of the adoption of the annual plan.

25. Others observed that more staff were working from home, decreasing the number of visitors to the city centre.

Strategic / Statutory Context

26. UFTI: the Urban Form and Transport Initiative was endorsed by Council earlier this year. The UFTI final report provides direction on Parking: ‘with the increase in multimodal use and improved access to the urban centres, the need to provide the same quantum of carparking could reduce. Parking costs are targeted to help encourage people to use the personal mobility or public transport options available to them. For the commercial areas throughout the sub-region, an appropriate level of turnover is the focus of parking management policy and activities’. The action package includes an action (0-5 years) to the development of a carparking strategy changes to support increased parking turn-over.

27. The National Policy Statement (NPS) on Urban Development came into effect on 20 August 2020. The NPS made changes to what Councils can require in terms of on-site parking spaces (i.e. minimum parking requirements). The NPS also strongly encourages Councils to ‘manage effects associated with the supply and demand of car parking through comprehensive parking management plans’. These are anticipated to be a key implementation tool that gives effect to the under-development Parking Strategy.

28. The Te Papa Spatial Framework recommends to ‘progress parking policy reviews (including parking pricing) and strategy, to support better urban form and central government direction.

29. Plan Change 26 will enable higher density developments. This will likely add more pressure onto on-street car parking spaces in residential areas. In line with the NPS-UD, parking management plans are anticipated as an important tool to help manage these demands.

30. The Tauranga Community Outcomes to guide the development of the next Long Term Plan were endorsed by Council on 8 September 2020. Five outcomes were endorsed: we value and protect our environment, we have a well-planned city, we can move around our city easily, we support business and education, and we are inclusive, and value our culture and diversity. The way in which parking is managed generally, and in particular in the city centre, can influence community outcomes.

31. Emerging work on the development of a Parking Strategy: whilst the development of a strategy is still in progress, a package of draft technical memos have been prepared and shared with Council at workshops in September 2019 and October 2020. The draft consultants’ recommendations from these technical memos have been taken into account in this evaluation report. A key concept of parking management in centres is to achieve a high parking turnover, which helps to bring in more visitors per parking space.

Options Analysis

32. Based on the data, and recommendations in technical memos that have been prepared as part of the development of a Parking Strategy, four options have been proposed.

33. Given the short period of the trial so far and the upcoming Christmas period and the need to consult on significant changes, significant changes are not considered feasible for now. Hence the considered options only refer to on-street parking spaces. No changes are proposed to off-street car parks, parking buildings and streets outside the city centre (pre-trial) paid parking zone.

34. The three considered options are:

· Option 1: Extension: continue the current 2-hour free parking trial

· Option 2: Reintroduce on-street paid parking in line with the annual plan ($2.50/hour)

· Option 3: Introduce 2-hours of nominally charged parking, with a more expensive option for a third and consecutive hours.

35. Unaffected parking provision: Parking spaces that currently have a short time limit, e.g. 15, 30 or 60 minutes are a result of consultation with local businesses and residents. They serve a particular operational purpose and have been retained through the trial to date. Further, they are not affected in any of the options presented below.

36. Alternative options to further improve effectiveness of parking management as part of a wider parking approach within the city are not part of the trial and may be taken into account in a further evaluation, but will require consultation with local businesses, stakeholders and/or residents.

37. In all paid-parking options the first 10 minutes are not enforced (a 10 minute grace period) to allow visitors to find a parking machine or use the PayMyPark app.

38. The following tables provide advantages and disadvantages of the three options.

Option 1 – Extension of the current trial conditions (recommended option)

39. Key operational aspects include:

(a) 2 hours free parking on street with strict enforcement.

(b) No ability to extend or return in the same day for on-street parking.

(d) Off-street parking charging not affected.

40. Financial Considerations:

Budget – Capex – Nil

Budget – circa $100k per month of lost user fee revenue

OPTION 1 (recommended)

Retain status quo – extend 2 hour free parking trial

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Allows more time to assess how 2 hour free parking trial performs with ANPR enforcement

· People are becoming familiar with the trial conditions, so this option offers consistency.

· Free parking may improve the image of the city centre, and may encourage people to drive to and visit the city centre.

· Council is perceived to be supporting economic recovery of the city centre.

· Businesses have indicated support for extension of the current trial.

· Loss of revenue to Council from parking charges.

· Does not allow for visitors that may wish to stay longer than two hours to park on street.

· All-day parking is only available off-street.

· May ingrain parking/travel behaviours that are later considered to be unhelpful to longer-term objectives.

Option 2 – Reintroduce paid parking (pre-Covid) in accordance with 20/21Annual Plan

41. Key operational aspects include:

(a) On street parking is charged at rates as per the approved 20/21 annual plan

(b) No free on street parking

42. Financial Considerations:

Budget – Capex – Nil

Budget – Opex – cost of $20k to change signage. Reinstate revenue from user fees currently being sacrificed under trial conditions of c. $100k per month.

OPTION 2

Reintroduce paid parking (pre-Covid) in accordance with 20/21Annual Plan

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Aligns with Council’s longer-term strategic direction to encourage mode shift (UFTI).

· Pricing is a well-established mechanism to better manage parking supply and demand.

· Improves financial effectiveness of parking management for Council (‘user pays principle’).

· As Tauranga’s only centre with paid parking, this option may discourage some people from visiting the city centre.

· Current occupancy levels for some streets and parking buildings indicates pricing (as per annual plan) may not achieve optimal (85%) occupancy levels.

· Time limits ($P180) do not allow visitors to stay longer, despite paying for parking. Changes to $P180 may need to be considered if this option were taken forward.

· Change of Bylaw (P120) required.

· Parking spaces with a 30, 60 and 120 time limit would be also subject to paid parking.

· Change of all physical signage

Option 3 – Nominal charge for first 2 hours with considerably increased charge thereafter

43. Key operational aspects include:

(a) First 2 hours are charged at a nominal cost of $0.50 to cover credit card charges only.

(b) Subsequent parking is charged at an increased rate of $5 / hour

44. Financial Considerations:

Budget – Capex – Nil

Budget – Opex - $20k to change signs

Detailed financial modelling provided in Attachment 2.

OPTION 3

Nominal charge for 2 hours with considerably increased charge thereafter

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Partly aligns with Council’s strategic long-term direction to encourage mode-shift.

· Encourages visitors who intend to stay more than two hours to park off-street or in parking buildings, but allows for those who wish to park on-street.

· Current parking machines and apps have the technology in place for variable charging.

· Relatively cheap two-hour parking (and increased price afterwards) is recognised as good parking management to achieve high turnover.

· Parking spaces with a time limit of 30 minutes or shorter would remain free and would in essence operate as a ‘drop off’ or ‘loading’ zone.

· Note that in any paid-parking scenario the first 10 minutes are not enforced (a 10 minute grace period) to allow visitors to find a parking machine or use the PayMyPark app.

· Potentially reduces turnover as people can park all day if desired. In turn, those spaces are not available for customers.

· Despite a very low proposed fee for the first two hours, the city centre will remain Tauranga’s only centre with paid parking, this option may discourage some people to visit the city centre.

· Change of Bylaw (P120) required

· It presents another significant change for people to understand and would require considerable communication prior to implementation.

· People may not understand the variable charge logic, specifically, the steep increase from the third hour onwards.

· Change of all physical signage required

45. Realtime parking information: Within the current 20/21 approved annual plan budget there is provision for Realtime parking information. It is intended that the data we now have at our disposal can be used to communicate to motorists, encouraging them to the areas that have spare parking capacity. This is currently being scoped and is expected to be in place before the end of the proposed trial extension to April 2021.

46. Other considerations: An option that includes provision for up to 2 free hours, then paid parking afterwards was considered, but not put forward because it is not currently implementable for the following reasons:

(a) It is not practically enforceable currently at TCC: The option is not practically enforceable with Tauranga’s current parking infrastructure. Without in-ground parking sensors this option requires people to register at the parking machine or the app, even though parking is free for the first two hours (and paid parking afterwards). Visitors who would want to stay for an hour (free parking), would still have to register at the machine.

(b) Consequence for non-compliance: The consequence for not registering a parking event would be a $40 infringement.

(d) The PayMyPark app currently cannot be used for this option.

Legal Implications / Risks

47. Bylaws are required to support any parking restriction. Deviance from the current trial conditions will require bylaw revision.

Consultation / Engagement

48. Public notification via media release and website that the trial is being extended through to April 2021 when it will be reviewed by Council in April 2021.

Significance

49. The recommended option is considered to be of low significance, given that it implies no change to the current arrangements. Changes to the current arrangement would likely trigger Bylaw changes and would be of greater significance.

Next Steps

50. Subject to direction given by Councillors further evaluation of the trial would be presented to Council in April 2021.

Attachments

1. Evaluation of Parking Trial - A12035600 ⇩

Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting Agenda

24 November 2020

Quarterly Update – Growth / Land Use Planning Projects – November 2020

PROJECT	PROGRESS UPDATE	1. NEXT STEPS
Spatial Planning Programme	Te Papa Spatial Plan On 13 October TCC’s UFTD Committee resolved to approve the Te Papa Spatial Plan, agreeing in principle to the Te Papa peninsula 30-year Implementation Plan to support the recommended urban form, movement and broader spatial plan outcomes, subject to further investigation and funding availability. The investment timing, costs and cost sharing are now subject to Long Term Plan funding prioritisation and further investigations and agreement between the project partners, which will come before Council for approvals as the Te Papa programme progresses. Implementation of the outcomes of the Te Papa Spatial Plan area is also proceeding with the commencement of Plan Change 26 and the Cameron Road Multimodal Project. Future Spatial Planning As part of the 24 November UFTD Committee reporting, Council have prepared a report seeking approval to commence with the planning for the next spatial planning areas, in alignment with direction of UFTI: a) Mount Maunganui North to Bayfair / Arataki; and b) The Otumoetai to Brookfield Peninsula area, including Matua, Pillans Point, Bellevue, Judea and Cherrywood Initial details of the proposed scope and timing are outlined in the 24 November UFTD report, with further detail proposed to be brought before Council in early 2021.	Te Papa Spatial Plan Ongoing – Te Papa Long Term Plan funding prioritisation through LTP process. Ongoing – discussions and planning with key project partners, government agencies and stakeholders in relation to housing regeneration within the peninsula, particularly around Gate Pā/Pukehinahina and Merivale. Future Spatial Planning 24 November UFTD Committee reporting, seeking approval to commence with planning for the next spatial plan areas. Early 2021 – further detailed reporting in relation to scope, timing and engagement.
Smart-Growth Joint Spatial Plan (JSP)	The Government confirmed in early 2020 that it wishes to partner with SmartGrowth (councils and tāngata whenua) in order to progress and deliver on its Urban Growth Agenda. A key component of this is the development of a Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) covering the western Bay of Plenty which will build on UFTI, become a replacement SmartGrowth Strategy 2021 and deliver on the Urban Growth Agenda. The JSP will have a narrower focus than the 2013 SmartGrowth Strategy, especially in terms of the implementation plan which will focus on a concise list of short, medium and longer-term transformational initiatives relating to land use, housing, transport integration and wider infrastructure provision at the sub-regional scale. Key aspects of the project include: a) Converting the UFTI Final Report, Proposed FDS 2018 and the existing supporting material into a framework, similar to the Hamilton-Waikato Metro Spatial Plan, and address any immediate short-term gaps. b) That it will primarily be developed as a desktop exercise, relying on targeted engagement (not a formal SCP process under the LGA), with a target completion date and approval prior to 1 July 2021. c) Identify gaps for filling in next iteration of the JSP, noting a fuller more comprehensive JSP will be developed between 2021-2024 to meet the requirements of the NPS-UD. d) The JSP will include a work programme of actions. One of these will be the Iwi Spatial Plan which is being scoped up separately and being led by the SmartGrowth Combined Tangata Whenua Forum. TCC’s current role includes sitting on the JSP Working Group to oversee the Joint Spatial Plan delivery, providing workstream lead roles in relation to the Green-Blue (water and green networks) and 3-waters layers, and inputs into wider spatial plan layers.	Nov 2020 – scoping of terms of reference and inputs Nov 2020 – Feb 2021 – preparation of draft JSP inputs from partners, including specific workstream leadership from TCC staff, and review by TCC working group members. March 2021 – draft JSP for review Mid 2021 – Final JSP (Version 1) 2021-2024 – further development of JSP to meet requirements of NPS-UD and respond to any gaps in identified in version 1.
Plan Change 26 - Housing Choice	Resolution was received to adopt Plan Change 26 (Housing Choice) for public notification at the UFTD committee and Full Council meetings held on 13 October 2020. Public notification is currently underway, and the submission period closes on the 18 December 2020. Staff are available to answer questions and have one on one conversation during this time. In addition, 10 community open days are being held across the city between 23November and 4 November to provide further information on the proposed plan changes. Plan Change 26 has been progressed to enable greater housing choice and residential density in existing urban areas.	Public notification 16 November to 18 November. Summary of submissions and further submissions in early 2021. A report will be presented in early/mid 2021 providing a summary of the key issues received through submissions and seeking direction on the hearings panel.
Plan Change 27 - Flooding from intense rainfall Plan Change	Resolution was received to adopt Plan Change 27 (Flooding from intense rainfall) for public notification at the UFTD committee and Full Council meetings held on 13 October 2020. Public notification is currently underway, and the submission period closes on the 18 December 2020. Staff are available to answer questions and have one on one conversation during this time. In addition, 10 community open days are being held across the city between 23November and 4 November to provide further information on the proposed plan changes. Plan Change 27 has been progressed to propose a rule framework to reduce the risk of flooding from intense rainfall in Tauranga. The proposed Plan Change 27 provisions are not beyond appeal, but they do have legal effect. Delegation has been used by the General Manager: Strategy & Growth to approve the introduction of Rule 8D.7 exempting any building consents lodged prior to notification (16 November 2020) from requiring a Resource Consent under Plan Change 27.	Public notification 16 November to 18 November. Summary of submissions and further submissions in early 2021. A report will be presented in early/mid 2021 providing a summary of the key issues received through submissions and seeking direction on the hearings panel.
Plan Change 30 - Earthworks	Resolution was received to adopt Plan Change 30 (Earthworks) for public notification at the UFTD committee and Full Council meetings held on 13 October 2020. Public notification is currently underway, and the submission period closes on the 18 December 2020. Staff are available to answer questions and have one on one conversation during this time. In addition, 10 community open days are being held across the city between 23November and 4 November to provide further information on the proposed plan changes Plan Change 30 has been progressed as a technical plan change to clarify existing rules to remove ambiguities. It does not adjust the wider earthworks policy approach and plan provisions, which will be addressed in the upcoming City Plan Review.	Public notification 16 November to 18 November. Summary of submissions and further submissions in early 2021. A report will be presented in early/mid 2021 providing a summary of the key issues received through submissions and seeking direction on the hearings panel.
City Plan Review	The review of the City Plan is a statutory requirement every 10 years under the Resource Management Act 1991. The current operative Tauranga City Plan became operative in September 2013. Government direction through the national planning standards also requires the next Tauranga City Plan to be prepared and notified for public submissions by April 2024. A workshop with Councillors has been undertaken to identify key issues to be considered through the City Plan Review. Twelve internal workshops have also been undertaken with staff to identify issues to be considered through the City Plan Review. Staff are now working through these issues to identify research and investigation workstreams. A separate attachment has been included to this report identifying the key issues for research and investigation through Phase 1 and 2.	Continue with Phase 1 (research and investigation) and Phase 2 (issues and options). Identification of issues and options with key stakeholders will commence in early 2021.
Tauriko West Urban Growth Area	Tauriko West Urban Growth Area is a collaborative project with Tangata Whenua, landowners and three key partners being Western Bay of Plenty District Council (WBOPDC), Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC), and New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA). Tauriko West is located partially within WBOPDC and TCC jurisdictional areas. A reorganisation proposal has been confirmed by the Local Government Commission (LGC) and is expected to become effective in January 2021. A group has been established to meet transition requirements between the councils; and the first Order in Council has been approved by the Governor General to enable progression of the transition requirements. Work is also underway by TCC staff to develop further understanding of the infrastructure requirements to service Tauriko West and the necessary sequencing. Presented as a Staging Plan this identifies respective areas across Tauriko West and the necessary requirements to deliver the servicing to enable development to proceed in a coordinated and efficient manner, while also ensuring that as Tauriko West progresses, it is integrated with development across the wider western corridor and the City. Recent investigations have focused on wastewater capacity and availability of connections in the south through Redwood Lane and to the upper plateau through Whiore Avenue. Discussions with landowners on staging options, priority of connection and constraints to development continue while such investigations are finalised. The discussions with landowners include developing appropriate cross sections for the main internal road corridor in order to develop an agreed set of principles that will address issues associated with corridor width, extent of bus priority, cycle/pedestrian facilities and provision for utility corridors. Recently developed guidance will be shared with landowners as this detail is further developed; and liaison with network utility operators continues to identify adequate provision for services within the road corridor. Significant progress has been made with landowners to agree the principles associated with stormwater management and the implications for landform refinements. An agreed Concept Landform has been developed in liaison with landowners, and further work is now underway to address natural inland wetlands and diversion of modified watercourses in accordance with the recently released NPSFM as well as the new National Environmental Standard for Freshwater (NESFW). The Tauranga City Council continues to progress work on the development of the future structure plan to incorporate all necessary infrastructure. This includes the initial State Highway roading improvements to enable Tauriko West to progress, strategic wastewater and water supply assessments for both the interim and long-term periods, and progression of work for a future comprehensive stormwater consent. Work has commenced on the preparation of the RMA planning provisions and appropriate zoning of land for the Tauriko West plan change. Market Economics and 4Sight Planning have recently been engaged to deliver an assessment of policy options to drive increased housing densities and a wider variety of housing in the Urban Growth Area. Work continues with NZTA on State Highway Planning, for early access to the proposed growth area and long-term upgrades for SH29. Further investigations by NZTA continue for SH29/SH29A upgrade options.	The Concept Landform developed in agreement with landowners is now subject to further assessment of natural inland wetlands and stream diversions/relocations proposed, under the (new) National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM) provisions. Further work on stormwater management and structure plan related details awaits outcome. The further ecological assessment of wetlands will be undertaken in liaison with the landowners and BOPRC; and is likely to identify additional wetland areas which subsequently reduces the extent of developable land and the associated yield. Ongoing liaison with Te Kauae a Roopu (Hapu based forum) as part of the Iwi/Hapu engagement; and work to continue on the Maori (Cultural) Values Assessment coordinated by Te Kauae a Roopu. Separate liaison with Iwi required. Continue working with NZTA on State Highway Planning, for early access to the proposed growth area and long-term upgrades for SH29. Continue technical workstreams, particularly for flood risk assessment, groundwater and ecological assessments, and Plan Change drafting. Progress with the required steps to meet the first Order in Council in regard to the Transition Body, which is to establish an implementation team to develop a plan which is then progressed to the second Order in Council to allow the progression of tasks to meet the reorganisation plan. Continue engagement with Government agencies in relation to the proposed RMA national directions. This includes consideration of the new National Policy Statements for Urban Development and Freshwater Management, the new National Environmental Standard for Freshwater and potential streamline zoning pathways.
Te Tumu Urban Growth Area	Council have completed the majority of technical assessments to inform the structure plan. The inputs for the technical reports have been based on three population scenarios to ensure that appropriate infrastructure can be delivered. These three population scenarios range from a base of 15,500 people up to 25,000 people. Most technical workstreams are now complete with final reporting in the process of being reviewed including a stormwater management strategy. A review is to commence shortly on the impact of recently enacted National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (Freshwater NPS 2020) and its impacts on stormwater management within Te Tumu. Updates to some natural hazard work has also taken place to account for updated Ministry for the Environment guidance on sea level rise – including updates to tsunami and coastal erosion modelling. Transport modelling is continuing to help inform final road corridor and intersection concept development. These road corridors include the provisions for walking, cycling and public transport. Reporting has also been finalised in respect to natural hazard risk for lifeline infrastructure. The outputs of this are being considered in respect to adherence with the Regional Policy Statement. All these workstreams will inform the structure plan and plan change documentation. Work is ongoing in respect to the preparation of the RMA planning provisions and the identification of appropriate zoning and rule frameworks for the Te Tumu Plan Change. Consideration is now also being given to the requirement for enablement provisions around building heights and density in accordance with the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD 2020). These requirements are being considered alongside existing technical work that has already been completed. Development of a framework for reporting on Plan Change content in accordance with RMA Section 32 has also commenced. Discussions with landowners are ongoing in relation to the preparation of funding agreements for the delivery of infrastructure and services within this urban growth area, along with the potential staging of these assets. Also, as for Tauriko West above, Market Economics and 4Sight Planning are in the process of finalising an assessment of policy options to improve housing density and diversity outcomes in Te Tumu. On 9 April 2020 the Māori Appellate Court released its decision affirming the 24 October 2018 decision of the Māori Land Court to dismiss the application by the Tumu Kaituna 14 Trust for a change of status of a 55 hectare portion of the land block (from Māori land to general land) and a Trust order variation. The Trust has subsequently lodged an appeal of this decision with the NZ Court of Appeal. This appeal is scheduled to be heard by the Court in Feb 2021. Therefore, provision of infrastructure corridors through this land to support delivery of development within the remainder of the growth area will be subject to the outcomes of the Court of Appeal process and landowner engagement via the various affected Māori landowners. It is expected that urban development within this growth area will now be further delayed, until such a time as access through this Māori land block to the remainder of the growth area can be confirmed.	Complete infrastructure planning and road corridor planning assessments. Undertake wetland re-assessment in line with requirements of Freshwater NPS 2020. Continue finalising reporting from technical workstreams and preparation of plan change documentation. Complete structure planning processes. Develop updated communications and engagement program for Te Tumu, in preparation for re-engagement with iwi authorities, and wider community in progression for future plan change progression. Continue to work with TK14 Trust on TCC proposal for next steps on infrastructure corridor creation.
Future Urban Growth Areas: Keenan Road	The Local Government Commission (LGC) have met to decide whether 390 ha of land in the Keenan Road area should be included in a boundary reorganisation to facilitate development of this area. A project plan is being developed for the area to enable structure planning to progress in time for the City Plan Review assuming that the LGC transfers this land to the City in the near future. Long-term wastewater study for the Western Corridor is complete and was reported previously to an earlier UFTD meeting. This study provides for wastewater servicing in the Keenan Road area. A similar potable water study is nearing completion.	Continue to work with the LGC and WBoPDC on the proposed boundary reorganisation to move the Keenan Road area into Tauranga City. Progress a project plan for the future structure planning and rezoning of the area. Complete water planning study.
Future Urban Growth Areas: Lower Belk Road area (Tauriko Business Estate Extension)	The LGC has met to decide whether 175ha of land in the Lower Belk Road area should be included in Tauranga City. This area is earmarked for an extension of the Tauriko Business Estate in current planning documents such as the urban limits, SmartGrowth and UFTI. Long-term water study and wastewater servicing studies have been undertaken for the Western Corridor as the result of structure planning of Tauriko West. These studies include consideration of the Tauriko Business Estate extension area.	Continue to work with the LGC and WBoPDC on the proposed boundary reorganisation to move the Lower Belk Road area into Tauranga City. Complete water planning study. Complete investigations into transport improvements for approval by TCC and NZTA.
Future Urban Growth Areas: Ohauiti South	In August 2020 Tauranga City Council staff completed the Welcome Bay and Ohauiti Planning Study. The purpose was to better understand the infrastructure needs, options and costs to accommodate additional housing growth within the Welcome Bay and Ohauiti area. The assessment work and resulting report identified and assessed a number of locations within the Study Area that were potentially suitable for additional housing development while also assessing the capacity of services and infrastructure to accommodate additional demand. Specific infrastructure assessments were undertaken for three waters, transport, social and commercial infrastructure. The Study ultimately found that accommodating housing at suitable densities was most feasible in the Upper Ohauiti Road Area. The area on Ohauiti Road is at the southern extent of Tauranga City Council’s jurisdiction is presently zoned as Rural with a portion of Greenbelt overlay. It amounts to approximately 54 ha and is presently in single ownership. Council has approached the landowners to seek direction on whether they are willing to lead their own rezoning and structure plan process. The landowner has decided that they do not have the financial resources/imperative to undertake structure planning for the property, but would not oppose the Council undertaking re-zoning and structure planning of R346 Ohauiti Road for residential development.	Determine whether Council will undertake the structure planning and rezoning of the area at its cost as part of the City Plan Review. This is not currently a priority within the team’s work programme and the matter will be reconsidered once the Te Tumu and Tauriko West projects have been progressed to public notification.
Tara Road	The LGC has met to decide whether an area of land along Tara Road (bounded by Tara Road, Parton Road and the Tauranga Eastern Link should be included in Tauranga City. This is not a planned urban growth area however it is largely Crown owned.	Continue to work with the LGC and WBoPDC on the proposed boundary reorganisation to move the Lower Belk Road area into Tauranga City. Engage with government officials in respect of any potential future plans for this area.
Rural Land Study	This project has not progressed since the last quarterly update as it is not a priority workstream relative to other work underway across the team. The previous update is repeated below. A desktop study is nearly complete to determine the urbanisation potential of the remaining rural land areas within the city boundaries namely Bethlehem South, Oropi Road, Papamoa Hills, Papamoa and Matapihi. Draft findings are complete. There is no significant urbanisation potential identified in Bethlehem or Oropi, however, there are small areas in Oropi, which could be considered for Rural Residential. For Papamoa and part of Papamoa Hills catchments show that urbanisation potential is challenging as the land blocks are located on peat soils and with other constraints such as flooding. Further investigation is required to understand the extent of ground conditions challenges and mitigation measures before considering future urbanisation of these areas. However, it should be noted that a number of parties have development aspirations in these areas and some are progressing their own investigations and considering resource consent processes. The draft findings identify that there is potential for urbanisation in Matapihi and some parts of the Papamoa Hills area, however both catchments have large areas of multiply-owned Maori Land and urbanisation may not be consistent with the aspirations of these communities. Future engagement will be required with the landowners to understand aspirations and opportunities in this area.	The Rural Land Study is being finalised. The intention is that the findings of the study will be reported to UFTD in 2021. It is likely that the aspirations for Maori land identified in the study will be considered through the proposed ‘Iwi Spatial Plan’ which is an action from UFTI to be progressed over the next 12 months. The Study will also be a key input into the City Plan Review.
Smith’s Farm	Staff are continuing to explore options to progress the development and sale of Smiths Farm for residential housing. This will be reported back to the Committee most probably early in 2021. The main constraint is the cost, timeframes and risks associated with access. With the NZTA Tauranga Northern Link project progressing at pace, NZTA advise that it needs to complete a cost sharing MOU with TCC in respect of access and the proposed shared stormwater solution before the end of the 2021 calendar year. In broad terms NZTA will met the costs of retaining a like for like access as currently provided by Richards Way. TCC would meet the additional costs of an upgraded access to enable urban development. Good progress has been made on refining the MOU over the last few months. At present the cost of the access road is at a level that aligns with the development aspirations for Smiths Farm however greater cost certainty will not be known until the tender price is available (likely in December 2020). A final decision on whether TCC will commit to the access road is required in the first quarter of 2021 and as report will be brought to the Committee in relation to this decision. The timing of the access road being completed may come toward to end of the TNL construction period. Payment for TCC’s cost share would be upon completion of the road which could align with revenue from the potential sale or development of the site. TCC is able to apply for FAR subsidy for its share of transport costs through separate NZTA processes. There appears to be a reasonable prospect of securing funding. A point of entry has been agreed with NZTA and this will be considered at its November or December delegations committee. It is hoped that NZTA will approve the project to move to the pre-implementation phase at this time and endorse funding for the project.	Compete investigations and prepare Committee report. Complete cost sharing MOU with NZTA for Chief Executive signing. Report to elected members in early 2021 to determine commitment to access road construction and funding.
Government Policy & Initiatives	A substantive update of proposed RMA reforms was made through the last quarterly update. No further progress has been reported by the Government on its review of the RMA of the last quarter due to the election period. We expect this to be a significant focus for the Government in 2021. Freshwater and Urban Development national directions are now in place as reported in further detail at the last two UFTD meetings. The Government is still progressing: - NPS on Highly Productive Land: Consultation closed on 10 October 2019. The Ministry for the Environment (MfE) and the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) are reviewing the proposed National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL) based on public submissions. The work to further develop the policy was affected by the government's need to focus on the response to COVID-19 and ongoing recovery. Officials now expect to provide final advice to Cabinet in the first half of 2021. If approved by Cabinet, the NPS-HPL will likely take effect soon after. - NPS on biodiversity: The Government has outlined that the Biodiversity NPS is now set for release in April 2021.	Continue to make submissions as appropriate and engage with the Government and its officials on matters as they relate to Tauranga.
Natural Hazards & Resilience Planning	Separate reporting on the Resilience Project is occurring on the November UFTD meeting. Developing resilience in design and strategic thinking among the technical professionals and consultants of the city is a key means of achieving the objective of building a resilient Tauranga. Resilience presentations have been made to several consultants (WSP, Maven, Boffa Miskell), two professional institutions (ACENZ and ENZ) and two conferences in the last quarter. Two national conferences with a resilience focus have been hosted by Tauranga- the National Lifelines Utilities Forum and the GNS Volcano Short Course. Modelling of open coast inundation from Mount to Te Tumu is currently being undertaken by NIWA for BoPRC and the results will be incorporated into TCC hazard maps. Release of this information to the community is anticipated in second quarter 2021. It is likely to impact a number of properties along the coast and an appropriate engagement program is being developed around this. City wide land stability assessment has started and will continue through Q1 2021. This will be a technical advance on our current static hazard lines and will incorporate probability into the analysis for the first time. TCC has initiated a Super regional steering group with BoPRC, Waikato Regional Council, Auckland Unitary Council and EQC in order to standardise our approach and share resources. A pilot study completed in December 2019 indicated that this new probabilistic mapping is not likely to negatively impact properties as the existing 2001 mapping is generally conservative by comparison. Regional Lifelines Climate Change Risk Assessment is in progress. Tonkin and Taylor were engaged by Emergency Management BoP in October with scope and deliverables determined by TCC and other stakeholders. Output will be in Q1 2021 and will input into city resilience evaluations as well as providing evaluations of risks to main lifelines for the city such as power and transport. BoPRC is progressing considerations to make changes to the Regional Policy Statement, in regard to Natural Hazards planning. This work flows from current implementation issues raised by territorial authorities and professional consultancies. The current phase of work includes understanding the issues with RPS natural hazards implementation and potential short term implementation solutions. BoPRC are of the view that the RPS Natural Hazards policies and methodology changes will not be a full scale review, rather will focus on specific implementation issues to aid in interpretation and implementation of the existing approach.	Completion of studies on land stability, and open coast inundation.

PROJECT

PROGRESS UPDATE

1. NEXT STEPS

Spatial Planning Programme

Te Papa Spatial Plan

On 13 October TCC’s UFTD Committee resolved to approve the Te Papa Spatial Plan, agreeing in principle to the Te Papa peninsula 30-year Implementation Plan to support the recommended urban form, movement and broader spatial plan outcomes, subject to further investigation and funding availability. The investment timing, costs and cost sharing are now subject to Long Term Plan funding prioritisation and further investigations and agreement between the project partners, which will come before Council for approvals as the Te Papa programme progresses. Implementation of the outcomes of the Te Papa Spatial Plan area is also proceeding with the commencement of Plan Change 26 and the Cameron Road Multimodal Project.

Future Spatial Planning

As part of the 24 November UFTD Committee reporting, Council have prepared a report seeking approval to commence with the planning for the next spatial planning areas, in alignment with direction of UFTI:

a) Mount Maunganui North to Bayfair / Arataki; and

b) The Otumoetai to Brookfield Peninsula area, including Matua, Pillans Point, Bellevue, Judea and Cherrywood

Initial details of the proposed scope and timing are outlined in the 24 November UFTD report, with further detail proposed to be brought before Council in early 2021.

Te Papa Spatial Plan

Ongoing – Te Papa Long Term Plan funding prioritisation through LTP process.

Ongoing – discussions and planning with key project partners, government agencies and stakeholders in relation to housing regeneration within the peninsula, particularly around Gate Pā/Pukehinahina and Merivale.

Future Spatial Planning

24 November UFTD Committee reporting, seeking approval to commence with planning for the next spatial plan areas.

Early 2021 – further detailed reporting in relation to scope, timing and engagement.

Smart-Growth Joint Spatial Plan (JSP)

The Government confirmed in early 2020 that it wishes to partner with SmartGrowth (councils and tāngata whenua) in order to progress and deliver on its Urban Growth Agenda. A key component of this is the development of a Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) covering the western Bay of Plenty which will build on UFTI, become a replacement SmartGrowth Strategy 2021 and deliver on the Urban Growth Agenda.

The JSP will have a narrower focus than the 2013 SmartGrowth Strategy, especially in terms of the implementation plan which will focus on a concise list of short, medium and longer-term transformational initiatives relating to land use, housing, transport integration and wider infrastructure provision at the sub-regional scale. Key aspects of the project include:

a) Converting the UFTI Final Report, Proposed FDS 2018 and the existing supporting material into a framework, similar to the Hamilton-Waikato Metro Spatial Plan, and address any immediate short-term gaps.

b) That it will primarily be developed as a desktop exercise, relying on targeted engagement (not a formal SCP process under the LGA), with a target completion date and approval prior to 1 July 2021.

c) Identify gaps for filling in next iteration of the JSP, noting a fuller more comprehensive JSP will be developed between 2021-2024 to meet the requirements of the NPS-UD.

d) The JSP will include a work programme of actions. One of these will be the Iwi Spatial Plan which is being scoped up separately and being led by the SmartGrowth Combined Tangata Whenua Forum.

TCC’s current role includes sitting on the JSP Working Group to oversee the Joint Spatial Plan delivery, providing workstream lead roles in relation to the Green-Blue (water and green networks) and 3-waters layers, and inputs into wider spatial plan layers.

Nov 2020 – scoping of terms of reference and inputs

Nov 2020 – Feb 2021 – preparation of draft JSP inputs from partners, including specific workstream leadership from TCC staff, and review by TCC working group members.

March 2021 – draft JSP for review

Mid 2021 – Final JSP (Version 1)

2021-2024 – further development of JSP to meet requirements of NPS-UD and respond to any gaps in identified in version 1.

Plan Change 26 - Housing Choice

Resolution was received to adopt Plan Change 26 (Housing Choice) for public notification at the UFTD committee and Full Council meetings held on 13 October 2020.

Public notification is currently underway, and the submission period closes on the 18 December 2020. Staff are available to answer questions and have one on one conversation during this time. In addition, 10 community open days are being held across the city between 23November and 4 November to provide further information on the proposed plan changes.

Plan Change 26 has been progressed to enable greater housing choice and residential density in existing urban areas.

Public notification 16 November to 18 November. Summary of submissions and further submissions in early 2021.

A report will be presented in early/mid 2021 providing a summary of the key issues received through submissions and seeking direction on the hearings panel.

Plan Change 27 - Flooding from intense rainfall Plan Change

Resolution was received to adopt Plan Change 27 (Flooding from intense rainfall) for public notification at the UFTD committee and Full Council meetings held on 13 October 2020.

Plan Change 27 has been progressed to propose a rule framework to reduce the risk of flooding from intense rainfall in Tauranga.

The proposed Plan Change 27 provisions are not beyond appeal, but they do have legal effect.

Delegation has been used by the General Manager: Strategy & Growth to approve the introduction of Rule 8D.7 exempting any building consents lodged prior to notification (16 November 2020) from requiring a Resource Consent under Plan Change 27.

Public notification 16 November to 18 November. Summary of submissions and further submissions in early 2021.

A report will be presented in early/mid 2021 providing a summary of the key issues received through submissions and seeking direction on the hearings panel.

Plan Change 30 - Earthworks

Resolution was received to adopt Plan Change 30 (Earthworks) for public notification at the UFTD committee and Full Council meetings held on 13 October 2020.

Plan Change 30 has been progressed as a technical plan change to clarify existing rules to remove ambiguities. It does not adjust the wider earthworks policy approach and plan provisions, which will be addressed in the upcoming City Plan Review.

Public notification 16 November to 18 November. Summary of submissions and further submissions in early 2021.

A report will be presented in early/mid 2021 providing a summary of the key issues received through submissions and seeking direction on the hearings panel.

City Plan Review

The review of the City Plan is a statutory requirement every 10 years under the Resource Management Act 1991. The current operative Tauranga City Plan became operative in September 2013. Government direction through the national planning standards also requires the next Tauranga City Plan to be prepared and notified for public submissions by April 2024.

A workshop with Councillors has been undertaken to identify key issues to be considered through the City Plan Review. Twelve internal workshops have also been undertaken with staff to identify issues to be considered through the City Plan Review. Staff are now working through these issues to identify research and investigation workstreams.

A separate attachment has been included to this report identifying the key issues for research and investigation through Phase 1 and 2.

Continue with Phase 1 (research and investigation) and Phase 2 (issues and options). Identification of issues and options with key stakeholders will commence in early 2021.

Tauriko West Urban Growth Area

Tauriko West Urban Growth Area is a collaborative project with Tangata Whenua, landowners and three key partners being Western Bay of Plenty District Council (WBOPDC), Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC), and New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA).

Tauriko West is located partially within WBOPDC and TCC jurisdictional areas. A reorganisation proposal has been confirmed by the Local Government Commission (LGC) and is expected to become effective in January 2021. A group has been established to meet transition requirements between the councils; and the first Order in Council has been approved by the Governor General to enable progression of the transition requirements.

Work is also underway by TCC staff to develop further understanding of the infrastructure requirements to service Tauriko West and the necessary sequencing. Presented as a Staging Plan this identifies respective areas across Tauriko West and the necessary requirements to deliver the servicing to enable development to proceed in a coordinated and efficient manner, while also ensuring that as Tauriko West progresses, it is integrated with development across the wider western corridor and the City. Recent investigations have focused on wastewater capacity and availability of connections in the south through Redwood Lane and to the upper plateau through Whiore Avenue. Discussions with landowners on staging options, priority of connection and constraints to development continue while such investigations are finalised.

The discussions with landowners include developing appropriate cross sections for the main internal road corridor in order to develop an agreed set of principles that will address issues associated with corridor width, extent of bus priority, cycle/pedestrian facilities and provision for utility corridors. Recently developed guidance will be shared with landowners as this detail is further developed; and liaison with network utility operators continues to identify adequate provision for services within the road corridor.

Significant progress has been made with landowners to agree the principles associated with stormwater management and the implications for landform refinements. An agreed Concept Landform has been developed in liaison with landowners, and further work is now underway to address natural inland wetlands and diversion of modified watercourses in accordance with the recently released NPSFM as well as the new National Environmental Standard for Freshwater (NESFW).

The Tauranga City Council continues to progress work on the development of the future structure plan to incorporate all necessary infrastructure. This includes the initial State Highway roading improvements to enable Tauriko West to progress, strategic wastewater and water supply assessments for both the interim and long-term periods, and progression of work for a future comprehensive stormwater consent. Work has commenced on the preparation of the RMA planning provisions and appropriate zoning of land for the Tauriko West plan change. Market Economics and 4Sight Planning have recently been engaged to deliver an assessment of policy options to drive increased housing densities and a wider variety of housing in the Urban Growth Area.

Work continues with NZTA on State Highway Planning, for early access to the proposed growth area and long-term upgrades for SH29. Further investigations by NZTA continue for SH29/SH29A upgrade options.

The Concept Landform developed in agreement with landowners is now subject to further assessment of natural inland wetlands and stream diversions/relocations proposed, under the (new) National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM) provisions. Further work on stormwater management and structure plan related details awaits outcome.

The further ecological assessment of wetlands will be undertaken in liaison with the landowners and BOPRC; and is likely to identify additional wetland areas which subsequently reduces the extent of developable land and the associated yield.

Ongoing liaison with Te Kauae a Roopu (Hapu based forum) as part of the Iwi/Hapu engagement; and work to continue on the Maori (Cultural) Values Assessment coordinated by Te Kauae a Roopu. Separate liaison with Iwi required.

Continue working with NZTA on State Highway Planning, for early access to the proposed growth area and long-term upgrades for SH29.

Continue technical workstreams, particularly for flood risk assessment, groundwater and ecological assessments, and Plan Change drafting.

Progress with the required steps to meet the first Order in Council in regard to the Transition Body, which is to establish an implementation team to develop a plan which is then progressed to the second Order in Council to allow the progression of tasks to meet the reorganisation plan.

Continue engagement with Government agencies in relation to the proposed RMA national directions. This includes consideration of the new National Policy Statements for Urban Development and Freshwater Management, the new National Environmental Standard for Freshwater and potential streamline zoning pathways.

Te Tumu Urban Growth Area

Council have completed the majority of technical assessments to inform the structure plan. The inputs for the technical reports have been based on three population scenarios to ensure that appropriate infrastructure can be delivered. These three population scenarios range from a base of 15,500 people up to 25,000 people.

Most technical workstreams are now complete with final reporting in the process of being reviewed including a stormwater management strategy. A review is to commence shortly on the impact of recently enacted National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (Freshwater NPS 2020) and its impacts on stormwater management within Te Tumu. Updates to some natural hazard work has also taken place to account for updated Ministry for the Environment guidance on sea level rise – including updates to tsunami and coastal erosion modelling. Transport modelling is continuing to help inform final road corridor and intersection concept development. These road corridors include the provisions for walking, cycling and public transport. Reporting has also been finalised in respect to natural hazard risk for lifeline infrastructure. The outputs of this are being considered in respect to adherence with the Regional Policy Statement. All these workstreams will inform the structure plan and plan change documentation.

Work is ongoing in respect to the preparation of the RMA planning provisions and the identification of appropriate zoning and rule frameworks for the Te Tumu Plan Change. Consideration is now also being given to the requirement for enablement provisions around building heights and density in accordance with the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD 2020). These requirements are being considered alongside existing technical work that has already been completed. Development of a framework for reporting on Plan Change content in accordance with RMA Section 32 has also commenced. Discussions with landowners are ongoing in relation to the preparation of funding agreements for the delivery of infrastructure and services within this urban growth area, along with the potential staging of these assets. Also, as for Tauriko West above, Market Economics and 4Sight Planning are in the process of finalising an assessment of policy options to improve housing density and diversity outcomes in Te Tumu.

On 9 April 2020 the Māori Appellate Court released its decision affirming the 24 October 2018 decision of the Māori Land Court to dismiss the application by the Tumu Kaituna 14 Trust for a change of status of a 55 hectare portion of the land block (from Māori land to general land) and a Trust order variation. The Trust has subsequently lodged an appeal of this decision with the NZ Court of Appeal. This appeal is scheduled to be heard by the Court in Feb 2021. Therefore, provision of infrastructure corridors through this land to support delivery of development within the remainder of the growth area will be subject to the outcomes of the Court of Appeal process and landowner engagement via the various affected Māori landowners. It is expected that urban development within this growth area will now be further delayed, until such a time as access through this Māori land block to the remainder of the growth area can be confirmed.

Complete infrastructure planning and road corridor planning assessments.

Undertake wetland re-assessment in line with requirements of Freshwater NPS 2020.

Continue finalising reporting from technical workstreams and preparation of plan change documentation.

Complete structure planning processes.

Develop updated communications and engagement program for Te Tumu, in preparation for re-engagement with iwi authorities, and wider community in progression for future plan change progression.

Continue to work with TK14 Trust on TCC proposal for next steps on infrastructure corridor creation.

Future Urban Growth Areas:

Keenan Road

The Local Government Commission (LGC) have met to decide whether 390 ha of land in the Keenan Road area should be included in a boundary reorganisation to facilitate development of this area.

A project plan is being developed for the area to enable structure planning to progress in time for the City Plan Review assuming that the LGC transfers this land to the City in the near future.

Long-term wastewater study for the Western Corridor is complete and was reported previously to an earlier UFTD meeting. This study provides for wastewater servicing in the Keenan Road area. A similar potable water study is nearing completion.

Continue to work with the LGC and WBoPDC on the proposed boundary reorganisation to move the Keenan Road area into Tauranga City.

Progress a project plan for the future structure planning and rezoning of the area.

Complete water planning study.

Future Urban Growth Areas:

Lower Belk Road area

(Tauriko Business Estate Extension)

The LGC has met to decide whether 175ha of land in the Lower Belk Road area should be included in Tauranga City. This area is earmarked for an extension of the Tauriko Business Estate in current planning documents such as the urban limits, SmartGrowth and UFTI.

Long-term water study and wastewater servicing studies have been undertaken for the Western Corridor as the result of structure planning of Tauriko West. These studies include consideration of the Tauriko Business Estate extension area.

Continue to work with the LGC and WBoPDC on the proposed boundary reorganisation to move the Lower Belk Road area into Tauranga City.

Complete water planning study.

Complete investigations into transport improvements for approval by TCC and NZTA.

Future Urban Growth Areas:

Ohauiti South

In August 2020 Tauranga City Council staff completed the Welcome Bay and Ohauiti Planning Study. The purpose was to better understand the infrastructure needs, options and costs to accommodate additional housing growth within the Welcome Bay and Ohauiti area. The assessment work and resulting report identified and assessed a number of locations within the Study Area that were potentially suitable for additional housing development while also assessing the capacity of services and infrastructure to accommodate additional demand.

Specific infrastructure assessments were undertaken for three waters, transport, social and commercial infrastructure. The Study ultimately found that accommodating housing at suitable densities was most feasible in the Upper Ohauiti Road Area. The area on Ohauiti Road is at the southern extent of Tauranga City Council’s jurisdiction is presently zoned as Rural with a portion of Greenbelt overlay. It amounts to approximately 54 ha and is presently in single ownership.

Council has approached the landowners to seek direction on whether they are willing to lead their own rezoning and structure plan process. The landowner has decided that they do not have the financial resources/imperative to undertake structure planning for the property, but would not oppose the Council undertaking re-zoning and structure planning of R346 Ohauiti Road for residential development.

Determine whether Council will undertake the structure planning and rezoning of the area at its cost as part of the City Plan Review.

This is not currently a priority within the team’s work programme and the matter will be reconsidered once the Te Tumu and Tauriko West projects have been progressed to public notification.

Tara Road

The LGC has met to decide whether an area of land along Tara Road (bounded by Tara Road, Parton Road and the Tauranga Eastern Link should be included in Tauranga City. This is not a planned urban growth area however it is largely Crown owned.

Continue to work with the LGC and WBoPDC on the proposed boundary reorganisation to move the Lower Belk Road area into Tauranga City.

Engage with government officials in respect of any potential future plans for this area.

Rural Land Study

This project has not progressed since the last quarterly update as it is not a priority workstream relative to other work underway across the team. The previous update is repeated below.

A desktop study is nearly complete to determine the urbanisation potential of the remaining rural land areas within the city boundaries namely Bethlehem South, Oropi Road, Papamoa Hills, Papamoa and Matapihi.

Draft findings are complete. There is no significant urbanisation potential identified in Bethlehem or Oropi, however, there are small areas in Oropi, which could be considered for Rural Residential. For Papamoa and part of Papamoa Hills catchments show that urbanisation potential is challenging as the land blocks are located on peat soils and with other constraints such as flooding. Further investigation is required to understand the extent of ground conditions challenges and mitigation measures before considering future urbanisation of these areas. However, it should be noted that a number of parties have development aspirations in these areas and some are progressing their own investigations and considering resource consent processes.

The draft findings identify that there is potential for urbanisation in Matapihi and some parts of the Papamoa Hills area, however both catchments have large areas of multiply-owned Maori Land and urbanisation may not be consistent with the aspirations of these communities. Future engagement will be required with the landowners to understand aspirations and opportunities in this area.

The Rural Land Study is being finalised. The intention is that the findings of the study will be reported to UFTD in 2021.

It is likely that the aspirations for Maori land identified in the study will be considered through the proposed ‘Iwi Spatial Plan’ which is an action from UFTI to be progressed over the next 12 months.

The Study will also be a key input into the City Plan Review.

Smith’s Farm

Staff are continuing to explore options to progress the development and sale of Smiths Farm for residential housing. This will be reported back to the Committee most probably early in 2021. The main constraint is the cost, timeframes and risks associated with access.

With the NZTA Tauranga Northern Link project progressing at pace, NZTA advise that it needs to complete a cost sharing MOU with TCC in respect of access and the proposed shared stormwater solution before the end of the 2021 calendar year.

In broad terms NZTA will met the costs of retaining a like for like access as currently provided by Richards Way. TCC would meet the additional costs of an upgraded access to enable urban development. Good progress has been made on refining the MOU over the last few months. At present the cost of the access road is at a level that aligns with the development aspirations for Smiths Farm however greater cost certainty will not be known until the tender price is available (likely in December 2020). A final decision on whether TCC will commit to the access road is required in the first quarter of 2021 and as report will be brought to the Committee in relation to this decision.

The timing of the access road being completed may come toward to end of the TNL construction period. Payment for TCC’s cost share would be upon completion of the road which could align with revenue from the potential sale or development of the site.

TCC is able to apply for FAR subsidy for its share of transport costs through separate NZTA processes. There appears to be a reasonable prospect of securing funding. A point of entry has been agreed with NZTA and this will be considered at its November or December delegations committee. It is hoped that NZTA will approve the project to move to the pre-implementation phase at this time and endorse funding for the project.

Compete investigations and prepare Committee report.

Complete cost sharing MOU with NZTA for Chief Executive signing.

Report to elected members in early 2021 to determine commitment to access road construction and funding.

Government Policy & Initiatives

A substantive update of proposed RMA reforms was made through the last quarterly update. No further progress has been reported by the Government on its review of the RMA of the last quarter due to the election period. We expect this to be a significant focus for the Government in 2021.

Freshwater and Urban Development national directions are now in place as reported in further detail at the last two UFTD meetings.

The Government is still progressing:

- NPS on Highly Productive Land: Consultation closed on 10 October 2019. The Ministry for the Environment (MfE) and the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) are reviewing the proposed National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL) based on public submissions. The work to further develop the policy was affected by the government's need to focus on the response to COVID-19 and ongoing recovery. Officials now expect to provide final advice to Cabinet in the first half of 2021. If approved by Cabinet, the NPS-HPL will likely take effect soon after.

- NPS on biodiversity: The Government has outlined that the Biodiversity NPS is now set for release in April 2021.

Continue to make submissions as appropriate and engage with the Government and its officials on matters as they relate to Tauranga.

Natural Hazards & Resilience Planning

Separate reporting on the Resilience Project is occurring on the November UFTD meeting.

Developing resilience in design and strategic thinking among the technical professionals and consultants of the city is a key means of achieving the objective of building a resilient Tauranga. Resilience presentations have been made to several consultants (WSP, Maven, Boffa Miskell), two professional institutions (ACENZ and ENZ) and two conferences in the last quarter. Two national conferences with a resilience focus have been hosted by Tauranga- the National Lifelines Utilities Forum and the GNS Volcano Short Course.

Modelling of open coast inundation from Mount to Te Tumu is currently being undertaken by NIWA for BoPRC and the results will be incorporated into TCC hazard maps. Release of this information to the community is anticipated in second quarter 2021. It is likely to impact a number of properties along the coast and an appropriate engagement program is being developed around this.

City wide land stability assessment has started and will continue through Q1 2021. This will be a technical advance on our current static hazard lines and will incorporate probability into the analysis for the first time. TCC has initiated a Super regional steering group with BoPRC, Waikato Regional Council, Auckland Unitary Council and EQC in order to standardise our approach and share resources. A pilot study completed in December 2019 indicated that this new probabilistic mapping is not likely to negatively impact properties as the existing 2001 mapping is generally conservative by comparison.

Regional Lifelines Climate Change Risk Assessment is in progress. Tonkin and Taylor were engaged by Emergency Management BoP in October with scope and deliverables determined by TCC and other stakeholders. Output will be in Q1 2021 and will input into city resilience evaluations as well as providing evaluations of risks to main lifelines for the city such as power and transport.

BoPRC is progressing considerations to make changes to the Regional Policy Statement, in regard to Natural Hazards planning. This work flows from current implementation issues raised by territorial authorities and professional consultancies. The current phase of work includes understanding the issues with RPS natural hazards implementation and potential short term implementation solutions. BoPRC are of the view that the RPS Natural Hazards policies and methodology changes will not be a full scale review, rather will focus on specific implementation issues to aid in interpretation and implementation of the existing approach.

Completion of studies on land stability, and open coast inundation.

Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting Agenda

24 November 2020

Key Issues for Tauranga City Plan Review, October 2020

Note: There are a range of issues that the City Plan Review project will need to consider. Those contained in this list are considered the key issues for the development of the next Tauranga City Plan Review. However, it is not a definitive list and issues can be added, amended or deleted as the project progresses. How key issues are addressed will be determined following the development of options for each key issue. Opportunities will be provided for stakeholders, tangata whenua and the community to provide input.

Reference	Issue	Summary	Scale	Priority	Processes/actions required
National & Regional
N1	Resource Management Act reform	Understand future implications if RMA is replaced and what transitional provisions will apply. Likely three years away at least. Some form of district plan will still be required for Tauranga, even if combined.	Large	Low	Council to retain a watching brief on this process as it may impact on future processes. Opportunities for Council to be involved on any new legislation eg. through submissions. Risk to City Plan Review to be monitored.
N2	National Policy Statement – Urban Development (NPS-UD) in effect from 20 August 2020	NPS-UD sets out how and where housing and business land for growth must be accommodated. Requirement for intensification plan change within 18 months of gazettal from 20 August 2020 and no car parking minimums. Implications for whether City Plan requires turning circles and access in relation to road hierarchy.	Medium	High	Refer report to 1 September UFTD Committee. Minimum carparking requirements in current City Plan to be removed by public notice in November. Consider how best to manage any consequential effects on access, services and road hierarchy.
N3	New National Policy Statements - Freshwater Management in effect from 3 Sept 2020 - Highly Versatile Land (due April 2021) - Indigenous Biodiversity (due April 2021)	Freshwater NPS largely at regional council level but some requirements on territorial authorities to include objectives, policies and methods for water quality. Highly Versatile Land and Indigenous Biodiversity NPS will have direct implications for City Plan.	Medium	Moderate	Assess implications for City Plan. Awaiting central government guidance. Some directions to district plans through regional policy statement changes first.
N4	Natural hazard requirements of Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement (RPS)	Development of some existing urban areas may not be possible due to natural hazard risk requirements, such as sea level rise. Review being undertaken to better understand implementation requirements and determine whether a development pathway exists. Certainty needed for being able to develop Mount-Papamoa and other existing urban areas of Tauranga through intensification and spatial planning under the City Plan.	Medium	High	Natural Hazards working group underway comprising staff from BOPRC, WBOPDC and TCC operating under an agreed terms of reference. Intention to agree high level policy implementation and confirm gaps in susceptibility modelling and risk assessment work. Any formal change to the RPS (if required) could include amending or removing specific policies and showing how other risk management approaches can comply with the RPS.
N5	Urban limits amendments	Urban development is required to be within defined urban limits agreed through SmartGrowth in the Regional Policy Statement. A formal change to the RPS is required to include areas currently outside of the western Bay of Plenty urban limits.	Medium	High	RPS change to give effect to NPS-UD (which includes more enabling provisions for greenfield development) UFTI and updated SmartGrowth spatial plan. Requires completion of SmartGrowth spatial plan.
N6	Urban Form and Transport Initiative, SmartGrowth and transport planning	Expectations on City Plan from UFTI and SmartGrowth spatial plan. Land use pattern that supports public transport and mode share. Links with N2 above.	Large	High	Requires development and completion of revised SmartGrowth spatial plan. Te Papa spatial plan and Plan Change 26 promote a more intensive land use pattern to drive greater public transport, walking and cycling.

Reference	Issue	Summary	Scale	Priority	Processes/actions required
Built Environment
B1	Housing affordability	Determine what role the City Plan can have in assisting to make housing more affordable. Significant previous work on this issue. Consider mechanisms such as Inclusionary Zoning.	Large	High	Actions identified in the UFTI report and Homelessness Strategy. Investigate other council’s district plans approaches (eg. Auckland City and Queenstown Lakes). Homelessness Strategy Action Plan alignment with the actions in the UFTI report.
B2	Housing choice	Requirements for enabling housing choice from single detached dwellings to apartment living. Follows from Plan Change 26 – Housing choice and Te Papa spatial plan. Links with N2 and B1 issues above.	Medium	Moderate	Investigate what other councils’ City/District Plans require. Consider potential limitations of the RMA around implementation of mandatory affordable housing provision.
B3	Visitor accommodation	Review how plan addresses tiny homes, Air BnB, Book a Bach, portacabins, and secondary independent dwellings.	Small	Moderate	Investigate other councils use of regulatory tools, including the district plan to manage these activities, and the cost requirements. Christchurch City is to notify a plan change to address effects from un-hosted visitor accommodation. Consider rating and development contribution approaches.
B4	Commercial centres hierarchy	Develop a commercial centres hierarchy for Tauranga to implement the zones set out in the National Planning Standards.	Medium	Moderate	Spatial mapping of national planning standard zones for Tauranga and what that means in practice against outcomes sought. Technical input required from external experts.
B5	Industrial areas hierarchy	Develop an industrial zones hierarchy to ensure implementation of the National Planning Standards.	Medium	Moderate	Spatial mapping of national planning standard zones for Tauranga and what that means in practice against outcomes sought. Technical input required from external experts.
B6	Urban design	Investigate urban design approaches that are pragmatic and outcome focussed, while providing flexibility for development.	Medium	Moderate	Investigate having an Urban Design Panel to assess development as a requirement of the City Plan.
B7	Universal design	How development allows for ageing in place and changing circumstances of those living in housing. Universal design is the design of buildings, products or environments to make them accessible to all people, regardless of age, disability or other factors.	Medium	Moderate	Investigate other councils use of City/District Plan, and cost requirements. Undertake high level assessment of potentially feasibly options for incorporating universal design in new developments.
B8	Sequencing of development	Ensuring orderly progression of services and infrastructure as well connectivity of roads, cycleways and walkways	Medium	Moderate	Consider greater regulatory intervention in development through structure planning, staged development triggers and development contributions policy to require sequenced development to occur. Consider options to require connectivity through objectives, policies and rules as part of comprehensive development approach.
B9	Covenant restrictions to re-development	Determine what role Council can have that limits covenants that restrict further development opportunities.	Medium	Moderate	Revisit existing work undertaken to address restrictive covenants to ensure re-development opportunities.
B10	Social diversity	The role the City Plan might be able to play in assisting in developing social diverse communities.	Medium	Moderate	Investigate other councils use of City/District Plan. Undertake high level assessment of potentially feasibly options for how social diversity might be encouraged in new subdivision and development.

Reference	Issue	Summary	Scale	Priority	Processes/actions required
Natural Environment and Sustainability
ES1	Sustainability - solar energy use	Consider how City Plan could promote solar energy use for new development	Small	Low	Investigate other councils use of City/District Plan, and cost requirements. Undertake high level assessment of potentially feasibly options for sustainable energy uses in new development.
ES2	Sustainability - water efficiency	Consider how City Plan could promote water efficiency for new development	Small	Low	Investigate other councils use of City/District Plan, and cost requirements. Undertake high level assessment of potentially feasibly options for water efficient uses in new development
ES3	Water quality	Consider how the City Plan can maintain and enhance water quality in streams, rivers and waterways around Tauranga. Links with N3.	Small	Low	Directed by the new National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management. Assess options for further requirements in the City Plan.
ES4	Hazardous substances	Analysis of the National Environmental Standards and other councils’ approaches in their district plan to the management of hazardous substances and whether additional controls are required.	Small	Low	Investigate other councils use of City/District Plan, and cost requirements. Undertake high level assessment of potentially feasibly options with pros and cons for controlling hazardous substances in the City Plan.
ES5	Tree protection	Register and Significant Notable Trees to be reviewed and approach to tree protection in plan. Links with ‘Growing Tauranga Green Strategy’ 2006 and Council’s ‘Vegetation and Tree Management Policy’. Complex due to high community interest.	Medium	Moderate	Current approach to identifying and protecting significant trees to be reviewed. High level options to be presented. Review of tree register with landowners able to nominate any additional trees for assessment.
ES6	Ecological preservation and protection	Significant Ecological Areas re-assessment in plan and any amendments needed, including mapping. Section 6(c) RMA requires the protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna.	Small	Low	Technical work to be undertaken by ecological experts. Assessment to be undertaken after National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity released (April 2021) to confirm criteria for assessment.
ES7	Outstanding landscapes and important amenity landscapes	Re-assessment of significant landscape areas in plan and any amendments needed, including mapping. Section 6(b) RMA requires the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes from inappropriate subdivision, use and development.	Small	Low	Technical work to be undertaken by landscape experts. Council required to identify and protect significant landscapes and natural features.
ES8	Low impact design	Consider how low impact design measures can be incorporated into new development. Low Impact Design (LID) is an inter-disciplinary design approach to stormwater management which seeks to deliver integrated solutions and achieve multiple benefits from land development.	Medium	Moderate	Review low impact design guidelines associated with Infrastructure Development Code. Investigate other councils use of City/District Plan to require and/or encourage low impact design. Undertake high level assessment of potentially feasibly options with pros and cons for requiring low impact design measures through the City Plan.

Reference	Issue	Summary	Scale	Priority	Processes/actions required
Heritage and Cultural
C1	Cultural heritage	Undertake an assessment of archaeological sites and cultural heritage, to determine what additional areas may need to be included in the plan.	Medium	Moderate	Technical re-assessment by external experts, in close consultation and discussion with tangata whenua, iwi/hapu authorities and Heritage NZ. Assess mechanisms to protect sites in City Plan and whether current approach is sufficient.
C2	Viewshafts	Review marae viewshafts in light of spatial planning outcomes and potential conflicts with NPS-UD intensification requirements.	Small	Moderate	Technical re-assessment by external experts
C3	Whareroa marae	Consider planning pathways for the protection of Whareroa Marae community from the adverse effects of industrial activities.	Medium	High	Council decision to investigate with initial scoping study with BOPRC. Direction from legal advice.
C4	Maori Land (Trusts Land)	Determine how to progress land-uses on multiple owned Maori land inclusion in City Plan.	Large	Moderate	Engagement with land trusts, including Te Aro Whenua (group of larger trusts and entities in Tauranga). Assess options to achieve outcome sought eg. rezoning.
C5	Review and updating of iwi and hapu management plans, including Ngati Hangarau	Consider how City Plan can assist iwi and hapu achieve outcomes sought in their rohe.	Small	Moderate	Council required to take into account iwi and hapu management plans. Awaiting completion of Ngati Hangarau hapu management plan to provide aspirations.
C6	Significant Maori Areas (SMA)	Review of SMA sites and addition of new sites to be considered following landowner engagement. Review of provisions to protect/manage SMAs.	Small	Moderate	Technical work to be undertaken by external expert to then inform discussions with tangata whenua, iwi/hapu authorities, landowners and others. Undertake high level assessment of options to comply with section 6(e) RMA to provide for the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.
C7	Papakainga housing	Identify how the City Plan can provide and assist with the delivery of papakainga housing.			Actions identified in the UFTI Final Report. Potential opportunities will stem from engagement conversations with iwi, hapu, marae, housing and Maori land trust entities.
C8	Iwi spatial planning	Identify and consider how the City Plan might enable development of Maori land and Crown settlement land. Identifying protection of cultural values that would incorporate several of the Cultural and Heritage issues above.			UFTI action for iwi spatial planning. Spatial planning outcomes to be considered through City Plan Review.

Reference	Issue	Summary	Scale	Priority	Processes/actions required
Spatial & Rezoning
S1	Accommodating future growth	Confirming land use pattern for future growth in meeting the requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development. Links with N2 and N6 above.	Large	High	Requires development and completion of revised SmartGrowth spatial plan.
S2	Application of National Planning Standard zonings	Spatially map the zones required to be used in the City Plan by the National Planning Standards.	Medium	High	Ensure outcomes fit with City Vision for Tauranga – are activities occurring in the right place?
S3	Industrial activity vs business activity	Provide better certainty of outcomes to ensure activities occur in appropriate parts of Tauranga.	Small	Low	To be clarified through the commercial centres and industrial hierarchy work.
S4	City centre vibrancy / liveability	What is needed to encourage residential development to enable more people to live in and near the City centre?	Medium	High	Analysis to understand drivers / impediments to City Centre use, including retail economics and social infrastructure. LTP to consider developing City Centre Plan.
S5	New greenfield growth areas	Delivery of Ohauti South, Keenan Road and TBE (Stage 4) as new growth areas, with Structure Plans.	Medium	High	Requires structure planning and setting up as new projects, with input across Council teams, including Transport Planning, Infrastructure Planning, Spaces & Places. Some questions around whether Ohauiti South will be progressed due to landowner position on structure planning – refer Attachment A to Quarterly Planning Projects Update report.
S6	Rezoning for development	Council needs to understand areas sought to be rezoned and ensure sufficient information is provided. Potential areas for rezoning include: · Parau Farms (TCC) · Private requests – Renner Park, Domain Road, Tara Road · Kainga Ora developments	Medium	Moderate	Identify all likely rezoning requests through initial engagement with stakeholders, developers and tangata whenua. Assess suitability and seek information from requesters to justify inclusion in draft plan. Infrastructure assessments will be required.
S7	Natural Hazards, Climate Change and Community Resilience	The role the City Plan has to play in Council’s adaptive planning response to natural hazards, climate change and resilience issues. Continuation of existing work programme.	Large	Moderate	Includes assessing the resilience to natural hazards of Council’s infrastructure and the impact on potential future landform. Input from Sustainability Advisory Panel when established.

Reference	Issue	Summary	Scale	Priority	Processes/actions required
Infrastructure
I1	Transport System Plan	Identify requirements arising from the Transport System Plan on the City Plan. Walking and cycling network connectivity.	Medium	High	Consider as part of reviewing transport provisions of current City Plan. Determine multi-modal transport forms and connectivity requirements through plan provisions and structure planning, including access and provision of walkways and cycleways.
I2	Roading hierarchy	Consider the current roading hierarchy and design requirements. Impacts of recent NZTA assessment standards.	Small	Low	Consider as part of reviewing transport provisions of current City Plan.
I3	Infrastructure Development Code (IDC)	The IDC outlines Council’s required standards for how infrastructure and land should be developed. IDC requires ‘teeth’ through City Plan, but amendment by plan change is often not timely due to RMA process required. Options analysis to consider how the IDC links to the City Plan, and how the IDC is implemented.	Medium	Moderate	Investigate other councils’ use of City/District Plan, and cost requirements. Undertake high level assessment of potentially feasibly options with pros and cons. For example, Auckland City uses bylaw process as more flexible. Legal input and advice to be sought.
I4	Development contributions	Development contributions are fees payable to Council when development occurs through resource and building consents. These can be local fees or city-wide fees payable for infrastructure costs. Review of DC policy and financial collection to ensure that key assumptions and logic are relevant and that current issues are addressed, including DC funding on Maori land and community housing. The DC Policy is not part of the City Plan, but it is expected that this work would occur alongside the City Plan Review.	Large	Moderate	Ensure DC Policy work and City Plan review are aligned.
I5	Financial contributions	Most contributions towards the cost of infrastructure are taken as Development Contributions under the Local Government Act 2002. The current City Plan also provides for the taking of financial contributions under the RMA in some circumstances to augment the Development Contributions system.	Large	Moderate	Review current approach and quantify the amount of financial contributions required, as part of the wider Development Contributions review and considerations.

Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting Agenda

24 November 2020

9.3 Long Term Plan 2021 - 2031: Community Facilities Investment Plan

File Number: A11963439

Author: Ross Hudson, Strategic Advisor

Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy & Growth

Purpose of the Report

1. To propose the adoption of the Community Facilities Investment Plan for consideration through the 2021-31 Long Term Plan.

Recommendations

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee:

(a) Receives the Community Facilities Investment Plan report.

(b) Adopts the Community Facilities Investment Plan as the basis for consideration of community facility investment priorities in the 2021/31 Long Term Plan.

Executive Summary

2. Community facilities are a significant contributor to our community outcomes. They provide places for us to connect, to learn, to play and stay healthy. They contribute to the development of successful, accessible centres. They provide safe and inclusive spaces that allow cultural expression and provide opportunities for people of all ages and backgrounds to be inspired and to thrive. They are integral to our future planning, and our ability to achieve good place-based outcomes for all of our communities across the city.

3. The Community Facilities Investment Plan (CFIP) synthesises existing community facilities’ strategy, recent needs assessments and feasibility studies, taking into consideration the broader strategic context of growth, community wellbeing and financial constraints. It proposes investment priorities and budgets for the 2021/31 Long Term Plan (LTP). It seeks to ensure we provide the right facility, in the right place, at the right time to meet our community’s current and future demand for libraries, community centres, indoor courts, aquatic facilities and active reserves (sports fields). It also provides for the planning of future cultural facilities.

4. The plan takes a network approach for each facility type, considering the evolution of the network as we move over time from a city of 150,000 people to 200,000+. It seeks to provide a balance between locality, accessibility and economies of scale. Understanding where deficits are in the network and the likely flow on effects from diminished or increased provision allows us to provide a good level of service, balanced with cost-effectiveness and future-proofing.

5. The plan proposes a similar set of investments to the previous LTP, but with significant changes to timing and cost as a result of updated growth projections and revised cost estimates. Key contributors to this are delayed growth in the Western and Eastern Corridors, greater levels of projected development within the existing city, delays to the anticipated redevelopment of key existing facilities, land acquisition and access issues, and construction cost escalation.

6. The overall budgetary effect is that we propose that over years one and two of the LTP we will need $133m less capex than was budgeted in the previous LTP. Conversely, we propose an additional $54m of capex over years three to six. The total proposed capex budget over the 10 years is circa $299m.

7. The priority projects remain the same as the last LTP: a redeveloped Central Library, a redeveloped Aquatics Facility at Memorial Park, provision of a new active reserve in the Bethlehem area and Ohauiti Reserve, along with land acquisition to enable provision of new facilities in the Western and Eastern Corridors in the 2030s.

Investment drivers

8. Community facilities are integral to our Community Outcomes and agreed approach to development of the city around thriving, multi-functional, accessible centres. Their rapidly growing use demonstrates that the community values these facilities. For example, there was a 58% increase in visits to community centres and a 15% increase in visits to aquatics facilities between 2013 and 2018.

9. Where facilities are well-placed, well-designed and in decent condition they are very popular. Some of our older facilities, notably the Central Library and Memorial Pools, are nearing the end of their useful lives and are not fit-for-purpose to meet the growing and changing demands of our population. Previous and projected rates of population growth are such that even our more recent major facilities such as the Trustpower Arena and Baywave are under demand pressure. Baywave was built in 2006 when our population was 107,000; it is now estimated to be over 151,000.

10. Financial constraints have led to deferred investments in new facilities, particularly the redevelopment of facilities in the Te Papa peninsula, which has become both a key growth area and an area where successful redevelopment and accessibility is integral to the long-term functioning of the city’s transport network and network of centres. Significant further deferral risks facilities failing and would undermine the objectives of the Te Papa Spatial Plan and Urban Form & Transport Initiative.

11. Delayed growth in the Western and Eastern Corridors eases the investment pressure for new facilities in those areas. However, purchases of land in those areas remain important to ensure we can provide those facilities in due course and at the lowest price.

Scope of the plan

12. The CFIP has been developed to provide the basis for LTP decisions on community facility investment priorities, the staging of those investments and as the basis for long-term planning in the context of growth and demographic change. It is informed by demand assessments, catchment and network analysis, feasibility studies and updated cost estimates.

13. Overall, the Plan seeks to provide a programme of investment that:

(a) Prioritises areas of greatest need, urgency and network value, balanced against Council’s financial constraints.

(b) Looks longer than the 10-year LTP period and, where practical and cost-effective, seeks to future-proof community facility provision for an estimated 200,000+ population.

(d) Includes a required work programme for development of new facilities (key steps, timing and funding) and to review network demand and supply to inform future LTP planning and identify gaps in level of service information for community facility provision.

(e) Takes an integrated approach recognising the value of co-located facilities in communities (community hubs) and the efficiencies that can be gained from this.

(f) Can make use of external funding contributions where feasible.

14. The plan has been put together in partnership with Bay Venues (BVL) and covers Council’s core multi-use facilities provision – those facilities that are underpinned by existing strategy and agreed levels of service. It also includes provision for the planning of new strategic and cultural assets that are not part of the core network and for the master-planning of Baypark. It does not cover neighbourhood reserves, renewals and minor upgrades of existing assets or ‘single-use’ facilities that are brought to Council for consideration by community groups. These will be considered separately where necessary through the wider LTP process.

15. The CFIP is attached with this report (Attachment 1), along with a summary of the strategic case for the Memorial Park project (Attachment 2). We are undertaking a revised assessment of the scope and requirements for a redeveloped Central Library, the findings of which will be available in the New Year to inform the Willow Street Masterplan process. Any proposed budget changes will then be brought to Council for consideration.

16. The overall budgetary effect is that we propose that over years one and two of the LTP we will need $133m less capex than is budgeted in the previous LTP. Conversely, we propose an additional $54m of capex over years three to six. The total capex budget over the 10 years is circa $299m.

17. The priority projects remain the same as the last LTP: a redeveloped Central Library, a redeveloped Aquatics Facility at Memorial Park, a new active reserve in the Bethlehem area and Ohauiti Reserve, along with land acquisition to enable provision of new facilities in the Western and Eastern Corridors in the 2030s.

18. Funding for these facilities is expected to be predominantly from rates. However, development contributions and external funding from local and national sources are expected to contribute also. The plan and the updated assessments that underpin it provide the basis for collaboration and co-investment with potential investment partners.

19. Once adopted, the plan and the projects within it will form a subset of the LTP for consideration and prioritisation. Through that process we will be emphasising that there is flexibility on the timing of investment, but that we would not recommend significant changes to scope and budget.

Legal Implications / Risks

20. The CFIP and the information on which it is based will inform recommendations on levels of Development Contributions for the 2021/31 LTP. The Development Contributions Policy will be the subject of a separate report to Council.

21. Each significant project within the CFIP will have its own project implementation and governance regime through which key risks and legal implications will be identified and mitigated.

Consultation / Engagement

22. It is proposed that the CFIP becomes a component of the LTP consultation, pending decisions on investment priorities. Individual projects will then have their own engagement processes through detailed design and implementation phases.

Significance

23. The CFIP is considered to be of high significance with broad community interest and significant cost implications.

Next Steps

24. Consideration of the CFIP priorities and investment timing through the Long-Term Plan.

Attachments

1. Community Facilities Investment Plan - A12047768 ⇩

Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting Agenda

24 November 2020

9.4 Long Term Plan 2021 - 2031: Infrastructure Resilience Projects Proposed Scope and Cost

File Number: A11888657

Author: Steve Raynor, Resilience Specialist: Infrastructure & Urban Form

Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy & Growth

Purpose of the Report

1. To report the outcomes of the three-year Infrastructure Resilience Project in terms of natural hazard risks, vulnerabilities and projects identified to build a resilient citywide infrastructure and seek Council approval to include the outcomes into the 2021-2031 Long Term Plan prioritisation process.

Recommendations

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee:

(a) Receives the Infrastructure Resilience Projects Proposed Scope and Cost report.

(b) Approves the use of the Resilience Project methodology and outcomes in development of the 2021-31 Long Term Plan and 30-year Infrastructure Strategy.

Executive Summary

2. The Infrastructure Resilience Project, started in 2017, has reached the point where potential hazard prone assets throughout the City have been identified and potential mitigation projects scoped and costed. Some 315 projects have been identified, rated for risk reduction and resilience contribution.

3. The key findings of this project are as follows:

a) 315 projects across the City have been identified as mitigating natural hazard risks to infrastructure;

b) The 315 projects include 30 projects that have been presented with two options for mitigation;

c) Many projects integrate with previously forecast renewals and upgrades;

d) 24 projects indicate that long term solutions should consider option of relocation away from that area; and

e) The estimated cost of the total improvement program is between $850-950 million. This includes $60-120 million of pre-budgeted renewals. Opportunity exists within the transportation activity for Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) funding.

4. Implementation of projects (and project prioritisation) is proposed to be subject to a cascading ranking approach using a cascading criterion of “high criticality”, “large improvement’, “renewals/potential Waka Kotahi (NZTA) subsidy”, “best resilience gain per $ rating”, and “alignment of linked/joint project or has strategic alignment”.

5. Progressing these identified projects will overtime aid to the establishment of a genuinely resilient city infrastructure and result in the risk of a significant loss of service to the City’s population and economic centres, loss of critical service or result in civil emergencies.

6. Without the progression of the Resilience Infrastructure Project in the 2021-31 LTP and 30-year infrastructure will require (across all assets types):

(a) A continued and prolonged reliance on risk reserves (currently in negative) to respond to a natural hazard event (or other funding means would be required to be found to recover from the event and establish infrastructure that would provide for the city’s needs);

(b) Reliance on insurance (which may not be available to cover recovery or increase in cost to TCC as a result of knowing exposure to hazards);

(d) Reliance on renewals being the only source of improvement (potentially without a resilience lens being placed over the renewal improvement).

7. Additionally, there is a risk to delivery of long-term growth management, as TCC will not have a mechanism to respond to the Regional Policy Statements Natural Hazards provisions (lifelines risk reduction) without a risk reduction methodology in place and an audit risk will exist against statutory requirements as TCC would not be addressing the risks of known information through its 2021-31 LTP.

8. All identified projects improve city resilience by a quantifiable amount and as implementation progresses, resilient infrastructure to support Tauranga growth and investment will be achieved.

9. Recommendations are proposed for provision of funding through the 2021-31 Long Term Plan (LTP) to initiate the implementation of the outcomes of the Infrastructure Resilience Project are made, utilising a bulk fund over the LTP period.

Background

10. The Infrastructure Resilience Project began in 2017 with the United Nations five priorities for reducing disaster losses as the underpinning approach developed for project progression within the set project plan. At that point there was clear awareness that:

· The Tauranga City Council (TCC) did not know, nor understand all natural hazard susceptibilities, including the potential effects of sea level rise; and

· TCC had not determined the consequences (and therefore overall risk) to infrastructure assets, and potential mitigations to reduce that risk.

11. The Infrastructure Resilience Project formed with the goal of directly addressing these unknowns and through research and design establishing an approach to deliver resilient infrastructure for TCC horizontal assets of three-waters and roads.

12. A key milestone in the project is concluding the identification of potential “at risk” assets and determining appropriate risk reduction measures (i.e. mitigation) to improve resilience and identify costs for prioritisation and inclusion into the 2021-31 LTP.

13. These risk mitigation projects have now been identified through mapping natural hazards and TCC infrastructure assets in a GIS database, assessing risk, identifying risk mitigation measures, costings those measures and determining prioritisation for implementation. When implemented these works will:

· Add security to already planned infrastructure investment;

· Build robustness and rapid recovery principles into our infrastructure assets; and

· Integrate future proofing into asset design and construction, including the renewal of existing assets.

14. The flowchart in Attachment A provides a decision making pathway to assist Council in its consideration of this report.

Natural Hazard Susceptibility Modelling

15. TCC holds comprehensive natural hazard information, either developed ahead of this project or developed as part of this project. This information considers a range of natural hazard event likelihood/recurrence and associated potential sea level rise impacts. All information is in the public realm, and currently utilised across a range of planning, LGA 2004, CDEM 2002 and RMA 1991 and BA 2004 processes. The natural hazard information includes:

· Tsunami

· Earthquake

o Tauranga Shaking Model

o Liquefaction and Lateral Spread

· Sea Level Rise

· Inundation from storms (inner harbour)

· Erosion

o Open Coast

o Inner Harbour

· Flooding from intense rainfall

· Groundwater

16. TCC also holds information on slope instability and is presently updating this information, which is due to be completed in March 2021. This updated hazard mapping will be released to the affected landowners and be available for use in all regulatory and resilience processes at that time.

17. All hazards used in the Infrastructure Resilience Project are spatially mapped within GIS to show each hazard in terms of different return periods and time horizons. An example is inundation is mapped with 50-year, 100-year and 500-year return period storm events and each of these are mapped with sea-level rise projections for 2080 and 2130 which are the current, 50-year and 100-year scenarios. This provides an extensive database for analysis and use in determining risk.

18. The asset databases for 3-waters and roads have been reviewed and updated to reflect current criticality and importance ratings.

Mapping 3-Waters and Roading Infrastructure Assets with Hazards

19. Locations where multiple assets are potentially exposed to multiple hazards (and therefore at risk) have been identified and the risks analysed. To achieve this the hazard maps are overlaid on the asset databases in spatial GIS software. The resulting intersections identify risk “hot-spots” where multiple assets are impacted by multiple hazards. Hotspots are established as projects to be investigated. These are location-based projects rather than asset-based. Each project addresses all assets and all hazards within its boundary.

20. Each hotspot is analysed in terms of risk. This is a measure of likelihood of a natural hazard event and the consequence of that event with outage times factored in to provide a risk rating for the project area as it is currently.

21. For all identified projects a concept design of mitigation measures has been carried out. As the projects were geographically based this provided opportunity to explore options that completely removed assets from hazard zones as well as straight forward strengthening or new material options. The risk factor was re-evaluated in the post-mitigation condition therefore providing a risk rating before and after the mitigation.

22. Cost estimates for each project considered are based on the concept mitigation design. Consistent construction and material rates were used across all the projects to ensure all estimates were comparable. The estimates included allowance for consenting. Land acquisition was identified in some projects, but no cost estimate attempted for land purchase.

23. Opportunity exists within the transport related mitigation activity for Waka Kotahi (NZTA) funding. This has been signalled but not included in the budgets due to the lack of certainty of those funds being available.

24. The key findings are as follows:

· 315 projects across the City have been identified as mitigating natural hazard risks to infrastructure;

· The 315 projects include 30 projects that have been presented with two options for mitigation;

· Many projects integrate with previously forecast renewals and upgrades which are already part of Councils’ asset management program;

· 24 projects indicate that long term solutions may require the removal of infrastructure from those areas (i.e. adaptation, or relocation may be more appropriate strategy than defence strategies via construction improvements);

· The estimated cost of the total improvement program is between $850-950million. This includes $60-120million of pre-budgeted renewals; and

· The programme of work can be implemented over the 30-year period, subject to confirmation of funding over the funding period through Long Term Plans and included in the 30-year Infrastructure Strategy.

Additional Considerations

25. It is noted that specific items of major infrastructure that are already under evaluation, such as treatment plants and reservoirs are not included in the above Project work as they are already covered in terms of consideration of resilience improvement individually by the asset owner. Bridges were evaluated and reported separately due to the multifaceted community interest and Transport Planning Strategy that is currently in development. As project concept designs are developed in detail once formally adopted into the LTP there is the ability to reconsider the option put forward, the solution proposed or consider alternative solutions such as adaptive approaches, or removal outright (i.e. retreat).

26. Where high risk hotspots have been identified and mitigation works programmed for late in the LTP period it is likely that an interim managed approach to securing the assets identified at risk will be required until the risk is addressed through the permanent mitigation measures.

27. This comprehensive analysis of assets and natural hazards proposes resolution of the highest risk hotspots. There is always the possibility that in a major event the hazard and/or the asset will behave differently to expectation and some damage may still occur. However, as progress is made on mitigation projects the impact of such an event will be reduced and the recovery period shortened.

Mitigation Project Rating

28. Following the process outlined in the background section of this report, each individual project has been rated for its contribution of robustness and reliability to assets throughout the City.

29. In order to compare mitigation projects for prioritisation several metrics were established for each project. There were:

(a) Existing risk rating. Numerical value in the current state representing likelihood and consequence.

(b) Post mitigation risk rating. Numerical value after mitigation works completed.

(d) Renewals ratio. The amount of cost covered by pre-planned renewals.

30. Project selection and prioritisation can be achieved by any combination of these parameters, plus consideration of total cost. Analysis of different prioritisation rankings indicated that projects of high existing risk and high improvement rating topped the priority project lists in several possible priority scenarios, and that using renewals ratio was ineffective in defining priority due to the low renewals budgeted.

31. Approximately 30 projects have more than one option representing alternatives for cost verses risk improvement. These metrics will be used to analyse these alternatives. The remainder of the projects offer a single solution and prioritisation can also be achieved by application of the same metrics.

Strategic / Statutory Context

32. Building a resilient City was a strategic goal established in 2017 with robust infrastructure and urban form being the first and underlying components of the wider consideration of moving towards a resilient City. Creating resilient communities, governance and environments are future sectors to be progressed.

33. Further, TCC has responsibilities under a range of legislative functions to understand natural hazards, natural hazard risk and reduce this risk. This includes the consideration of the effects of climate change (i.e. sea level rise) over 100 years.

Proposal for inclusion in 2021-31 LTP

34. Following the prioritisation process carried out in cooperation with asset operator’s, asset managers, infrastructure planners and resilience specialist, with oversight by the General Manager: Strategy & Growth and General Manager: Infrastructure a bulk funded approach is considered appropriate for the implementation of the resilience project over time.

35. A flow chart to guide consideration of decisions and options associated with this LTP proposal is appended in Attachment A.

36. This proposal represents prioritised projects through the 2021-31 LTP period as a bulk fund to maximise resilience improvement for consultation through the LTP processes.

37. It is recommended that a bulk fund be used which overtime will reduce the identified risk to infrastructure within the City, based upon the identified risk priority. The identified risk priority provides as an outcome:

(a) The ability to consult on approach and receive submissions from the community;

(b) Enables ability to determine investment in LTP;

(d) Clearly defined approach to risk reduction (over time).

38. To determine how the proposed bulk fund would be implemented, a ranked investment priority has been developed to recognise what projects should proceed ahead of others. This ranked investment priority is based upon a cascading criterion of “high current criticality”, “large improvement” “renewals/potential for NZTA subsidy”, best resilience gain per $ rating.”

39. The rationale for this ranked investment priority is due to the following:

(a) Initiates mitigation of highest risk first;

(b) Triggers early investigation of long-term critical issues like coastal retreat;

(d) Maximises benefit of pre-budgeted renewals;

(e) Permits flexibility to achieve low cost high gain projects; and

(f) Is well suited to programme style delivery and provides for a flexible approach to improvement resilience as part of renewals programs, as the opportunity arises.

40. The proposed funding scenarios currently for consideration of inclusion in the 2021–31 LTP are:

· Funding of $10 million per annum over the 10-year period as a bulk fund (total of $100 million). Project planning, design and construction would be allocated according to technical priority and an annual funding cap. This rate of expenditure would see completion of all the identified projects in 90 years. Details of the specific projects proposed, and their cumulative achievement are shown in the attached full report.

· Funding of $30 million per annum over the 10-year period as a bulk fund (total $300 million). This rate of expenditure would see completion of all the identified projects within the period of the 30-year infrastructure plan. Details of the specific projects proposed, and their cumulative achievement are shown in the attached full report.

41. The difference between the two proposed funding scenarios for consideration through the 2021-31 LTP are around the timeframe to complete the identified resilience projects. The difference is 30 years (with $30M p.a funding) to complete the identified program of works and 90 years (with $10M p.a funding). The completion of the project works within a 30-year timeframe will significantly reduce the risk the City currently faces in regard to a loss of service to the City’s population and economic centres, loss of critical service or result in civil emergencies from the event of a natural hazard event(s) occurring. While the same outcome is sought by the $10M p.a approach, the timeframe for delivery of the mitigation projects is greatly expanded, and therefore the scale of risk which will remain present to the infrastructure exposed. As the timeframe for delivery expands, the probability of an event occurring will only increase. Any variance between these two approaches will have a benefit above the $10M p.a approach.

42. Until the specific project mitigation is implemented the risk will remain, and will result in:

(b) Reliance on insurance (which may not be available to cover recovery or increase in cost to TCC as a result of knowing exposure to hazards);

(d) Reliance on renewals being the only source of improvement (potentially without a resilience lens being placed over the renewal improvement).

43. The rationale for the proposal for use of a bulk fund is that it provides maximum flexibility in progressing multiple fronts provided by these options. Design and construction phases can be programmed alongside investigations and mixed in scale to fit budget and resource availability to most rapidly progress towards a resilient city. A programme director can plan with long term confidence which translates to efficient processes and benefits construction forecasting for better market response.

44. The outcomes will be:

(a) Individual projects progressed through asset teams. Project Director and programme governance team may be OPEX expenses; (It is noted that OPEX budgets are not considered through this report).

(b) OPEX allowance for interim risk management needed for hazards identified but still waiting for mitigation;

(d) Large projects, of a scale above the bulk fund limit get delivered over multiple years;

(e) Annual budget retested each annual plan; and

(f) Potential for budget to be repurposed each year reduces ability to long-term plan projects.

Mitigation Project Impact

45. The outcomes of the Resilience Infrastructure Project have identified a number of TCC infrastructure assets which are susceptible to multiple natural hazards, and therefore are vulnerable. These vulnerabilities arise where multiple natural hazards threaten high criticality assets. Mitigation of these project areas is important to reduce the risk of these vulnerabilities from significant impacts that may result in loss of service to the City’s population and economic centres, loss of critical service or result in civil emergencies.

46. To aid in understanding of the type of criticality of the infrastructure assets prioritised through the Resilience Infrastructure project, two priority example projects are described:

(a) Waters supply routes south of the City:

Vulnerability occurs in several locations along the waters supply routes south of the City. The trunk mains pass through locations subject to landslide, liquefaction, inundation and flooding making these assets vulnerable to damage and difficult to repair. Loss of one or both of these pipes would threaten approximately 50% of the water supply delivery to the City. Loss of both is quite possible, under one or more hazard events. Mitigation projects have been prepared for separate exposures and a larger scale combined project prepared that removes the pipelines completely from the hazard threatened area. The outcome would be the provision for a continued supply of water to the city’s population local network, population and economic centres ensuring a pipeline of water to connect to the urban areas. Without mitigation, the continued risk of city water supply remains threatened.

(b) Chapel Street bridge and causeway:

Vulnerability exists to the Chapel Street bridge and causeway from earthquake, liquefaction, coastal erosion, tsunami, storm surge and the effects of sea level rise. The bridge itself is already known to be vulnerable to earthquakes, however replacement would be complicated by the multiple hazards impacting the approach roads which may be affected by sea level inundation within 100 years, which would be inside the expected service life of any new structure. Loss of the Chapel Street bridge and causeway would result in a loss of transport connection of the Matua, Bureta and Otumoetai to the rest of the City, resulting in the requirement to re-direct traffic flows to other transport connections. Loss of the bridge would also result in the loss of service to those connected communities of any infrastructure connected to that bridge also. Without mitigation, the continued risk of transport connectivity to these suburbs is at threat.

47. Each of these priority example projects (and all others identified for inclusion in the 2021-31 LTP represents a risk to the functioning and wellbeing of the City, and its economic productivity to a significant extent.

48. The Resilience Project has mapped a pathway to a resilient city by proposing mitigation to these examples and each of the other exposures represented by the 315 projects. Mitigation includes approaches such as protecting the area, strengthening or renewing the asset, realigning roads or pipes, and in some cases retreating from the effected location. Many innovative engineering and management solutions have been proposed to build robustness or repairability to the exposed asset.

49. Every mitigation project implemented will improve the city resilience by a measurable amount, noting it will take time to work through a programme of projects of this size.

50. Attachment B provides the list of prioritised projects for inclusion in the first years of the 2021-31 LTP for progression. This includes identifying the project and the rationale behind its selection, proposed mitigation, risk rating pre and post mitigation, consequence of not acting and costs.

51. Attachment C provides the “Tauranga City Natural Hazards Resilience Project – Building Resilient Infrastructure” outcomes report. This report provides the overall summary of the project process, methodology used, assessment process, all technical reports, mitigation projects and cost estimates.

52. Attachment D contains extracts from the main report illustrating mitigation project locations and a prioritised listing of these projects, costs and program.

Financial Considerations

53. It is noted that the Resilience Project, as established in the 2018-28 LTP, has a ‘holding’ capital budget of $175 million.

54. The use and make-up of the bulk fund and final amount for inclusion in the 2021-31 LTP will be subject to the consideration for the development of that Plan, and decision by the Council upon adoption of that Plan for community consultation.

55. Implementation of all projects would be timed to coincide with pre-planned and pre-budgeted renewals or upgrade work to minimise cost and disruption.

56. Every project completed will improve city resilience to natural hazards and provides additional security to private and public investment.

Legal Implications / Risks

57. The key risks identified as part of this project are listed below:

(a) Exposure of assets. There are an identified 315 projects which are identified as being susceptible to natural hazards and therefore a consequence on community, in terms of that hazard being potentially exposed and therefore, subject to outage, resulting in a range of risks (i.e. environment, social, loss or decrease of level of service).

(b) Risks associated with deferring implementation of the programme. This exacerbates existing identified risks to assets, under threat of natural hazard events. This could result in operation issues, risks environmental and community consequences associated with the loss of infrastructure LOS, or lifelines, based upon failure of the land, or the hazard occurring.

(c) Financial risks. The costs for this programme are significant (as a total project cost). Recent work has attempted to provide considered cost estimates with funding risk included, which mitigates (but does not eliminate) the risks of significant budget overruns as part of specific design of mitigations, and implementation.

Consultation / Engagement

58. Consultation on the outcomes of natural hazard susceptibility mapping occurs as part of the outcome of the hazard mapping.

59. No external stakeholder consultation has occurred as part of this project, noting staff have provided a number of presentations with external providers and stakeholders on the project. Wider consultation on the delivery of a resilient City will occur through the 2021-31 LTP and decision making on prioritisation on projects.

60. External engagement will proceed as appropriate depending on the scale and location of the particular project, when it is prioritised for implementation.

Significance

61. Having regard to Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, significance of this project is considered ‘medium’. While the proposed inclusion of the bulk fund in the LTP, the matter is then subject to community consultation.

62. Further, while the outcomes of this project will affect the strategic networks of Council (transport, water/wastewater), the outcomes are to improve that network – over time.

63. This Resilience Project will produce a program of work for a significant improvement to the resilience of the City through management (i.e. protection) of strategic assets across the whole City providing a safer environment for the community.

64. Implementation of identified resilience projects will keep city infrastructure operating more effectively in extreme natural hazards events and support urban planning by removing people and assets from hazard exposed situations.

Next Steps

65. The outcomes of the Infrastructure Resilience Project will be included in the 2021-31 LTP, for public consultation as part of the LTP engagement and consultation processes. Council will, after receiving submission on those processes deliberate on whether the bulk fund proposed in this report will proceed as part of the adoption of the 2021-31 LTP.

66. Following the adoption of the final 2021-31 LTP Council staff will commence implementation of selected projects through options analysis, detailed design and construction.

Attachments

1. Decision Flow Chart for LTP2021-31 - A11975910 ⇩

2. Summary Rationale for High Priority Resilience Projects - A11992712 ⇩

3. Natural Hazard Resilience Project Summary Report - A11992578 ⇩

4. Extract illustrating locations and prioritised list of mitigation projects - A11992766 ⇩

Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting Agenda

24 November 2020

9.5 Long Term Plan 2021 - 2031: Urban Communities Programme - Spatial Planning

File Number: A11900228

Author: Gareth Pottinger, Project Leader: Urban Planning

Carl Lucca, Programme Director: Urban Communities

Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy & Growth

Purpose of the Report

1. The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the proposed Spatial Planning programme for existing urban communities, and to seek approval to commence project planning for the Mount Maunganui / Arataki and Otumoetai / Brookfield spatial plan areas.

Recommendations

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee:

(a) Receives the Urban Communities Programme – Spatial Planning report.

(b) Endorses the commencement of spatial planning for the Mount Maunganui / Arataki and Otumoetai / Brookfield areas with staff to report back to the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee in the first quarter of 2021 with more detail on extent, timing and project planning.

(c) Approves future operational and capital expenditure associated with Urban Communities Growth Programme to proceed to the Long-Term Plan prioritisation process.

Executive Summary

2. In response to central government policy direction and the outcomes of the Urban Form and Transport Initiative (UFTI), a spatial planning programme is proposed to prepare 30-year blueprints of the strategic direction for growth of the Mount Maunganui / Arataki and Otumoetai / Brookfield areas.

3. It is proposed to prepare the two spatial plans in parallel with the City Plan review, acknowledging the strategic dependencies between the two programmes.

4. Staff are seeking approval to commence the preparation of project planning and to report back to the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee in the first quarter of 2021 with more detail on the extent, timing and project planning for the spatial plans.

Background

Urban Communities Growth Programme

5. Significant growth within Tauranga continues to place pressure on existing infrastructure and resources, including within existing urban areas and in particular those areas where greater growth will be enabled through proposed plan changes. Integrated planning for growth within existing urban areas provides an opportunity to plan for and prioritise investment over the short, medium and long term, while also responding to key challenges and opportunities.

6. Tauranga City Council’s programme for planning for existing urban communities (hereafter referred to as the ‘Urban Communities Growth Programme’) builds upon sub-regional planning (i.e. the Urban Form and Transport initiative (UFTI)) by delivering corridor based spatial planning (e.g. Te Papa Spatial Plan) and neighbourhood and centre planning. Using a collaborative approach, spatial plans and neighbourhood plans provide for integrated land use, transport and social infrastructure planning, while also seeking to enhance local culture and identity.

7. The Urban Communities Growth Programme will seek to comprehensively plan for how areas of our city are required to respond to central government policy and integrate with sub-regional and local workstreams. This report focuses on the spatial planning component of the programme (refer figure 1 below); a separate report is provided in relation to neighbourhood planning.

Figure 1: Urban Communities Growth Programme – Flow chart showing spatial planning components

Purpose of Spatial Planning

8. In 2020, Council delivered the Te Papa Spatial Plan, which developed a 30-year integrated land use and transport plan for the Te Papa Peninsula. As the Te Papa Spatial Plan moves into the implementation phase, the Urban Communities Growth Programme is now seeking to prepare spatial plans for wider Mount Maunganui and Otumoetai areas. These spatial plans will provide a response to central government policy including the National Policy Statement on Urban Development and progress the key moves identified within the Urban Form and Transport Initiative which were to prepare spatial plans for the Mount Maunganui / Arataki and Otumoetai / Brookfield areas.

9. In the same manner as the Te Papa Spatial Plan, the spatial plans are intended to create an integrated land use and transport network 30-year vision for the local area that connects with the wider City, which are supported by public amenities. The spatial plans will provide strategic direction for these matters and prepare future implementation programmes to achieve the intended outcomes.

10. The spatial plans will provide a comprehensive and integrated implementation plan that will respond to future growth demands for the areas. It is anticipated that the spatial plans will consider future land use planning, transport, culture and heritage, three waters, open space, community facilities and urban realm. In this manner, the spatial plans inform both strategic planning and long-term planning and investment.

Strategic Context

11. The proposed spatial plans (and subsequent neighbourhood plans) will respond to central and local government strategic direction, which sets out expectations for integrated land use and transport and supporting investment in order to achieve wellbeing and sustainability outcomes. A summary of influencing policy on the Urban Communities Growth Programme is provided below.

National Policy Statement Urban Development

12. Released in August 2020, the NPS-UD seeks to ensure development of well-functioning, inclusive and better-connected cities that reflect the diversity of their current and future communities. It requires that Tauranga City Council enables higher-density residential development in proximity to employment opportunities (including the city centre and neighbourhood centres) along with existing and planned rapid transit bus stops and where commercial activities and services are easily accessible by active or public transport networks.

13. Spatial and neighbourhood planning will respond to government direction by focusing on development of centres and surrounding areas supported by public transport, active modes and improved amenities.

National Planning Standards

14. The Government has introduced national planning standards to provide consistency in terminology across New Zealand. The first set of planning standards came into force on 3 May 2019.

15. The planning standards provide a suite of residential and commercial zones which spatial plans will need to consider and propose how these are implemented through the City Plan review.

16. Spatial planning will integrate with the City Plan review process to identify and comprehensively plan for how these zones could be applied.

Waka Kotahi – National Programme Arataki

17. Released in December 2019, Arataki provides national guidance with a 10-year view of the changes needed to deliver on the government’s current priorities and long-term objectives for the land transport system and integrated land use at a regional level. The spatial plans and associated projects incorporate an integrated land use transport strategy to give specific regard to the Arataki key steps changes, including improving urban form, transforming urban mobility, improving public health, tackling climate change and supporting regional development.

18. The Arataki Strategy links strongly with the abovementioned NPS-UD, providing direction on steps required to achieve the government’s short-term priorities and longer-term outcomes, including:

(a) Improve urban form – use transport to improve connections between people, product and places.

(b) Transform urban mobility – shift from our reliance on single occupancy vehicles to more sustainable transport solutions for the movement of people and freight.

19. Spatial and neighbourhood planning will need to strategically align with the above direction.

Key regional and local policy drivers

20. Urban Form and Transport Initiative (UFTI)

(a) Key moves in the endorsed UFTI business case have a significant influence on the potential outcomes of spatial plans and strong consideration needs to be given to the potential land use and population drivers and how these integrate with these key move processes. Consideration of timing to lead or integrate with these is required.

21. Transport System Plan (TSP)

(a) Further business case work will be undertaken as part of the TSP programme, including consideration of integration between land use and transport to support desired urban form outcomes.

(b) In some areas, the proposed TSP Corridors may trigger the application of the NPS – UD Policy 3 regarding land use outcomes, including implications on land use patterns and height.

22. City Visioning

(a) Anticipated to provide a set of objectives/principles that will frame land use and transport strategies.

City Plan Review

23. The City Plan Review will provide the strategic land use mechanism to implement the outcomes of any land use planning outcomes identified through the spatial plans. As such, strong integration is required between the teams to ensure there is consistency in the strategic approach and outcomes are deliverable.

24. An important influence on the spatial plan programme will be the outcomes of the built environment workstream which will explore the commercial centres hierarchy of the City and the supporting residential framework to ensure compliance with the National Policy Statement for Urban Development. These workstreams would be the focus for the next 6 months ahead of spatial planning commencing.

25. The spatial plan programme is being prepared with the intention to align with the timeframes of 2024 for the City Plan Review.

Long Term Plan Implications

26. Spatial and neighbourhood planning will assist to inform long term planning. Early implications and assumptions are discussion further below.

Proposed Spatial plans

27. In order to support the policy direction of UFTI, it is proposed to progress with the two spatial plans for Mount Maunganui / Arataki and Otumoetai / Brookfield. The draft spatial extents of these spatial plans, indicatively identified in UFTI, are shown in figure 2 below.

28. As shown, it is anticipated the Otumoetai / Brookfield Spatial Plan will include the suburbs of Otumoetai, Matua, Bellevue, Brookfield and Judea, bound by State Highway 2 to the south. The Mount Maunganui / Arataki Spatial Plan is proposed to encompass the Mount Maunganui suburb through to Bayfair / Arataki.

29. These spatial plan extents have a primary focus on commercial and residential land uses. As the spatial plans progress, these extents will be further defined through outcomes which are dependent on the built environment workstreams of the City Plan Review. The final proposed spatial plan extents will be brought before Council for confirmation in early 2021.

Figure 2 –UFTI - Indicative Spatial Plan boundaries (boundaries highlighted red)

30. In preparing the Urban Communities Growth Programme, there are several key projects and processes which require consideration and/or integration, including:

(a) National Policy Statements

(b) City Plan Review 2024

(d) Long Term Planning.

31. In order to comprehensively prepare spatial plans, an agreed programme with project partners will need to be established. This will include investigating the requirement for business cases with Waka Kotahi (noting that this may already be covered through business cases identified in the implementation plan for the TSP), along with preparing an integrated work programme within City and Infrastructure and supporting internal departments (e.g. Te Pou Takawaenga, Transport, Three Waters, Places and Spaces, Community Development, City Planning, Communications etc).

32. It is considered the spatial plans and work programme will cover the following:

(a) Land use planning including natural hazards and resilience;

(b) Transport planning (Integration with key UFTI and TSP actions);

(d) Open space and community facilities;

(e) Identification of significant sites, features or values which may be but not limited to cultural, ecological, historical or amenity;

(f) Utilities and infrastructure planning.

33. A commercial centres hierarchy study in early 2021 (as part of the overall City Plan review) will review and provide recommendations to translate the existing City Plan commercial zones into the new zone hierarchy required by the National Planning Standards (refer above). Along with the Transport Systems Plan, UFTI, existing resilience work and the NPS-UD, this will provide clear direction in relation to the land use pattern for spatial plan areas, including areas likely to be proposed for higher densities.

34. Importantly, a key component of these spatial plans will be to establish a partnership with Mana Whenua and to prepare a suite of principles for the area and to identify challenges and opportunities for Mana Whenua within the areas. It is proposed to commence regular hui as part of preparing more detailed project plans and to inform spatial planning from the outset.

Key challenges

35. In initial scoping for spatial plans, we are aware of a number of challenges which may need to be addressed or responded to when preparing the spatial plans (and acknowledging that some challenges will have higher priority in each spatial plan area).

36. A summary of identified challenges within spatial plans include:

(a) Resilience and Natural Hazards - Adaptation

(b) Land use (Existing interfaces, Existing Natural features and significant landscapes)

(d) Three waters infrastructure (Stormwater)

(e) Supporting infrastructure

37. Integrating with other concurrent work streams (e.g. Mauao Joint Administration Board, existing industrial interfaces with other existing uses, e.g. Whareroa) will also be integral to assisting in delivery of the spatial plans.

Proposed process and timing

38. It is proposed that the programme integrate with key components of the City Plan Review to ensure consistency in approach, along with key transport projects such as the Transport System Plan. A diagram to outline how this could progress is provided in Figure 3.

39. The timeframes for the Urban Communities Growth Programme have been prepared based on current budgets and on prioritising the greenfield planning programme in early 2021.

40. The proposed timeframes for delivery (refer figure 3 below) are based on the following:

(a) Integration with existing workstreams and proceeding workstreams, e.g. the City Plan review and commercial centres hierarchy.

(b) Prioritising the greenfield planning programme for Te Tumu and Tauriko West in early 2021, including resourcing.

(c) General availability of resources. Delivery is based on proposed operational resourcing and budgets put forward as part of the Long-Term Plan 2021-2031, as outlined further below. Without the proposed operational resourcing and budgets, the proposed programme will need to be reviewed.

(d) Allowing time to establish early engagement and partnership with Mana Whenua, as well as early engagement with other potential partners and key stakeholders.

Figure 3 Proposed Integration Timeline for City Plan Review and Urban Communities Growth Programme.

Options

41. In responding to the strategic context and key challenges, there are a range of options which could be undertaken to respond moving forward. These include:

42. Option 1 - Integrated City Plan Review and Spatial Plan Programme - Recommended

43. Prepare spatial plans for the Mount Maunganui / Arataki and Otumoetai / Brookfield areas. With a detailed project programme to be prepared.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Process will support meeting strategic objectives;

· May allow for efficiencies between workstreams;

· Will ensure strategic alignment in policy;

· Will inform City Plan review;

· Timeframe will inform the next LTP.

· Significant time and resource required to prepare spatial plans.

44. Option 2 – Progress with One Spatial Plan

45. Progress with one spatial plan and delay future spatial planning for one area.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Ability to undertake extensive urban planning and programme preparation.

· May result in inefficiencies in workstreams.

· Could not meet timelines to inform City Plan Review.

46. Option 3 - No Spatial Plans rely on City Plan Review and Transport System Plan.

47. Don’t progress with any spatial plans and rely on the outcomes of the City Plan Review and Transport System Plan.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· More time and resource could be allocated to City Plan Review.

· Would not consider the supporting infrastructure requirements and prepare a supporting programme for subsequent LTPs.

· May not result in area specific solutions.

· Less opportunity for community and stakeholder engagement.

Consultation / Engagement

48. The project has a high level of significance as it directly impacts on the future development and urban form of the city. The programme will have significant rounds of stakeholder and community engagement. It is anticipated this would include two stages of engagement with the community, multiple rounds of stakeholder engagement, of which both would have Councillor involvement.

49. As part of the project, a comprehensive communications and engagement plan will be prepared for the spatial planning programme.

Financial Considerations

50. There are financial considerations associated with this report, which will be put forward as part of the Long-Term Plan 2021-2031.

51. In order to progress with the proposed programme and timeline outlined in this report supporting operational budget has been submitted to the Long-Term Plan in order to resource the Urban Communities Growth Programme. This budget seeks two new FTE roles to resource the overall Urban Communities Growth Programme, plus a 0.5 FTE fixed term (2-year) project manager. A specific operating budget of $700,000 is also sought within the 2021/22 period to provide for delivery of the two spatial plans. This includes communications and engagement, transport, business case, economic and other necessary expertise that may not be able to be resourced internally.

52. Additionally, as part of long-term plan process for 2021-2031, to support the future implementation of Spatial Plans, bulk funds have been proposed within the latter years (2028-2031). These bulk funds are intended to provide for outcomes of the spatial planning process, which will also integrate outcomes of the TSP and other related projects. Proposed bulk funds have been estimated based on recent projects and anticipated requirements to support growth:

(a) Mount Maunganui / Arataki spatial plan area – transport ($50m), open space and public realm ($20m).

(b) Otumoetai / Brookfield spatial plan area – transport ($30m), open space and public realm ($15m).

53. The LTP development process is still progressing and prioritisation of these activities will need to be considered against other activities in terms of their criticality; in this regard, the proposed timing and/or fund allocations may be pushed out and/or reduced, respectively.

54. The bulk fund timeframes of 2028-2031 are also indicative and are dependent on outcomes of the City Plan review and the spatial planning process, which is anticipated to further define timeframes dependant on the outcomes of these processes. These figures will be further refined through subsequent Long-Term Plan planning processes.

55. The Transport bulk fund has been proposed to cover multi-modal improvements. Following detailed spatial planning, the fund could be allocated to support potential upgrades that would be required to support a growing community and create a safe multi-modal transport network.

56. The open space and public realm budget would have a similar function to improve open space dependant on future growth considerations. Increased densities require consideration of provision of new smaller parks (or repurpose existing spaces) particularly around town centres, improving accessibility to the water and protection of environmental values, improving overall public realm (e.g. streetscape), and improve quality, accessibility and function of existing open space network.

57. The bulk fund figures have been put forward on top of existing know project budgets contained within the LTP, as any growth programme may need to enhance the level of service.

Significance

58. Having regard to Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, significance of this project is considered ‘high’. It affects a wide range of people; has moderate to high public interest; and will have a large consequence for the city in terms of growth over time. As outlined within this report, community, stakeholder and mana whenua engagement will be a key component, including opportunity to provide feedback in relation to aspects of the urban form and transport recommendations developed as part of the Spatial Plans. Further opportunities for engagement will also be provided through the Long-Term Plan process and project delivery stages.

Next Steps

59. Subject to Councils approval to progress with the Mount Maunganui / Arataki and Otumoetai / Brookfield spatial plan areas, the next steps in this process are:

(a) Prepare a detailed spatial planning programme and report back to the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee in early 2021 to establish detailed timeframes and deliverables.

(b) Commence engagement with Mana Whenua and other project partners to assist in developing the programme.

Attachments

Nil

Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting Agenda

24 November 2020

9.6 Long Term Plan 2021 - 2031: Urban Communities Programme - Neighbourhood Planning

File Number: A11912699

Author: Carl Lucca, Programme Director: Urban Communities

Gareth Pottinger, Project Leader: Urban Planning

Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy & Growth

Purpose of the Report

1. The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the proposed Neighbourhood Planning programme for existing urban communities, including agreement in principle to proposed criteria for prioritisation of future neighbourhood planning areas.

Recommendations

That the Urban Form and Transport Development Committee:

(a) Receives the Urban Communities Growth Programme - Neighbourhood Planning Report

(b) Agrees in principle the proposed criteria for prioritisation of neighbourhood planning areas

(d) Notes that detailed proposals for neighbourhood planning will come before Council for approval as the programme for planning for existing urban communities progresses.

Executive Summary

2. Neighbourhood planning is intended to form part of the wider Urban Communities Growth Programme, pre-empted by sub-regional planning (i.e. the Urban Form and Transport initiative (UFTI)) and corridor based spatial planning (e.g. Te Papa Spatial Plan). In general, it is proposed that neighbourhood plans will be delivered in priority growth areas following higher level spatial planning, responding to significant challenges and/or opportunities.

3. Over the past decade TCC is undertaken very little in the way of neighbourhood planning and is not currently resourced to do so. Planning has generally been focused at a higher sub-regional, city and corridor level, or in a greenfield setting.

4. Prepared in collaboration with the community, mana whenua, local and central government agencies, and other key stakeholders, neighbourhood plans would be at a suburb, neighbourhood or local centre scale, setting out:

(a) Key challenges and opportunities facing the study area, including those identified by the community

(b) Overall vision for the area responding to key challenges and opportunities

(c) Further definition of land use, movement, open space, community infrastructure, 3-waters infrastructure and cultural outcomes proposed to respond to the issues and vision and higher level plans

(d) An ‘implementation plan’ outlining quick wins, short, medium and long term initiatives to implement the proposed outcomes including, where relevant, project partners.

5. Preparation and implementation of neighbourhood plans will require resourcing and funding to deliver alongside broader sub-regional and city priorities; as such, prioritisation of neighbourhood plans and related initiatives is integral to facilitate efficient investment over time.

6. Appropriate criteria when considering prioritisation of neighbourhood plans are recommended as:

(a) Supports and facilitates outcomes of key sub-regional, city and related spatial plan priorities and initiatives

(b) Supports and facilitates city growth and/or faces significant growth pressures

(d) Significant development interests from public and/or private sector

(e) Opportunity for co-investment by project partners

(f) Significant other issues that are affecting neighbourhood / community wellbeing, such as hazard resilience, movement or social issues

(g) Clear community interest in moving a neighbourhood plan forward

7. Having regard to the above, proposals for detailed neighbourhood planning will come before Council for approval as the Urban Communities Growth Programme progresses, with a recommendation made based on an assessment of the above criteria.

8. For those areas where a neighbourhood plan has been proposed but does do not meet the above criteria, alternate pathways to deliver the neighbourhood plan and/or respond to any significant challenges or opportunities could be considered.

Background

Urban Communities Growth Programme

9. An outline of the Urban Communities Growth Programme is provided in the ‘Urban Communities Growth Programme – Spatial Planning’ report that proceeds this report. This report focuses on the neighbourhood planning component of the programme (refer figure 1 below).

Need for Neighbourhood Planning

10. Over the past decade TCC is undertaken very little in the way of neighbourhood planning and is not currently resourced to do so. Planning has generally been focused at a higher sub-regional, city and corridor level, or in a greenfield setting.

11. While spatial plans like Te Papa are at a corridor scale and set the key moves for that corridor, neighbourhood plans are will be at a suburb, neighbourhood or local centre scale. Neighbourhood plans may differ in their look and feel depending on the key challenges and opportunities being responded to, e.g.:

(a) Enhancing four wellbeings (cultural, social, environmental and economic) through relevant initiatives and strong community input

(b) Responding to key issues identified by the community

(d) Masterplanning in relation to development opportunities afforded by existing ownership

(e) A combination of the above.

12. Having regard to the above, neighbourhood plans will set out:

(a) Key challenges and opportunities facing the study area, including those identified by the community

(b) Overall vision for the area responding to key challenges and opportunities

(c) Further definition of land use, movement, open space, community infrastructure, 3-waters infrastructure and cultural outcomes proposed to respond to the issues and vision and higher level plans

(d) An ‘implementation plan’ outlining quick wins, short, medium and long term initiatives to implement the proposed outcomes including, where relevant, project partners.

Figure 1: Urban Communities Growth Programme – Flow chart showing spatial planning components

13. An important element of the neighbourhood plans will be working with the community, mana whenua, key stakeholders and project partners to understand local challenges and opportunities. As such, meaningful engagement forms an integral part of the neighbourhood planning process.

14. Internal collaboration between various Council teams as well as external organisations will also be integral, including Community Development, Spaces and Places, Infrastructure and City Planning, Te Pou Takawaenga and other Council teams.

15. Implementation of neighbourhood plans will require resourcing and funding to deliver alongside broader sub-regional and city priorities; as such, prioritisation of neighbourhood plans and related initiatives is integral to facilitate efficient investment over time. In essence, spatial planning will identify corridor investment priorities and areas, and the neighbourhood plans will identify the finer grain investment required to support growth and respond to local challenges and opportunities. Some neighbourhood plans may primarily take the form of development masterplan type documents where there are high concentrations of land owned by public or private developers; however, it is likely that most neighbourhood plans would be broader in scope encompassing the four well-beings in a local context.

Prioritising Neighbourhood Planning

16. Aspirations for neighbourhood planning will arise from various sources, including local community aspirations, spatial planning, development interests and through other project processes. While neighbourhood planning may be justified in many instances, limited resources and funding requires prioritisation. In addition, there may be other avenues for responding to the key challenges or opportunities being identified.

17. Having regard to the above, key criteria for the prioritising of neighbourhood plans is recommended as follows:

(a) Supports and facilitates outcomes of key sub-regional, city and related spatial plan priorities and initiatives

(b) Supports and facilitates city growth and/or faces significant growth pressures

(d) Significant development interests from public and/or private sector

(e) Opportunity for co-investment by project partners

(f) Significant other issues that are affecting neighbourhood / community wellbeing, such as hazard resilience, movement or social issues

(g) Clear community interest in moving the neighbourhood plan forward.

18. Weighting of criteria may vary depending on the significance of the challenges and opportunities. The purpose of the criteria-based approach is to enable an objective assessment to be made in the context of limited resources and funding.

19. Subject to further assessment and reporting to come before Council in 2021, based on the above criteria and outcomes of the Te Papa Spatial Plan, the following areas are likely to be key priorities over the next 0-5years:

Neighbourhood Plan Area	Criteria (refer above)
	(a)	(b)	(c)	(d)	(e)	(f)	(g)
City Centre	ü	ü		ü	ü
Gate Pā / Pukehinahina / Hospital	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü		ü
Merivale	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü		ü

20. Other areas are also likely to be identified through proposed spatial planning processes and/or other council processes and departments for consideration (refer figure 1). It is recommended that these areas be brought before Council as part of the above reporting or, subsequently, on a case by case basis.

Areas not meeting Prioritisation Criteria

21. For those areas where a neighbourhood plan has been proposed but does do not meet the prioritisation criteria (or otherwise considered a high priority), alternate pathways to deliver the neighbourhood plan and/or respond to any significant challenges or opportunities could be considered.

22. Recommendations will consider the specific challenges and opportunities within the neighbourhood area, including the overall context and breadth of issues. These may include:

(a) Recognition of priority albeit in a longer-term timeframe, funded through future long term planning

(b) ‘Community Funding’ applications to fund community led neighbourhood planning

(c) Addressing challenges and opportunities through existing projects, e.g. such as already funded transport or community infrastructure projects

(d) Establishment of new projects to focus on the core challenges or issues raised.

Timing

23. It is noted that timing and delivery of neighbourhood plans will also be recommended in relation to wider dependencies, particularly:

(a) Co-funding opportunities

(b) Willingness of potential project partners to move forward and collaborate on neighbourhood planning

(d) Willingness and readiness of community to engage in the project

(e) Timing alongside other projects and engagement.

24. It is estimated that neighbourhood planning, including community engagement, will take approximately 12 to 18 months for each area. Acknowledging the upcoming spatial planning programme over the coming 18 months, and taking into account proposed LTP operational budgets, it is proposed that neighbourhood planning commence in mid-2021, with 6-8 neighbourhood plans to be delivered over the course of the LTP. The final delivery programme will depend on the overall prioritisation process and complexity of the areas being considered.

25. Delivery is based on proposed operational resourcing and budgets put forward as part of the Long-Term Plan 2021-2031, as outlined further below. Without the proposed operational resourcing and budgets, the proposed programme would need to be reviewed.

Figure 2: Proposed Integration Timeline for City Plan Review and Urban Communities Growth Programme.

Strategic / Statutory Context

26. The proposed neighbourhood plans build on the spatial planning and overall Urban Communities Growth Programme, including the strategic context of these. A full outline of the strategic context is provided in the ‘Urban Communities Growth Programme – Spatial Planning’ report that proceeds this report.

Options Analysis

27. In responding to the key challenges and strategic context, there are a number of options which could be undertaken to respond moving forward. These include:

28. Option 1 – Neighbourhood Plan Criteria Based Prioritisation, as outlined within this report

Advantages	Disadvantages
· Efficient planning and use of resources, including long term plan funding and internal resourcing, that responds to areas most in need and likely to support growth.	· Perceived neglect of some areas over others.

29. Option 2 – Neighbourhood Planning on ad hoc basis (status quo)

30. Neighbourhood planning is undertaken without any prioritisation method but rather based on ad hoc requests arising through other processes and/or identified issues.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Nil

· Inefficient planning and use of resources, including long term plan funding and internal resourcing.

· Potential that areas most in need and with highest growth potential are not prioritised.

Consultation / Engagement

31. Neighbourhood plans will have a high level of significance as it directly impacts on the neighbourhood’s local communities; accordingly, all neighbourhood plans will include significant stakeholder and community engagement. As part of any future neighbourhood plan, a comprehensive communications and engagement plan will be prepared as part of the overall project planning.

Financial Considerations

32. There are financial considerations associated with this report, which will be put forward as part of the Long-Term Plan 2021-2031.

33. In order to progress with the proposed programme and timeline outlined in this report supporting operational budget has been submitted to the Long-Term Plan in order to resource the Urban Communities Growth Programme. This budget seeks two new FTE roles to resource the overall Urban Communities Growth Programme, plus a 0.5 FTE fixed term (2-year) project manager (noting these FTEs are for both Spatial Planning and Neighbourhood Planning, as outlined in the previous Spatial Planning report). Additionally, a specific operating budget of $150,000 per annum is sought throughout the 2021-31 period to provide for delivery of neighbourhood planning as outlined in this report (and including further planning for the city centre). This includes communications and engagement and other necessary expertise that may not be able to be resourced internally.

34. Additionally, and as outlined within the ‘Urban Communities Growth Programme – Spatial Planning’ report that proceeds this report, as part of long-term plan process for 2021-2031, to support the future implementation of Spatial Plans, bulk capex funds have been proposed within the latter years (2028-2031). These bulk funds will also assist in delivery of neighbourhood planning outcomes where appropriate.

Significance

35. Having regard to Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, significance of neighbourhood planning is considered ‘high’. It affects a wide range of people; has moderate to high public interest; and will have a large consequence for the city in terms of growth over time. Community, stakeholder and mana whenua engagement will be a key component, including opportunity to provide feedback in relation to aspects of the urban form and transport recommendations developed as part of the neighbourhood plans. Further opportunities for engagement will also be provided through the Long-Term Plan process and project delivery stages.

Next Steps

36. Subject to Council’s approval of the recommendations within this report, next steps will be to report back to Council on proposed prioritisation of neighbourhood planning against assessment of criteria, including updates in relation to other related projects and dependencies (including partners). Further reporting is likely to be in the first quarter of 2021.

Attachments

Nil


AGENDA Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting Tuesday, 24 November 2020
I hereby give notice that an Urban Form and Transport Development Committee Meeting will be held on:
Date:	Tuesday, 24 November 2020
Time:	9.30am
Location:	Tauranga City Council Council Chambers 91 Willow Street Tauranga
Please note that this meeting will be livestreamed and the recording will be publicly available on Tauranga City Council's website: www.tauranga.govt.nz.
Marty Grenfell Chief Executive

Chairperson	Cr Larry Baldock
Deputy chairperson	Cr Heidi Hughes
Members	Mayor Tenby Powell Cr Kelvin Clout Cr Bill Grainger Cr Andrew Hollis Cr Dawn Kiddie Cr Steve Morris Cr John Robson Cr Tina Salisbury
	Te Pio Kawe – Tangata Whenua representative
	Half of the members physically present, where the number of members (including vacancies) is even; and a majority of the members physically present, where the number of members (including vacancies) is odd
Meeting frequency	Six weekly