Agenda of Ordinary Council meeting - Monday, 27 November 2023

UNCONFIRMED Ordinary Council meeting minutes

6 November 2023

MINUTES

Ordinary Council meeting

Monday, 6 November 2023

Order of Business

1 Opening karakia. 4

2 Apologies. 4

3 Public forum.. 4

3.1 Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility - Uncertainty about pending challenges to the lawfulness of Ministry of Health fluoride directives to TLAs - Jodie Bruning. 4

3.2 Waterfront Carpark Closure - Hamish Carter - Oscar and Otto. 5

3.3 Badminton Multisport Centre – Delwyn Cooper (GM - Bay of Plenty Badminton) Graeme Neilson (Bay of Plenty Badminton Chairperson) and Nick Chambers (Sport Bay of Plenty) 6

4 Acceptance of late items. 6

5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open. 7

6 Change to the order of business. 7

7 Confirmation of minutes. 7

7.1 Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 11 October 2023. 7

7.2 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 16 October 2023. 7

8 Declaration of conflicts of interest 7

9 Deputations, presentations, petitions. 7

9.1 Petition - Tauranga Watefront Carpark - Ashleigh Gee. 7

10 Recommendations from other committees. 10

11 Business. 10

11.1 Badminton Multisport Centre. 10

11.2 Letters of Expectation 2024-25 for Council-Controlled Organisations. 11

11.3 Water Services Reform Update - Post General Elections of 14 October 2023. 12

11.4 Adoption of supporting documentation for the proposed Long-term Plan 2024-34. 13

11.5 2024-34 Long-term Plan - Adoption of consultation document 14

11.6 Deliberations on the Options to Fund the Ratepayer portion of the Te Manawataki o Te Papa (Civic Precinct) 14

11.7 Temporary Alcohol-Free Areas for the 2023/2024 Events Season. 16

11.8 Executive Report 17

11.9 Local Government New Zealand report to members October 2023. 20

12 Discussion of late items. 20

13 Public excluded session. 20

13.1 Public Excluded Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 11 October 2023. 21

13.2 Public Excluded Minutes of the Council meeting held on 16 October 2023. 21

13.3 Exemption from Open Competition - To direct Procure the Artificial Surface Materials Links Avenue Reserve Artificial Sports Fields. 21

13.4 Appointment of Mana Whenua Representative to the Tourism Bay of Plenty Board. 21

13.5 The Lakes Works in Lieu Agreement 22

14 Closing karakia. 22

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council

Ordinary Council meeting

HELD AT THE Bay of Plenty Regional Council Chambers,

Regional House, 1 Elizabeth Street, Tauranga

ON Monday, 6 November 2023 AT 9.30am

PRESENT: Commission Chair Anne Tolley, Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston, Commissioner Stephen Selwood, Commissioner Bill Wasley

IN ATTENDANCE: Marty Grenfell (Chief Executive), Paul Davidson (Chief Financial Officer), Stephen Burton (Acting General Manager: Infrastructure and Interface Lead: Three Waters Transition), Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance), Alastair McNeill (General Manager: Corporate Services), Sarah Omundsen (General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance), Gareth Wallis (General Manager: City Development & Partnerships), Ross Hudson (Manager: Strategic Planning and Partnerships, Spaces and Places), Sanjana France (CCO Specialist), Coral Hair (Manager: Democracy & Governance Services), Shaleen Narayan (Team Leader: Governance Services), Anahera Dinsdale (Governance Advisor), Janie Storey (Governance Advisor)

1 Opening karakia

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston opened the meeting with a karakia.

2 Apologies

Nil

3 Public forum

3.1 Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility - Uncertainty about pending challenges to the lawfulness of Ministry of Health fluoride directives to TLAs - Jodie Bruning

External Jodie Bruning

A reference paper was tabled.

Key points

· Local districts had been poorly served through the actions of the Ministry of Health, the Environment Protection Authority and Select Committee processes.

· Legal and management may elect to ignore this discussion as inconvenient.

· Ministry of Health studies into the prevention of dental caries demonstrates that there were inconsistencies into the prevention of some dental caries and the decrease must be lawfully balanced against other risks to health so as to protect health. The risk was to brains and bones as the main target organs of fluoride.

· The rule of law was founded on democracy, institutional and administrative law principles and certain rights and obligations. New laws must be reasonable and promote trust based on cost and benefit and risk and benefit.

· It was the duty of every local authority to promote and protect the public health of its communities. The purpose of the Act was to provide safe drinking water to consumers. Safe includes other causes together with the consumption or use of drinking water.

· Auckland and Wellington water was fluoridated 1960’s based on solid ground but with the current state of scientific evidence solid grounds do not exist.

· Fluoride exposures in 5-7 year olds were higher than the older age groups as noted in a 2018 study that was ignored by agencies and again in a 2021 enquiry.

· How much fluoride should be added to prevent harm in pre-natal exposure from 0-7 year olds? Based on Bay of Plenty data since the 1960’s, studies had persistently shown the co-relation between exposure to fluoride and neurodevelopment and IQ risk.

· The European Food Safety Authority states that fluoride was not a nutrient the margin was unknown and slim.

· Fluoride was a neuro toxin but the NZEA have never discussed this or conducted a risk assessment of issues to water, assessed the lower level of neuro developmental risk or other problems that may occur.

· Administrative law requires that decision makers take into account facts that contribute to risk, but this had not been undertaken.

· The legislative committee giving the Director General a mandate to fluoridate water which had the potential to adversely harm some populations was primarily based on the 2014 and 2021 reviews by the Offices of the Prime Ministers Chief Science Advisor (OPMCSA). This was a non-regulatory body who had no terms of reference or methodology to demonstrate an impartial process were followed. The panel was overweighted with dentists with a bias towards dental and oral health and had no one with a focus on neuro development or cognitive risk on the panel.

· There were thousands of public submissions expressing concern for the health risk and safety of fluoride and no one took the public cause for alarm dismissing public comments noting that safety was outside scope of interest.

· Recognition by global institutions were rare. The risk based United States national toxicology programme reviewed the literature on cognitive risk and it was evident from the review that the guideline per litre was unsafe and outdated. No lower level of exposure had been demonstrated as safe to cognitive risk.

· Despite 50 years of dosing in Auckland and Wellington, none of the brain research institutes had carried out a study on people who had cognitive problems with IQ in schools. There could be no claim that it was not a factor. These levels were not considered by the OPMSCA even though the data was available and there appeared to be a slim margin between the exposure levels and safe levels as required by the Water Services Act.

Attachments

1 Tabled Document - Fluoride - Jodi Bruning

3.2 Waterfront Carpark Closure - Hamish Carter - Oscar and Otto

External Hamish Carter – Oscar and Otto

Key points

· Mr Carter was present to talk on behalf of the downtown traders about the decision to close the Strand waterfront carpark prior to waiting for the other carparks to be opened.

· Noted his appreciation for the strong focus on the city centre and was excited about the downtown plans.

· When he set up his business it was a great spot, but in the five years since then downtown had deteriorated significantly.

· Businesses should not be further penalised with the unnecessary early closure of the carpark.

· While excited to see what Council were doing with the public spaces, the decision to close the carparks would hurt the CBD businesses and become another barrier for them to overcome.

· Businesses welcomed the new carparks along Dive Crescent.

· The businesses’ request that the waterfront car parks not be closed until the Harrington Street carpark was on stream.

· The immediate impact on his business at present was that trading was down 11%, which in the tight margins of the hospitality and retail sector, 11% drop in sales was just scrapping by and having to make decisions on things like whether to pay the mortgage on time or not.

· The carpark closure would be a final nail for many businesses - some may choose to close their doors and others may be forced to do so.

· Carpark numbers had been decreasing with the development of 100 spaces at Dive Crescent for the 140 lost. Mr Carter noted a number of areas where carparks had also been lost.

· There was expected to be 200 vehicles in the area daily associated with workers on the Te Manawataki o Te Papa which would need parking spaces along with workers from the other developments happening.

· Mr Carter noted that the businesses appreciated Gareth Wallis and his team who were doing what they could, but he considered that downtown carparking would get worse before it got better. The impact of this landed on the businesses who the Council relied on for support.

· The submitter considered that it was critical to delay the closure until sufficient alternative parks were made available.

3.3 Badminton Multisport Centre – Delwyn Cooper (GM - Bay of Plenty Badminton) Graeme Neilson (Bay of Plenty Badminton Chairperson) and Nick Chambers (Sport Bay of Plenty)

External Delwyn Cooper, General Manager - Bay of Plenty Badminton

Graeme Neilson, Bay of Plenty Badminton Chairperson

Nick Chambers, Sport Bay of Plenty

Key points

· Ms Cooper advised that Bay of Plenty Badminton supported the report in the agenda to establish a badminton multi-sport centre, noting that the journey to this stage had taken 15+ years.

· Appreciation for the great support from the Council and special thanks to Ross Hudson for his work on the project.

· The group were really excited that the centre was finally about to happen and noted that it would make a difference to the sport of badminton with the multi-sport centre providing support to the wider community and additional court space making it a reality not just a dream.

· Mr Neilson noted that more and more sports were getting squeezed into the community court spaces so it was imperative that the new facilities be approved.

· The badminton group appreciated the Council partnership throughout the process. They were excited and hoped that the Council were too.

· Mr Chambers commended the partnership with Council, showing it could be taken further for the community with the multi court space to help cover the significant shortfall of indoor court space.

· The complex was a testament to help a growing sport that allowed Sport Bay of Plenty to support and take a holistic view to create partnerships with groups by working smarter not harder to solve solutions.

· Thank you to all partners including Tauranga City Council and Bay Venues from the people who want to play sport and be part of the community.

4 Acceptance of late items

Nil

5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open

Nil

6 Change to the order of business

Nil

7 Confirmation of minutes

7.1 Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 11 October 2023

Resolution CO20/23/1

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 11 October 2023 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

7.2 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 16 October 2023

Resolution CO20/23/2

Moved: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 16 October 2023 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

8 Declaration of conflicts of interest

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston declared that he was contracted to the Crown as part of the Water Services Reform but had no direct relationship to item 11.3.

9 Deputations, presentations, petitions

9.1 Petition - Tauranga Watefront Carpark - Ashleigh Gee

External Ashleigh Gee – Chairperson, Downtown Tauranga

The 102 signature petition was included in the agenda.

Key points

· Ms Gee noted that she was the Chairperson of Mainstreet Tauranga and was speaking on behalf of all of the signatories on the petition to delay the closure of the waterfront Strand carpark.

· Acknowledgement to the Commissioners and the decisions they had made to shape the city for the future.

· While understanding the necessity to get the projects started, the speed of this and the large number of active and future projects was tearing the community apart.

· Ms Gee noted that her role was majority advocacy for members, there was overwhelming amount of concern from the business community on the timing of the project with the city centre going through so much over the past few years, they requested Council allow them some support and breathing space.

· Downtown Tauranga had been providing feedback and concerns to Council regarding the declining number of carparks for a number of years.

· Feedback and concerns to a 2022 MRC agency report that was accepted by Council. At that time there were 5,163 public carparks from the city to 11^th Avenue with 2,483 carparks in the city centre with on and off-street parking.

· These had been declining over the last 10 years, with a loss of more than 400 in off street parking in the city centre and surrounding streets and did not include the on-street parking that was removed because of the redevelopment and cityscape.

· While the 100 parks which had been redeveloped in Dive Crescent looked great, after one week of The Strand carparks being closed, they were full by 9 am by staff for all day parking.

· The abandonment of the Harrington Street transport hub was a major blow with 550 carparks being reduced to 200 public carparks and no estimated date of completion. These carparks would have provided instant relief to the parking squeeze.

· Businesses were not against the redevelopment of The Strand carpark to create a better greenspace, it was the timing of the closure with many businesses and visitors depending on the 147 parks with no alternate option at the peak of trade.

· The carpark was one of the most widely used and easily accessible parks in the city centre, providing options for clients visiting commercial services and for staff to use as a safe option, especially when finishing late at night. It also enabled businesses to host events and activations drawing people into the city centre.

· The 2022 Agnew report noted that the carpark consistently showed the highest user rate over the most amount per day. The report was generated in May 2022 which was outside the summer trading peak and there was still large daily Covid results. The carpark was measured at 90-100% occupancy and 90-100% peak times and 80%-90% on average during the week. Dive Crescent had similar occupancy indicating that people were using it more for long stay parking. No figures were included past 5 pm to gauge the strain on the carparks at peak times for hospitality and activities.

· The public transport system was slow to respond and nowhere near adequate to provide reliable alternative modes of transport and businesses were finding it hard and costly to find staff access to the city. If focus could be put on this, the demand for parking would decrease significantly.

· Businesses brought more staff, customers and foot traffic and Ms Gee asked when the public transport service would be running effectively enough to provide reliable options for city goers.

· There was a decrease in mobility parks with a further 10 parks being removed due to projects in the civic centre, Masonic Park and waterfront. Dive Crescent was 150m away from the closest public toilet facilities. Ms Gee asked how the Council were ensuring that all members of the community felt considered when visiting the city centre.

· Immediate improvement of lighting and safety in the city centre and carpark buildings had been the subject of feedback for quite some time. If Council expected people to walk further to their vehicles, there was a duty to provide safe movement around the city. Feedback to the 2022 report noted people feeling unsafe using the carpark buildings and Ms Gee asked what the Council had done to improve this.

· Communication on the closure to those utilising the waterfront carpark was rushed and had not providing enough notice as signage only went up one week prior to the closure. Hand delivered notification was done by Council staff on 18 October 2023, with many businesses were unaware of the closure. The flyer gave no clear indication that such a significant carpark was going to be shut down nor did it highlight that people could not park there any longer. Thereby stepping around a topic which Council knew would receive backlash.

· For businesses that rely on foot traffic and people being able to have easy access at such short notice with no alternative options was a complete blindside to many who were still under the impression that the carparks would stay until alternatives were completed. They did not believe that the Council would inflict further disruption to their business at the busiest time of the year. Ms Gee asked what Council expected businesses to do over the summer to cope with such a disruption.

· Ms Gee noted that the projects were moving too fast for the Council teams and by delaying the closure, it would allow the carparking strategy team to come up with further temporary options. A safe, well lit, central taxi stand was required as soon as possible and mobility parks in gap areas needed to be installed.

· Ms Gee asked that the carpark stay open and continue to bring in income that could go towards the redevelopment of the waterfront into the future. This would allow time to re-educate visitors that there was parking available and time for businesses to encourage staff to park in the parking buildings rather than on-street parking.

· Let the Cameron Road works be completed and provide some relief to the city centre.

· Running a business in a city that was being torn apart and rebuilt was extremely tough, with owners having to constantly adapt while being negatively impacted in so many ways.

· Visitors were getting more frustrated as parking becomes harder to find and were less likely to return. Events and activations were becoming harder to make work leading to less vibrancy.

· The businesses of Tauranga city request that Council postpone the redevelopment until other viable alternative options were in place and the city could provide a positive experience to all.

Discussion points raised

· Commissioners noted that they understood the disruption for businesses with the redevelopment and sympathised with them, noting that the end result would add more for the city centre and keep the lights on. They were working closely with the groups and listening hard to the feedback given.

· Council had been publishing photos for the past 12 months of a waterfront with lawn as a new events area designed to bring events into city centre.

· Council had worked alongside Downtown Tauranga to make sure parking at weekends and after 5 pm on weekday evenings was free to help the hospitality industry and had installed electronic signs showing the number of carparks available at any given time in the various carparking buildings.

· The revamp of Dive Crescent would provide 100 more spaces with a further 100 new carparks being created on Devonport Road.

· Seismic work had been completed on the Spring Street carpark so more spaces were also available and the bus stops had been removed from Willow Street reinstalling carparks to assist the hospitality industry.

· The Council had put $500,000 aside each year for incentives supporting feasibility studies to get accommodation within the city centre and were funding the Chamber of Commerce to provide capability building initiatives to advise businesses how to attract the many construction staff that were working within the city centre.

· Funds were being provided for activations to bring people into the city centre such as the Arts Festival, which was also to assist local businesses.

· Support had been given to the Art Gallery to relocate to Devonport Road for six months while the redevelopment of their premises was ongoing.

· The library had been relocated into the heart of the city as was the new Council office building which would house 800 staff.

· Information kiosks had been installed so that people were able to find way their way around the city, safe bike parking had been installed at the request of Downtown Tauranga for staff biking into work and a full time safety advisor was out in the community talking and working with businesses. There was an enormous amount going into the city centre to counter what was happening and Council was doing all it could.

· Commissioner Tolley noted Council could not continue to put off the works, they had to get on with changing the city and bringing in as many people as it could, whether it be with a number of temporary day to day activities or people living in the city centre. They were contractually bound and needed to do the works over the summer as the repair of the seawall could only occur at that time of the year. The repair of the walkway along the waterfront was also to allow people to get access to the water and if it was put off, it may never happen. No time was the right time.

· Council was happy to keep talking as to how they could support businesses as much as possible and to work together to minimise disruption and maximise getting people into town.

· Council had been honest and open in their engagement.

· Unfortunately the reinforcing of the message that no carparking was available was only worsened the situation. Instead everyone should be reinforcing the fact that there were many empty carparks.

· Commissioner Tolley noted that the Council would consider the petition and respond to it accordingly.

Resolution CO20/23/3

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

That the Council:

(a) Receive the “Petition – Tauranga Waterfront Carpark.”

Carried

10 Recommendations from other committees

Nil

11 Business

11.1 Badminton Multisport Centre

Staff Ross Hudson, Manager: Strategic Planning and Partnerships, Spaces and Places

Key points

· The current indoor court spaces were under significant pressure with the deficit likely to grow as the city grew. Badminton was a popular and rapidly growing sport and Council was planning significant investments to remediate the shortage.

· The use of the reserve would provide significantly to the sporting network by providing additional capacity for other sports.

· The Mount Sports Centre at Blake Park was at the end of its useful life.

· The new facility would provide eight badminton courts and two multi use courts.

· The proposal had been through a consultation process and they were confident with the cost effectiveness and robustness of the facility.

In response to questions

· The facility and carparking would take up most of Tatua Reserve.

· In response to the $5M funding being contributed by Council and whether there would be a fixed time for the community use of the multi court spaces, it was noted that the Council had an agreement with the Badminton Association that included checking points for an amount of community hours for which they were able to renegotiate to add the multi-use space if the sport grew. There would always be a community use component given the level of funding proposed by Council.

· Eight courts were sufficient to provide for badminton as it was currently structured and according to the demand on the network. Over time the aspirations of the Badminton Association as the sport grows was to provide for local community sports and for the centre to become one of a network of North Island facilities bringing national badminton events to the city.

Discussion points raised

· Appreciation was passed on to Ross Hudson for the work that he had done towards the indoor courts centre.

Resolution CO20/23/4

Moved: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Badminton Multisport Centre".

(b) Grants Bay of Plenty Badminton $5M towards the development of their Badminton Multisport Centre at Tatua Reserve, conditional on the following:

(i) Bay of Plenty Badminton securing the additional funding required to develop the centre, no later than 30 June 2026

(ii) Legal agreement between Bay of Plenty Badminton, Council and Bay Venues Ltd on the hours of community use of the two multi-use courts by other sports and recreational groups

(iii) Agreement with Council on a lease for the land at Tatua Reserve and any consents required for the development of the centre

(iv) Establishment of a project governance group with representation from Council’s Manager, Spaces & Places, or appointee

(v) Finalisation of the 2024-34 Long Term Plan.

Carried

11.2 Letters of Expectation 2024-25 for Council-Controlled Organisations

Staff Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships

Sanjana France, CCO Specialist

Key points

· The letters of expectation were for three of the four Council Controlled Organisations, with Te Manawataki o Te Papa Charitable Trust being considered separately at a later date.

· The letters were provided one month early so that the Statement of Intents were able to be adopted before 30 June 2024.

In response to questions

· In response to a query as to whether the Western Bay of Plenty District Council was aligned with Tauranga City Council for Tourism Bay of Plenty, it was noted that while the letters had been written separately they aligned with no conflict and the letter from Western Bay of Plenty District Council would be circulated to Commissioners for their information.

Discussion points raised

· Commissioners thanked staff for a great job to get these completed ahead of schedule.

Resolution CO20/23/5

Moved: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Letters of Expectation 2024-25 for Council-Controlled Organisations".

(b) Approves the Letter of Expectation from Tauranga City Council to Bay Venues Limited (Attachment 1).

(d) Approves the Letter of Expectation from Tauranga City Council to Tourism Bay of Plenty (Attachment 3), noting that Western Bay of Plenty District Council, as joint shareholder, has taken a separate letter to their Council meeting on 26 October 2023.

Carried

11.3 Water Services Reform Update - Post General Elections of 14 October 2023

Staff Stephen Burton, Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Interface Lead: Three Waters Transition

Key points

· The update report had been provided before the final results of the government election had been declared.

· Council was still involved in doing work around the workstreams of the National Transitional Unit with regards to ensuring standards, business systems and the like which would stand Council in good stead no matter what pathway was followed.

· Staff were keeping a watch for clarification on the reform and would respond accordingly.

· Work proactively was being undertaking around people as this was the biggest risk and concern with a limited talent pool and retaining a workforce that was feeling the uncertainty. The National Transitional Unit was working with Council and they would continue to hold conversations with the unit and surrounding territorial authorities as soon as a direction was known.

· Council was fulfilling its obligations under the current legislation.

Discussion points raised

· Commissioners noted that no one was sure of what was proposed for the future.

· People were now more focused on the new standards proposed by the regulator and a lot of concern was being voiced amongst authorities about increases in the water quality standards and the cost of those.

· Concern was noted that the reform was more about financing instead of funding, with many councils wanting to defer investment to keep their rates down and creating shortfalls. This would not change under a new government, and they needed to understand that the problem included enabling councils to borrow, as many were already up to their debt limits so were unable to fund the works without more revenue.

· It was requested that staff do all they could to get this financial message across to the incoming government.

Resolution CO20/23/6

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Water Services Reform Update – Post General Election of 14 October 2023”

(b) Endorses the Water Services Reform project team to continue with the next steps, summarised as follows: -

(i) Continue to meet obligations under current Water Services Reform legislation, including significant or intended decisions.

(ii) Continue to contribute to national frameworks, such as National Engineering Design Standards.

(iii) Analyse and communicate impacts of alternative plans and associated legislation for Water Services Reform from incoming government.

(iv) Should changes arise, develop Tauranga City Council’s options to participate in revised Water Services Reform and provide a recommendation. On confirmation, regroup the project team to implement recommended approach.

Carried

11.4 Adoption of supporting documentation for the proposed Long-term Plan 2024-34

Staff Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Key points

· The documents were relevant for this report and item 11.5.

· Audit New Zealand had advised that they were still working through the audit opinion process due to the uncertainty with the water reforms and disclosures were being prepared to accompany that.

· It was not likely that there would be any major changes to these supporting documents but there was a change to wording of the recommendations to reflect that an Extraordinary Council meeting would be held on 13 November 2023 to adopt the consultation document..

Resolution CO20/23/7

Moved: Commission Chair Anne Tolley

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report.

(b) Adopts the following for the purposes of public consultation through the 2024-34 Long-term Plan consultation process noting any additional or amended disclosures to be required by Audit New Zealand to be tabled at an Extraordinary Council meeting on 13 November 2023

(i) Statement of Proposal for the Draft Revenue and Financing Policy (Attachment 1)

(ii) Statement of Proposal for the Draft User Fees and Charges (Attachment 2).

(c) Adopts the supporting documentation for the proposed Long-term Plan 2024-34, noting any additional or amended disclosures to be required by Audit New Zealand to be tabled at the 13 November 2023 Extraordinary Council meeting including:

(i) Draft Policies (including draft Revenue and Financing Policy) (Attachment 3)

(ii) Draft Groups of Activities (Attachment 4)

(iii) Draft Performance Measures (Attachment 5)

(iv) Draft Significant Forecasting Assumptions (Attachment 6)

(v) Draft Underlying Financial Statements (Attachment 7)

(vi) Draft Financial Strategy (Attachment 8)

(vii) Draft Infrastructure Strategy (Attachment 9)

(viii) Draft User Fees and Charges (Attachment 10).

(d) Authorises the Chief Executive to make minor amendments to the documentation to ensure accuracy and correct minor drafting errors.

Carried

11.5 2024-34 Long-term Plan - Adoption of consultation document

Staff Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance

Key points

· Audit New Zealand had advised that they were still working through the audit opinion process due to the uncertainty with the water reforms and disclosures were being prepared to accompany that. An Extraordinary Council meeting would be held at 1.00 pm on Monday, 13 November 2023 to adopt the consultation document. Audit New Zealand would attend the meeting to present their audit opinion.

· Additions were included in recommendations (b) and a new (c) with the balance of recommendations to be adopted at the Extraordinary Council meeting on 13 November 2023.

Discussion points raised

· Commissioners noted some minor corrections that they would provide directly to staff.

· Acknowledgement to the team for producing a very clear and readable document.

Resolution CO20/23/8

Moved: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report “2024-34 Long-term Plan - Adoption of consultation document”.

(b) Approves the Consultation Document for the proposed 2024-34 Long-term Plan noting any additional or amended disclosures to be required by Audit New Zealand to be tabled at the Extraordinary 13 November Council meeting:

Carried

11.6 Deliberations on the Options to Fund the Ratepayer portion of the Te Manawataki o Te Papa (Civic Precinct)

Staff Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Key points

· 300 submissions had been received, with table 10 in the report providing a breakdown of these.

· There was 74% in support of the IFF. It was noted that the nature of the conversation on the IFF was split between the project itself and the levy. Some of the words did not align with the submissions’ responses and further analysis showed that 47% of the submitters supported the levy and their comments aligned with this support.

In response to questions

· Even if the debt was raised on the Council’s balance sheet the interest rates appeared to be not dissimilar from those paying on IFF however the length of tenure of borrowing undertaken would be for 30 years at higher margins and was quite a lot different than what the Council would do through the Local Government Funding Authority and that was where the conversation became different.

· There was a prospect of a refinancing option under IFF and there was an opportunity to change the net rate going forward and Council could work through those conversations with financiers.

· If an IFF defaulted, the special purpose vehicle had similar powers as the Council had under the Rating Act to recover those levies. The security for the IFF came from the levy payers which gave it a strong rating/ranking.

Discussion points raised

· Commissioners recognised the points the submitters were making about debt and the visibility of debt and the risk of finance.

· However all councils were severely constrained in their ability to raise debt to fund other things in their communities apart from repaying debt tied up with growth, and were looking for alternative arrangements.

· There was also some unknown factors with the timing of the development contributions actually being paid by developers.

· While IFF did cost more Just under half the submitters understood that this provided certainty of the project continuing and certainty of the cost involved. Intergenerational payment was a theme from submitters with 2-3 generations enjoying the benefit so should contribute to the cost.

· Commissioners still wanted to make sure it was a good deal for ratepayers so were not committing until they were able to see the deal before making the final decision.

· Acknowledgement was passed on to Paul Davidson and the Team for doing a great job.

Resolution CO20/23/9

Moved: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Deliberations on the Options to Fund the Ratepayer portion of the Te Manawataki o Te Papa (Civic Precinct)".

(b) Receives the 297 on-line submissions and four written submissions that were submitted prior to the consultation period closing at 5.00 pm on 6 October 2023.

(d) Approves Option 1 for the funding of the ratepayer share of Te Manawataki o Te Papa (Civic Precinct) to be developed and further detail reported back to a future Council meeting.

(e) Request staff to inform all submitters of this decision and the reasons for the decision.

(f) Authorises the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) and Council’s advisors to work with Crown Infrastructure Partners (CIP) and the relevant government ministries to continue with the development of an IFF Levy Proposal.

(g) Request the CFO to report back to Council on the outcome of this process in March 2024 for Council to decide whether to proceed with an IFF Levy for Te Manawataki o Te Papa.

Carried

11.7 Temporary Alcohol-Free Areas for the 2023/2024 Events Season

Staff Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance)

Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning

Key points In response to questions

· As these were specific events over the Christmas/New Year period with the dates changing each year, they had to be considered on an annual basis.

· There are two sets of temporary liquor bans. Geographical s areas which remained the same each year and specific events.

Resolution CO20/23/10

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Temporary Alcohol-Free Areas for the 2023/2024 Events Season".

(b) In accordance with section 147B of the Local Government Act 2002, agrees that the proposed temporary alcohol-free areas are appropriate and proportionate in light of the evidence; and justified as a reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms.

(c) Resolve under clause 8 of the Alcohol Control Bylaw 2018 to implement temporary alcohol-free areas to support event operations across Tauranga as follows:

Fergusson Park	Fergusson Park including Tilby Drive from the intersection of Tainui Street and Waratah Street (all inclusive) from 10am, 31 December 2023 to 6am, 1 January 2024.
Gordon Spratt Reserve	Gordon Spratt Reserve and Alice Way (all inclusive) and Parton Road (between Tara Road and Papamoa Beach Road) from 10am, 31 December 2023 to 6am, 1 January 2024.
Tauranga Racecourse Reserve	Tauranga Racecourse Reserve from 10am, 31 December 2023 to 6am, 1 January 2024.
Soper Reserve	Soper Reserve and Newton Street (all inclusive) from 10am to midnight, 17 February 2024.

(d) Resolve under clause 8 of the Alcohol Control Bylaw 2018 to implement temporary alcohol-free areas surrounding Mercury Baypark from 10am, 31 December 2023 to midnight, 7January 2024 as follows:

Proposed alcohol-free area for key events at Mercury Baypark
Girven Road	From Gloucester Road to State Highway 2
State Highway 2	From Girven Road to Sandhurst Drive
Te Maunga Lane	All inclusive
Truman Lane	All inclusive
Mangatawa Link Road	All inclusive
State Highway 29A	From Truman Lane to the intersection with State highway 2 (including the roundabouts)
Gloucester Road	From Eversham Road to Girven Road
Eversham Road	All inclusive
Tudor Place	All inclusive
Palliser Place	All inclusive
Harrow Place	All inclusive
Exeter Street	All inclusive
Lambeth Terrace	All inclusive
Dover Place	All inclusive
Weymouth Place	All inclusive
Eversham Road Reserve	All inclusive
Kingsley Place	All inclusive
Penrhyn Place	All inclusive
Ernie Way	All inclusive
Hadleigh Reserve	All inclusive

Carried

11.8 Executive Report

Staff Marty Grenfell, Chief Executive

Stephen Burton, Acting General Manager: Infrastructure Services

Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance

Alastair McNeil, General Manager: Corporate Services

Sarah Omundsen, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships

Infrastructure

Key points

· Capital programme was endorsed with the International Accreditation NZ audit, noting the superb reporting and standardisation from the team.

· The Waters team did very well with three trophies gained at the annual Water New Zealand Conference Award night. Peter Bahrs (TCC) and Ryan Orr from GHD for the Water Watchers Programme and Wally Potts being awarded an Honorary Life Membership of WaterNZ for his contribution to the water sector.

· There were good statistics for the number of cycle trips across the city and for the safety measures installed outside the fire station.

· An additional $7.7M was secured from Waka Kotahi to carry out further maintenance works.

· The Sustainability and Waste team attended the recent STEM festival with a rubbish sorting game, teaching children the importance of recycling and talking to 500 students about the Tauranga Moana Futures Programme.

Discussion points raised

· It was noted that graph in figure 2 of the report was upside down. Commissioners commented that it was good to see the increased cycleway use noting that it reinforced what the transport team had been advocating and aiming for and getting a larger group of cyclists using good safe cycleways. The percentage of the increase results in up to 1,000 less vehicles on the roads.

· Commissioners acknowledged the teams for the Awards received noting that they had done extremely well and were very proud of them.

· It was important to work regionally on the business case at Te Maunga and to get commitment from the regional partners and resources to help with the development of the facilities.

Community Services

Discussion points raised

· Commissioners noted that the two pathways at Pāpāmoa and Marine Parade were very well supported for a relatively modest investment and complimented staff for the superb designs.

· Commissioners requested information on whether the Kainga Tupu Taskforce Homelessness Strategy and Action Plan for the Western Bay of Plenty would see MSD cutting the transition funding for the homeless and pose a significant change to homelessness. It was noted that further information would be sought and provided.

· A query was raised as to whether the tsunami evacuation maps for Pāpāmoa had been updated in conjunction with the Pāpāmoa Residents Group.

· Positive comments had been received regarding staff being present on the Maunga every day and the significant increase in the levels of service by bringing the team in house and getting buy in from the staff who had a passion for what they do.

Chief Financial Officer

In response to questions

· Information would be sought from Air New Zealand as to the extent of the flight capacity as it was quite hard to get a flight unless you were booked well in advance.

Strategy, Growth and Governance

In response to questions

· In response to a query as to whether Western Bay of Plenty District Council and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council had any social procurement policies to provide alignment and to give security to mana whenua it was noted that information would be provided to Commissioners.

Corporate Services

Key points

· 17 students would be working for Council over the summer period.

· Indications were that the labour market was softening and flattening out.

· There was a drop in the turnover of Council staff with anything below 15% being ahead of the typical trend.

Regulatory and Compliance

Key points

· The IANZ assessment results were good with only eight non compliances identified and the auditors noting significant improvements and no technical issues with consents. Action plans were being prepared for the remaining seven factors for presentation to IANZ.

· Funding was being sought to improve and employ freedom camping ambassadors and upgrade signage at the freedom camping sites.

· Staff were working with a number of partners across the city in relation to the Alcohol Control Bylaw. There was a general feeling to complete Te Manawataki o Te Papa precinct works and the revitalisation of the city before considering whether any areas could be opened up.

In response to questions

· In response to a query regarding the timeframe for processing and decisions on the Sanderson Group’s Pitau Road Project it was noted that there was 50 working days for a decision. They were expecting to receive a number of requests for information in early 2024. There were no appeal rights in the process.

· The 40% increase in bylaw related complaints were mostly around people being in freedom camping areas longer than they should be and some in relation to homelessness areas.

· There was an increase in complaints in some of the newly developed areas where people were parking vehicles, caravans and boat on berms as there were not a lot of parking areas.

· The increase in bus lane infringements was noted and it was considered that the signage was not clear as to when drivers were able to cross into the lane, especially those accessing the airport. A query was raised as to whether there was any leeway to allowing drivers going to the airport to go in the lane, especially when in a long line of vehicles as this could also help to clear the traffic. It was noted that drivers received a warning letter for the first offence and fines were issued when it was more than twice.

· The review of the freedom camping sites was on the list of policies due to be reviewed by the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee.

· Temporary accommodation was not provided for in the city plan so a resource consent was required if a property was being used as an Airbnb. Staff only responded on a complaint basis which generally related to noise or parking.

Discussion points raised

· Commissioners noted ongoing concerns that the number of dwellings being below the targeted 100 per month and underlined the criticality of long term housing and creating a bow wave gap and affordability. The graph should be seen as a target vs an actual to look at how it was tracking.

City Development and Partnerships

Key points

· $1.5M had been secured in external funding for a number of projects.

· The opening of the new cycle parking facility in the city centre had taken place this morning.

· Karakia had been held on the water front and at Masonic Park to start the works and handover Site A to Willis Bond.

· The works in Dive Crescent, south Elizabeth Street and Tunks Reserve were all scheduled to finish before the end of the year.

In response to questions

· The upgrade of Dive Crescent being carried out in two parts to enable businesses to trade over summer. The licences to occupy fees had been reduced by 80%.

· When completing works some unanticipated pipework was discovered. The roadworks were closed to allow people to use the road while the redesign of the pipework was being completed. It was requested that this be made known so that people were aware of it when the road was closed again to finish the works.

· It was noted that the access to buses around the town was a work in progress and tied into the business case for the best locations for bus stops within the city centre. Consultation with the city centre community had been workshopped and the results would be provided in a future report.

Discussion points raised

· Discussion ensued on the amount of carparking in and around the city centre with the data showing 500 carparks available at 8 am and vacancies during the day. The combination of perceptions that there were no carparks was negative to the CBD. It was important that actual data was reported and picked up on so that residents and Mainstreet knew the facts and were informed that parking was available with more coming on stream in the near future. It was requested that this information be included in the monthly reporting and be provided to the partners.

· Commissioners noted the Library, Community and Customer Services Hub was at the 100% detailed design stage, the site preparation works commencing later this month, and construction in January 2024. It was the first significant project within Te Manawataki o Te Papa and they acknowledged the work of the teams to get it to this point.

· With the changing nature of the CBD and the large number of construction workers, it was an opportunity for the retail and hospitality sectors to adjust to clientele changes and the market.

Resolution CO20/23/11

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the Council:

(a) Receives the "Executive Report".

Carried

Commissioners agreed to continue with the meeting to the end of the public section before having a break.

11.9 Local Government New Zealand report to members October 2023

Staff Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance

Discussion points raised

Feedback included:

· having a clear definition of localism that was referenced and Local Government New Zealand seemed to be focused on.

· the outcomes to be achieved with the campaign for localism.

· to make local government funding more of a priority.

Resolution CO20/23/12

Moved: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Local Government New Zealand report to members October 2023".

(b) Provides feedback to Local Government New Zealand on the first of their formal updates to member councils as noted above.

Carried

12 Discussion of late items

Nil

13 Public excluded session

Resolution to exclude the public

Resolution CO20/23/13

Moved: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject matter of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48 for the passing of this resolution
13.1 - Public Excluded Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 11 October 2023	s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
13.2 - Public Excluded Minutes of the Council meeting held on 16 October 2023	s7(2)(a) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons s7(2)(b)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
13.3 - Exemption from Open Competition - To direct Procure the Artificial Surface Materials Links Avenue Reserve Artificial Sports Fields	s7(2)(b)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would disclose a trade secret s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities	s48(1)(a) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
13.4 - Appointment of Mana Whenua Representative to the Tourism Bay of Plenty Board	s7(2)(a) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons s7(2)(c)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information, or information from the same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied	s48(1)(a) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
13.5 - The Lakes Works in Lieu Agreement	s7(2)(b)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7

Carried

At 11.52am the meeting adjourned.

At 12.01pm the meeting reconvened in public excluded.

14 Closing karakia

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston closed the meeting with a karakia.

The meeting closed at 12.10 pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed as a true and correct record at the Ordinary Council meeting held on 27 November 2023.

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

CHAIRPERSON

Ordinary Council meeting Agenda

27 November 2023

11 Business

11.1 Implementation of Parking Changes

File Number: A15307639

Author: Nick Chester, Principal Strategic Advisor

Reece Wilkinson, Parking Strategy Manager

Authoriser: Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Purpose of the Report

1. To provide an overview of current challenges with implementing parking projects, seek a deferral of planned projects and note next steps for implementing paid parking projects.

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Implementation of Parking Changes".

(b) Defers the implementation of the following parking projects:

(i) Extension of paid parking area in the City Centre

(ii) Mount Maunganui Parking Management Plan

(iii) Implementation of parking restrictions in Cameron Road time-limited bus lanes

(c) Notes that staff will report back to Council in March 2024 with recommendations on implementation of the Parking Strategy

Executive Summary

2. There are currently several projects underway related to paid or restricting car parking in the city centre and Mount Maunganui. These projects are causing community concern, which can be mitigated to some degree by changing our approach to the roll-out. Staff are recommending that the implementation of upcoming parking projects is deferred to allow time to consider how best to implement the Tauranga Parking Management Strategy more effectively, with better lead-in time, and for the travelling public to be better prepared for the changes.

Background

3. Parking management is a key issue that affects residents, workers, businesses and tourists in Tauranga.

4. The Tauranga Parking Strategy was adopted by Council in 2021 and applies across the city.

5. There are 5 key outcomes outlined in the Tauranga Parking Strategy:

(i) Improving vibrant centres and access to centres

(ii) Enabling multi-modal transport system

(iii) Enabling more attractive compact urban form

(iv) Supporting access for all

(v) Ensuring value for money and best use of resources

6. The Parking Strategy was developed to guide the provision of carparking across the city and to guide how it was provided and the aspects such as recovery of the costs for the provision of parking. In addition, it linked how parking and parking provision influences aspects such as mode choice and housing intensification.

7. Some challenges faced in the wider Tauranga area outlined in the Parking Strategy are:

(i) Strong growth and increasing demand for parking

(ii) Availability of parking spaces

(iii) Cost of providing parking for any and all users.

8. The Strategy is to be supported by local Parking Management Plans, which outline specific processes for management and enforcement of parking in local areas.

9. The Tauranga Central City Parking Management Plan was adopted in October 2022, and was followed by the re-introduction of paid parking in the City Centre in December 2022. An expansion of the area where paid parking applied in the city centre was due to occur in November 2023.

10. At the 11 September 2023 Council meeting, Council approved engagement for the development of the Mount Maunganui Parking Management Plan. Initial engagement was due to be undertaken with the affected community from 13 November – 15 December 2023. A draft plan would then have been presented to Council in March 2024.

11. There has been concern within the community about potential changes to parking in both the city centre and Mt Maunganui. This has been raised with staff by residents, workers and businesses in both the city centre and Mt Maunganui. These concerns have often been compounded by a lack of other available parking, roadworks occurring in the local area, or a lack of safe and viable alternatives to travel by car.

12. Furthermore, Cameron Road Stage 1, due to be substantially completed by the end of 2023, has caused significant disruption to businesses and the community, with congestion and parking in and around Cameron Road a key concern. Parking restrictions in time-limited bus lanes on Cameron Road were planned for implementation in January 2024.

13. Staff are recommending that the implementation of upcoming parking projects is deferred to allow staff to consider how best to implement the Parking Management Strategy in light of community concerns and the wider infrastructure challenges in the city. This additional time will allow for a more holistic examination of how several parking initiatives happening at once may be compounding issues and causing of concern in the community. It also allows time to prepare and adjust to changes in a more realistic manner.

central city parking management plan and paid parking

14. The Tauranga Central City Parking Management Plan was adopted in October 2022. Prior to adoption, several initiatives had been trialled to manage parking in the city centre, most recently providing two hours of free parking.

15. From 1 December 2022, the two-hour free parking trial ended and paid on-street parking in the city centre was re-introduced. The initial area for charges to be applied was from Harington Street to Second Ave, with a planned expansion to city fringe areas in November 2023.

16. At the 16 October 2023 Council meeting, Council decided to pause the planned expansion of paid parking scheduled for 1 November 2023 until 26 February 2024.

17. Rationale for this delay was that due to various projects moving ahead before Christmas, there will be a reduced number of all-day parking spaces in the city centre while other projects are in the final phases of completion. This was alongside cost-of-living concerns among the wider community.

18. Much of this rationale will continue to be true through the early months of 2024. It is therefore proposed to further defer the expansion of paid parking in the city centre.

mount maunganui parking management plan

19. At the 11 September 2023 Council meeting, Council approved engagement for the development of the Mount Maunganui Parking Management Plan. Initial engagement was due to be undertaken with the affected community from 13 November – 15 December 2023.

20. The purpose of this engagement was to begin initial discussions about how paid parking may operate within the Mt Maunganui area. No specific plans or details were proposed, and it was simply a request to begin conversations with affected parties, especially local businesses and residents. A draft plan would then have been presented to Council in March 2024.

21. The initial community response to any potential move towards the implementation of paid parking at Mt Maunganui has been one of resistance. There is a high level of community concern about the impact that paid parking may have for residents and visitors, and especially for businesses and workers.

22. It is proposed that no further work is undertaken on potential paid parking at Mt Maunganui until after staff present options on implementing the Parking Strategy in March 2024.

cameron road stage 1

23. Cameron Road Stage 1 (CRS1) project aimed to support urban intensification through modal shift. It extends more than 3.5km along Cameron Road from Harington Street to the Tauranga hospital. It is due to be substantially completed by the end of 2023. While the project will achieve its stated objectives once completed, it has experienced a level of community discontent and stakeholder frustration.

24. A number of businesses have been impacted by the project, with traffic congestion and parking being major areas of concern.

25. It is intended that following the project’s completion, parking restrictions will be in place to ensure bus lanes are clear at certain times of the day. These restrictions are planned for implementation in January 2024.

26. This will have an impact on users of Cameron Road. It is recommended that the implementation of parking restrictions on Cameron Road are deferred until after staff present options on implementing the Parking Strategy in March 2024.

Strategic / Statutory Context

27. The Tauranga Parking Strategy was approved in 2021. There are no strategic issues related to the deferment of any projects, and the strategy remains relevant.

28. The implementation of parking restrictions in time-limited bus lanes in Cameron Road requires a resolution by council under the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2012.

Options Analysis

29. Staff consider there are two potential options to consider:

30. Option 1 – continue to implement planned projects within the previously agreed timeframes (status quo)

Option Description

Positives

Negatives

Continue with planned parking projects as previously agreed:

a. extension of paid parking in the city centre

b. engage with the community on potential paid parking in Mt Maunganui

c. implement parking restrictions in the Cameron Road bus lane

· Projects delivered with previously agreed timeframes.

· Issues with parking have not changed – there is still a need to reflect the true cost of parking through charges

· Availability, turn-over and functionality would improve for some users.

· Strong community resistance to increased parking charges.

· The volume and pace of change is increasing community concerns about parking charges.

· Many of the surrounding issues (lack of other parking options, especially in the city centre) will not be resolved as expected within previously agreed timeframes

This option is not recommended

31. Option 2 – Defer all three projects (recommended)

Option Description

Positives

Negatives

Defer all three projects. Staff will evaluate how the Parking Management Strategy may best be implemented and report next steps to Council in March 2024.

· Allows additional time for other projects in the city centre to be completed and create increased parking capacity.

· Increases community confidence that council are taking concerns around parking on board.

· Allows staff additional time to determine how to implement the Parking Strategy in a holistic manner

· Current issues with parking will not change there is still a need to reflect the true cost of parking through charges

Financial Considerations

32. There continues to be a cost incurred for providing free parking. On-street parking is expensive to maintain and limits the ability for transport corridors to focus on moving people efficiently.

33. Currently Tauranga rate payers subsidise free parking through their rates. The increasing maintenance costs of the transport network is applicable nationwide and does apply to the road network’s parking spaces.

34. The proposed deferment of projects will result in costs associated with free parking continuing to be met through rates, and revenue from existing paid parking in the city centre continuing to be collected.

35. The planned extension of paid parking in the city centre was expected to generate $1,250 in revenue per day. The deferral of this project will result in this revenue not being collected.

Legal Implications / Risks

36. There are no risks associated with the deferment of parking initiatives.

Consultation / Engagement

37. The Draft Parking Strategy was prepared back in 2021, and consultation took place in September and October 2021. As it was a city-wide strategy, consultation took place on high-level topics and principles rather than how these were to be implemented on specific streets. The feedback received led to several updates in the Strategy and was subsequently endorsed by Council on 15 November 2021.

Significance

38. The Local Government Act 2002 requires an assessment of the significance of matters, issues, proposals and decisions in this report against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Council acknowledges that in some instances a matter, issue, proposal or decision may have a high degree of importance to individuals, groups, or agencies affected by the report.

39. In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the likely impact, and likely consequences for:

(a) the current and future social, economic, environmental, or cultural well-being of the district or region

(b) any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or interested in, the matter.

40. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter is of medium significance.

ENGAGEMENT

41. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the matter is of medium significance, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to Council making a decision.

Next Steps

42. Staff will investigate options for the future implementation of the Parking Strategy. A report on recommended future actions will be presented to council in March 2024.

43. We will engage with Regional Council to optimise the implementation of timed clear bus lanes along CRS1, and report to the Join Public Transport Committee on its implementation following practical completion of the project.

Attachments

Nil

Ordinary Council meeting Agenda

27 November 2023

11.3 Consultation Regarding Te Pāhou Reserve

File Number: A15289854

Author: Simon Collett, Manager: Commercial Property

Alicia Oldham, Team Leader: Strategic and Commerical Property

Authoriser: Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Community Services

Purpose of the Report

1. This memorandum seeks direction on the future legal ownership of the Council-owned land known as the Te Pāhou Reserve following requests from hapū dating back 2000 to return the land.

2. A Council decision is sought on:

· an in principle decision to transfer ownership of the land to hapū

· the disposal classification for the property under the Property Acquisitions and Disposals Policy

· progressing the process of public consultation for the proposal

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Resolves that the disposal of Te Pāhou Reserve be classified as a Strategic Disposal in accordance with Council’s Property Acquisitions and Disposals Policy 2021, noting that:

i. the possible disposal to hapū would achieve strategic cultural objectives and acknowledges that Te Pāhou is a highly significant cultural heritage site with historical, spiritual, and ancestral values that connect hapū directly with Te Pāhou; and

ii. the terms and conditions of any proposed disposal of Te Pāhou Reserve will be presented to Council for approval prior to entering into a sale and purchase agreement.

(b) Proceed with the process of public consultation for disposal of a park under section 138 of the Local Government Act 2002 (“LGA”); and

(c) Approves in principle the reconnection of the land known as Te Pāhou Reserve to hapū by way of transfer of the land to the Ngāi Te Ahi Settlement Trust (“the Trust”) for nil consideration.

Executive Summary

3. Te Pāhou Reserve is a Council owned park which was acquired and is still held by Council for recreational reserve purposes.

4. The below aerial photograph highlights:

(a) in yellow dashed lines, the recreational land owned by the Tauranga City Council which is the land being considered for possible disposal (“the Reserve Land”); and

(b) in orange, the neighbouring urupā:

5. Ngāi Te Ahi and Ngāti Hē have an ongoing interest in the Reserve Land, as it surrounds their urupā. Ngāi Te Ahi has made several representations to Council since 2000 asking for Council to consider returning ownership of the Reserve Land to the hapū. The main reasons for the request are the strong cultural and historical links to the site and poor access to the existing urupā.

Background

6. Prior to European settlement, Te Pāhou was recognised as a Pā and Kāinga — a new residence for the Ngāi Te Ahi community, closely affiliated with the hapū of Ngāti Hē and Ngāti Ruahine. As years passed, the region was systematically settled, leading to the establishment of multiple Kainga and adjacent Marae. The land historically referred to as Te Pāhou spanned a much broader area than what is being discussed for potential disposal in this document.

7. The tract of the Reserve Land under consideration for disposal is part of the “Hairini Block”, which was a larger block of land encompassed in the confiscation under the Tauranga District Lands Act of 1867. The initial title record for the Hairini 1A 527A Block was documented in 1886. Subsequently, a Native Land Court Partition Order in 1924 vested the land, now known as the Te Pāhou Reserve, to several Māori owners in various parcels.

8. Raymond Kenneth Phelps and Te Aouru Smith (“the Former Owners”) acquired (separately) parcels of this partitioned land from the aforementioned Māori owners.

9. Following Mr Phelps death, Council purchased the parcel of land owned from Phelps’ executors in 1981. In 1982 Council purchased the parcel owned by Mr Smith.

10. Council used the low-lying area on the western side of the intersection of Hammond Street and Welcome Bay Road to dump soil and other road construction refuse. The land was also grazed. This contributed to erosion on the fill batter leading down from the upper roadway level.

11. The government and local authority pinpointed this area as a crucial node for traffic management. Council and Waka Kotahi entered into agreements to record the Crown’s acquisition of parts of the land to enable construction of the Harini Link – Stage 4 (“the Project”) over parts of the Reserve Land. The physical works aspect of the Project has been completed and Waka Kotahi are now completing the final legalisation works to declare the land acquired as road.

12. The culmination of the Hairini Link Project has made the reduced remaining segments of this culturally significant Reserve Land accessible for potential reconnection with the hapū.

13. The proposal has been discussed with Council’s internal asset managers and, if the transfer proceeds, easements will be required to protect existing stormwater ponds and water infrastructure to ensure on-going rights of access to the infrastructure is preserved.

14. The Reserve Land is zoned in the City Plan marked as "Passive Open Space." Owing to its positioning to the implemented major traffic routes, its suitability for public accessibility and its recreational potential is now limited.

15. While the Reserve Land is not classified as reserve under the Reserves Act, it is, however, included in Council’s Tauranga Reserves Management Plan 2019 (“TRMP”), and is categorised as a Heritage Reserve. As the Land is not held under the Reserves Act, the status of the TRMP is a non-statutory guiding policy document. The TRMP indicates that Council will consider the options for land ownership of Te Pāhou Reserve once the new land parcels are created and returned to the Council from the Waka Kotahi, following completion of the Hairini Link.

16. Ngāi Te Ahi submitted to elected members on the urupā and Te Pāhou Reserve again in August 2017 with an onsite presentation.

17. As per the response to the submission of Ngāi Te Ahi and Ngāti Hē hapū to the 2018 Long-Term Plan, Council advised they would consider the options for land ownership of Te Pāhou Reserve upon completion of the Hairini Link Project.

18. The legalisation of new land parcels is nearing completion. Accordingly, now is the appropriate time to consider options for the reconnection of hapū with the Reserve Land, subject to consideration of relevant council policy and legislation.

19. The Reserve Area and wider surrounds hold significant cultural value for the hapū, especially given its proximity to their urupā. During pre-European periods, numerous burials were conducted in repo (wetlands and swamps), where bodies were buried with limited tools. This was a conventional method for the times. One such wetland area is situated around the base of the Te Pāhou urupā, meaning the burial sites included both the high grounds and the lower wetlands (the land in discussion in this report). While these wetlands were often perceived as obstacles to development, they were cherished resources for the residents of Te Pāhou and surrounds.

20. Ngāi Te Ahi and Ngāti Hē have confirmed their preference for the Reserve Land to be conveyed to the Trust.

APPLYING THE PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS AND DISPOSALS POLICY (“PADP”)

21. Before proceeding with the transfer of the Reserve Land, council must classify the Reserve Land as either:

(a) Surplus - Property that has been reviewed from a whole of organisation perspective and assessed as no longer required for strategic or operational purposes; or

(b) Atypical – A unique property, which has a lack of similar sales to inform market value assessments, or a property with a range of uses (all with a significant range of values), or a property which has a different value for a sub-section of the market than it does for the market as a whole; or

(c) A Strategic Disposal - Disposal of property for the purposes of achieving strategic or operational outcomes for the community.

22. When classifying a property for disposal, Council must undertake three steps, these are addressed by the following sections.

Step 1: Assessment

23. Council must assess three key elements: its statutory and legal obligations, whether the purpose of the sale is to achieve strategic objectives, and if the property is suitable for an open market sale process.

Pre-existing statutory or legal obligations

24. Council’s pre-existing statutory or other legal obligations in relation to the Reserve Land is discussed at the Legal Implications/Risks section of this report.

Strategic Objectives

25. The transfer of the Reserve Land would seek to achieve the site-specific strategic objective of reconnecting hapū with the Reserve Land which:

(a) addresses the long-standing request the hapū have made to Council to be reconnected with the Reserve Land;

(b) acknowledges hapū strong cultural ties to the Reserve Land, with specific recognition of the proximity of the Reserve Land to their urupā which is the neighbouring parcel of land; and

(c) Recognises the principle of partnership between the Council and hapū being a well-established principle in Treaty jurisprudence. Note section 4 of the Local Government Act 2002 which provides Council has a role in ensuring the Crown’s responsibility to take appropriate account of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi is recognised and respected.

Suitability for an Open Market Sale Process

26. The ecology of the Reserve Land and the presence of significant Council infrastructure throughout means that the Reserve Land’s suitability for development or amenity is limited. Given the unique and significant cultural objectives which could be achieved through a direct transfer of the land to hapū, we consider that an open market process is not suitable for this parcel of land.

27. The PADP requires that once the above assessment has been made (as discussed in paragraph 23-26 above), Council will, as soon as reasonably practicable, notify Mana Whenua of the details of the property being considered and a summary of the assessment undertaken. This step has taken place over the last several years, with Council making the commitment to hapū that they would consider the options for land ownership of Te Pāhou Reserve upon completion of the Hairini Link Project.If the property is not subject to pre-existing statutory or other legal obligations, Council staff are required under the PADP to meet with Mana Whenua within 30 days of giving the above notice and engage in good faith to ensure any cultural matters have been appropriately identified and considered in the assessment and to receive any comments Mana Whenua may have in respect to the possible classification of the property.It is considered the PADP requirements in respect of Engagement with Mana Whenua on Cultural Matters have been satisfied. The hapū detailed articulation of the Reserve Land's significance during multiple hui and site presentations emphasises the value of a strategic disposal in this case. This is particularly relevant for the following reasons which have come direct from hapū:

(a) Cultural and Ancestral Connection: Te Pāhou is intricately linked to the history and culture of Ngāi Te Ahi. It is a place where their ancestors, including Ngāti Hē individuals, were and continue to be laid to rest with their whānau and matua tupuna. The process of interment of their own people in this wāhi tapu (sacred place / site) signifies a deep personal and ancestral connection that anchors them to Te Pāhou , Hairini and Ngāi Te Ahi.

(b) Ecological and biodiversity values: Te Pāhou has intrinsic associations with the Kaitemako Stream and Te Tāhuna o Tehe me Te Tāhuna o Rangataua. These are the most eastern tāhuna o Tauranga Moana that binds us directly to our Moana whanaunga.

(c) Historical Significance: The site is associated with historical events that are integral to the identity and heritage of Ngāi Te Ahi.

(d) Preservation of hapū tūrangawaewae: The urupā site plays a significant role and association in preserving the ongoing traditions of interment for Ngāi Te Ahi whānau and the ongoing cultural significance of the site with the surround cultural landscape.

(e) Cultural Heritage and Spiritual Significance: Te Pāhou is part of the cultural heritage and identity of Ngāi Te Ahi. The site's connection to the burial customs and rituals of the hapū, contributes to our sense of identity and belonging in the region. This spiritual aspect adds to its importance within Ngāi Te Ahi and Ngāti Hē belief system.

(f) Community Amenity: Te Pāhou provides a cultural amenity for the local Hairini, Ohauiti, Maungatapu and Welcome Bay communities and is recognised in the Tauranga City plan as a significant Māori site M30 in the Heritage provisions in Chapter 7 and Appendix 7B Register of Significant Māori Areas.

28. A copy of hapū cultural narrative is included in this report as Attachment 1.

Step 3: Classification

29. Following completing an assessment of the property and engaging with Mana Whenua, Council classifies the property via Council resolution. Once Council has classified the disposal type, Mana Whenua will be advised within 30 days of the Council resolution.

30. This report recommends that the Te Pāhou Reserve is classified as a strategic disposal subject to public consultation in accordance with the requirements under s138 of the Local Government Act. This recommendation is discussed further in the Options Analysis of The Local Government Act sections of this report.

OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Disposal classification

Option one: Classify the disposal of the Reserve Land as a Strategic Disposal: RECOMMENDED

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Ensures the delivery of key strategic cultural outcomes.

· Strategic disposals allow for desired outcomes to be non-financial in nature.

· Recognises the historical and cultural connections hapū have to the land.

· Acknowledges the role that hapū have in building, protecting, and celebrating Tauranga.

· There is some reputational risk to Council as this will be negatively perceived by some people in the Community.

Option two: Classify the disposal of the Reserve Land as an atypical disposal or surplus property: NOT RECOMMENDED

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Provides greater flexibility regarding the terms of any sale and purchase agreement, as Council will not be prioritising the achievement of strategic outcomes via the sale.

· May result in a financial benefit to Council.

· Council has no control (or less control) over the strategic outcomes of the sale, as these are not prioritised via the property classification.

· Surplus property must be sold at market value which may limit cultural objectives being met through the disposal.

DIVESTMENT APPROACH

Option One: Transfer the land at nil consideration to the Ngāi Te Ahi Settlement Trust RECOMMENDED OPTION

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Ensures delivery of meeting cultural objectives.

· Strengthens the relationship between the hapū and Council.

· Recognises the long-standing aspirations of hapū to have management and influence over the land neighbouring their urupā.

· The Reserve Land holds limited developable potential (due to zoning and its ecological state).

· Transfer will result in a long-term financial benefit to the community as ownership of the site will sit with the Trust.

· Aligns with principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

· Requires Council to enter into a non-competitive divestment, which may potentially expose Council to criticism.

· There is some reputational risk to Council as this will be negatively perceived by some people in the Community.

Option Two: Council to Retain Reserve Land NOT RECOMMENDED

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Avoidance of potential negative sentiment from a small sector of the community.

· Does not recognise the hapū aspirations for the land and does not strengthen Council’s relationship with hapū.

· Missed opportunity to reconcile longstanding requests from hapū to Council for reconnection to the Reserve Land.

· Sole financial and management responsibility will continue to lie with Council

· Public amenity and value of the Reserve Land will remain low.

Legal IMPLICATIONS/RISKS

31. Council sought legal advice in relation to its obligations under Section 40 of the Public Works Act 1981 (“PWA”) when it is considering a disposal, to offer the Land to the Former Owner from whom Council acquired the Land from. The advice set out that:

(a) the Land is held for a public work, namely for recreational purposes; and

(b) two valid exceptions to s40 offer back requirements give Council a basis not to offer back the Land to the Former Owners as follows:

i. there has been a significant change in the character of the Land (s 40(2)(b)); and

ii. due to the size, shape and situation to dispose of the Land to the owner of the adjacent land (s 40(4)).

32. There is some risk that the Former Owners or their successors could make a claim that the Reserve Land should be offered back to them. Council has a valid basis not to offer the Land back to the Former Owners or their successors as there has been a significant change in the character of the Reserve Land resulting from the creation of the State Highway intersecting with the Reserve Land. Accordingly, the exception in s 40(2)(b) applies.

33. The Reserve Land is considered a park in accordance with s138 of the LGA. Section 138 records that Council must consult on the proposal to dispose before it sells or otherwise disposes of, or agrees to dispose of, the park or part of the park.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONs

Road Stopping

34. We have identified that the legal owner of the Reserve Land could make an application to Toitū Te Whenua Land Information New Zealand to stop and amalgamate this neighbouring parcel with the Reserve land. This is a separate statutory process to the legalisation work Waka Kotahi are currently completing which can be completed by an adjoining owner to this parcel.

Possible Works Program

35. Hapū have expressed a desire to work with Council and other key stakeholders to continue and build upon the restoration works on the Reserve Land. Waka Kotahi have partnered with hapū to actively progress some wetland enhancement and creation works on the Reserve Land which has had a positive impact on the ecology of the Reserve Land. This work involves:

(a) Vegetation clearance of pest plant species on parts of the sites;

(b) Restorative planting in compliance with Tongaparaoa and Te Pāhou Wetland Ecology and Cultural Restoration Plans submitted as part of the Resource Consent for the Project Works;

(c) Maintenance of plantings on the Sites during a two-year period after Waka Kotahi achieved 90% of the native vegetation cover (the Maintenance Period”) including plant pest control; and

(d) Installation and checking of traps for animal pest control during the Maintenance Period.

36. While reconnection of the Reserve Land back to hapū is a main objective in a possible disposal to hapū, conversations with hapū has highlighted that further restorative works are desirable. These possible restoration works would be carried out in consultation with Council.

Consultation / Engagement ON DISPOSAL OF THE RESERVE LAND

37. Consultation on disposal of the Land is required in accordance with s138 of the LGA and Part B, Clause 10.9.2 of the TRMP.

38. The type of engagement is directed by Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy 2020.

39. Depending on the assessment, the engagement will likely comprise of the following:

(a) Public notice to dispose of the Reserve Land in a print newspaper twice over one calendar month;

(b) Notice on ‘Public Notices’ section of Council’s website;

(d) Any feedback received will be followed up by a Council representative.

40. All feedback will then be collated and reported back to Council following the consultation.

41. Council may wish to hear from people who want to provide feedback in person, but this is not expressly required by section 138 of the Local Government Act nor the TRMP.

Significance and engagement

42. The Local Government Act 2002 requires an assessment of the significance of matters, issues, proposals and decisions in this report against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy (“SAEP”). Council acknowledges that in some instances a matter, issue, proposal or decision may have a high degree of importance to individuals, groups, or agencies affected by the report.

43. In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the likely impact, and likely consequences for:

(a) the current and future social, economic, environmental, or cultural well-being of the district or region

(b) any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or interested in, the decision.

44. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the SAEP, it is considered that the decision is of medium significance, as the proposed transfer:

a) is not a ‘strategic asset’ as defined under Council’s SAEP but is still a transfer of a Council asset;

b) there is likely moderate public interest in the sites transfer given:

i. the Reserve Land’s ecology is made up of a majority of wetland, with limited public amenity;

ii. the limited public amenity is amplified by the poor access ability given its location is in the middle of a busy intersection (as a result of the Hairini Link State Highway Project); and

iii. the land is currently included in the TRMP and will be removed as a result of this proposed transfer.

45. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the proposed transfer is of medium significance, officers are of the opinion that the further engagement process specified at points 39-43 is required prior to Council making a decision.

Next Steps

46. If the proposal to return the Reserve Land to hapū for nil consideration is supported in principle, staff will complete the public consultation required in accordance with s138 of the LGA to inform a final report back to Council in 2024.

Attachments

1. Ngāi Te Ahi Cultural Narrative - A15305918 ⇩

Ordinary Council meeting Agenda

27 November 2023

11.4 Approval to commence reclassification of Puketoromiro Pā to historic reserve

File Number: A15031220

Author: Emma Joyce, Open Space and Community Facilities Planner

Authoriser: Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Community Services

Purpose of the Report

1. To agree, subject to section 24 of the Reserves Act 1977 (the Act), to commence the process to reclassify that part of Kopurererua Valley known as Puketoromiro Pā from recreation reserve to historic reserve.

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Approval to commence reclassification of Puketoromiro Pā to historic reserve".

(b) Agrees, subject to section 24 of the Reserves Act 1977, to commence the process to reclassify that part of Kopurererua Valley known as Puketoromiro Pā and shown as section one on the scheme plan appended as attachment 1 to this report to historic reserve to better recognise the historical significance of the pā.

(c) Notes that public consultation on the reclassification must be undertaken prior to Council (as the administering body for the reserve) making a formal recommendation to the Minister for Conservation on the reclassification proposal.

Executive Summary

2. Puketoromiro Pā is located within the Kopurererua Valley recreation reserve. While the recreation reserve classification requires some consideration and protection of historic features (like a pā), this is only to the “extent compatible” with the reserve’s primary purpose to provide for sport and recreation. A historic reserve classification ensures that the primary purpose of the reserve is the protection of the historic and archaeological features of the pā.

3. This report requests approval to enter into a process to reclassify Puketoromiro Pā from recreation to historic reserve. The boundaries of the proposed area to be reclassified are shown as section one on the plan appended at attachment 1.

Background

4. Section 16 of the Act requires all reserves to be classified according to their primary or principal purpose. As Puketoromiro Pā is located in the Kopurererua Valley, it is currently classified as a recreation reserve. The primary purpose of recreation reserves is to provide “for the recreation and sporting activities and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public” (section 17 of the Act). This classification requires management of historic and archaeological features within the reserve only to the “extent compatible with the principal or primary purpose of the reserve”. As such, this classification may be inappropriate for a pā site.

5. It is noted that the entire Kopurererua Valley is of historic significance. However, it is not proposed to reclassify a larger portion of the reserve as this would be inconsistent with the primary purpose of the reserve to provide for recreation.

6. Section 24 of the Act outlines the process to reclassify a reserve. As well as recreation reserve, reserves can be classified as scenic, historic, local purpose, nature or scientific. The first step is for Council, pursuant to a resolution, to advise the Minister for Conservation (or their delegate) of the wish to change the classification. Subject to Ministerial approval, Council will then need to undertake a public consultation process before making a final recommendation to the Minister.

Strategic / Statutory Context

7. As noted above, reclassification of reserves is subject to relevant provisions of the Act. It should be noted that the reclassification of a reserve to historic reserve can only be subsequently changed or revoked if the historic features are destroyed. Therefore, as part of the reclassification process, consideration needs to be given to future intended use of the reserve to ensure compatibility with the purpose of historic reserves.

8. The Tauranga Reserves Management Plan (TRMP) categorises the Kopurererua Valley as an “ecological and recreational linkage”. It is not proposed to change this categorisation through the reclassification process. This categorisation recognises the important role of Kopurererua Valley in providing informal recreation opportunities and undertaking ecological restoration activities.

9. Section 3.2 of Part B of the TRMP contains a number of management statements to recognise and appropriately manage historic features within reserves (regardless of their classification and categorisation). This includes provision to install appropriate interpretation and ensure that all development is respectful of the heritage features.

10. No changes are proposed to the current passive open space zoning (with a significant archaeological area and significant Māori area overlays) under the City Plan. Minor structures such as interpretative signage are permitted under this zoning.

Options Analysis

11. An option to prioritise the protection of the pā is to reclassify the pā as historic reserve. Historic reserve classification is “for the purpose of protecting and preserving in perpetuity” historic and archaeological features (section 18 of the Act). Council could also reclassify the reserve to scenic or nature reserve – both classifications recognise the need to protect in perpetuity natural features of note to the general public (sections 19 and 20 of the Act).

12. Council could choose to not enter into a reclassification process and retain the current classification (recreation reserve) or enter into the reclassification process to change the classification to one of the other reserve classifications.

	Option	Advantages	Disadvantages
1	Reclassify Puketoromiro Pā to historic reserve (recommended)	· Ensures the primary purpose of the reserve is the protection of the historic and archaeological features of the Pā · Recognises the historic significance of the pā and its significant location within the Kopurererua Valley · Recognises that sport and recreation is inappropriate in this location	· Inconsistent reserve classification across the whole valley
2	Do not reclassify Puketoromiro Pā to historic reserve (retaining recreation reserve classification)	· Consistent classification for the entire valley · Recognises management statements in the TRMP to protect historic features within reserves regardless of reserve status	· The historic features of the pā are only “managed and protected to the extent compatible” with the reserve’s purpose to provide for sport and recreation. · Less formal recognition of the historic and archaeological value of the pā
3	Reclassify Puketoromiro Pā to scenic or nature reserve	· Nil	· Classifications are more appropriate to natural or geological features such as wetlands or where protection of indigenous fauna is the main priority. · Not currently a classification for any reserves in Tauranga managed through the TRMP

Financial Considerations

13. Funding for the ongoing development of the pā and the valley is identified in the draft Long-term Plan 2024-2034. There are no financial considerations arising from the recommendations contained in this report.

Legal Implications / Risks

14. As noted in the table above, the recommended option reduces potential risk of the heritage values of the pā not being managed due to the requirement to focus on the primary purpose of the reserve to provide for recreation.

Consultation / Engagement

15. As mana whenua for the Kopurererua Valley, Ngāi Tamarawaho have been involved in the ongoing development of the valley. Hapū perspectives informed the Tauranga Reserves Management Plan. Formal feedback from hapū is supportive of the reclassification proposal.

16. Staff engaged with Waka Kotahi to confirm formally that future concept plans for the widening of Takitimu Drive will not impact on the pā. All future development of Takitimu Drive will be undertaken within the existing designated road corridor and not the adjacent Kopurererua Valley reserve. Therefore, the historic reserve classification will not impact on their plans.

17. Section 24 of the Act requires public consultation on all proposals to reclassify reserves. This consultation will be undertaken in mid-February 2024 provided Council approves the recommendations in this report.

Significance

18. The Local Government Act 2002 requires an assessment of the significance of matters, issues, proposals and decisions in this report against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Council acknowledges that in some instances a matter, issue, proposal or decision may have a high degree of importance to individuals, groups, or agencies affected by the report.

19. In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the likely impact, and likely consequences for:

(a) the current and future social, economic, environmental, or cultural well-being of the district or region

(b) any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or interested in, the decision.

20. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the decision is of low significance. However, it is noted that a final decision to reclassify a reserve is of medium significance.

Next Steps

21. Subject to a positive decision at this meeting, council will commence the process to reclassify Puketoromiro Pā. As per section 24(b) of the Act, the resolution of this meeting and this report will be provided to the Commissioner (an officer designated under the Act by the Director-General for Conservation) outlining the reasons for the proposed reclassification. After providing this information to the Commissioner, public consultation must be undertaken with Council (as the administering body) required to consider all objections before making a final recommendation. The Council’s recommendation in response to the objections (including copies of the objections) will be provided to the Commissioner before the final decision on the reclassification can be made by the Minister of Conservation.

22. The public consultation period will commence in mid-February 2024.

Attachments

1. Puketoromiro Pā Scheme Plan - A15215013 ⇩

Ordinary Council meeting Agenda

27 November 2023

11.7 Ratepayer Assistance Scheme

File Number: A15267501

Author: Frazer Smith, Manager: Strategic Finance & Growth

Jim Taylor, Manager: Rating Policy and Revenue

Authoriser: Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Purpose of the Report

1. To seek Council’s in-principle support for establishment of the Ratepayer Assistance Scheme (RAS), subject to commitment from other key stakeholders, final development and due diligence, and approve Tauranga City Council’s contribution of up to $600,000 (including $100,000 initially) to fund the final development

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Ratepayer Assistance Scheme".

(b) approve up to $600,000 unbudgeted loan funded development funding to support final development of the Ratepayer Assistance Scheme subject to:

(i) total development funding of $3 million (including Tauranga City Council’s contribution) being committed from other local authorities and / or central government; and

(ii) central government indicating its support for final development of the Ratepayer Assistance Scheme (including acknowledging the need for enabling legislation).

(iii) That any funding contribution is recognised as part of the equity contribution referred to below in resolution (d)

(c) Approve $100,000 unbudgeted loan funded expenditure to be available out of Tauranga City Council’s contribution to final development funding not subject to conditions a) i) and a) ii) above to enable the Steering Group to facilitate those conditions being satisfied.

(d) note that total Ratepayer Assistance Scheme establishment capital is estimated at up to $25 million and that Tauranga City Council’s contribution of Ratepayer Assistance Scheme could be up to $5 million (20 per cent of total capital), subject to further approval by Council and the governing body of the entity.

(e) Approve the inclusion of an additional $5m loan funded expenditure in the Long Term Plan subject to all conditions of the establishment of the Ratepayer Assistance Scheme being met.

(f) note that total Tauranga City Council’s funding contribution to date and any further final development funding will count as establishment capital in the event it chooses to participate in the establishment of the Ratepayer Assistance Scheme

Executive Summary

2. Tauranga City Council along with a group of other metro councils, New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) and Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) (the steering group) have developed a scheme (the RAS) that is able to provide very low-cost financing to ratepayers to support:

· existing local government policies that involve the LA effectively lending money to ratepayers (such as rates postponement and retrofit home insulation loans);

· new, flexible funding products; and

· new property improvement loans which provide public and private benefits.

3. The RAS itself and the development process is based heavily on the LGFA, taking advantage of the benefits scale and specialisation. It would be:

· off-balance sheet and be an operational organisation only with no discretion in what it could lend money for (which would be dictated by local authorities (LAs) and central government); and

· a flexible omnibus platform with multiple applications possible. The focus has been on - rates postponement (RP); deferred development contributions (DCs) and property improvement loans (PILs).

4. Significant work has been undertaken developing the RAS by the steering group supported by Cameron Partners (project leadership and commercial advice), Russell McVeagh (legal advice on structure and operating requirements) and PwC (accounting and tax advice). While there are complex issues to address no insurmountable red flags have been raised. Among other things, the RAS will require establishment capital estimated of up to $25 million from central government and LAs and enabling legislation.

5. Final development of the RAS requires in-principle support for the RAS from key stakeholders (Tauranga City Council and the other Steering Group Governing Bodies and central government), the enactment of enabling legislation from central government and the provision of development funding (estimated at $3 million in total and included in the $25 million estimate above).

6. With appropriate support from central government and other LAs it is estimated that the RAS could be established in approximately 12 to 18 months.

Background

7. New Zealand is facing a range of challenges including the cost of living crisis, changing demographics (in particular the growing cohort of elderly New Zealanders on fixed incomes), the infrastructure deficit, the quality and health / safety of homes, the housing deficit, climate change impacts and decarbonisation of the economy.

8. Tauranga City Council and other LAs have a critical role to play addressing these challenges:

· as organisations delivering critical services and infrastructure;

· by supporting ratepayers themselves to directly address the challenges that affect them; and

· providing flexibility in the way ratepayers choose to pay LA charges to meet LAs’ funding requirements.

9. In this regard, a group of metro councils (Auckland Council, Hamilton City Council, Tauranga City Council, Wellington City Council, Christchurch City Council), LGNZ and LGFA have formed a Steering Group to develop a scheme that is able to provide low-cost financing to ratepayers for approved purposes, including:

· existing local government policies that involve the LA effectively lending money to ratepayers (such as rates postponement and retrofit home insulation loans), but doing it off-balance sheet;

· new, flexible funding products; and

· new property improvement loans which provide public and private benefits.

10. LAs, including Tauranga City Council, individually lack the scale and capabilities to administer these ratepayer loans efficiently and effectively, and generally, do not have the financial capacity to do so, given their constrained balance sheets.

The Ratepayers Assistance Scheme (RAS)

11. The RAS would be a national shared service available to all LAs.

12. The RAS would be structured much like the LGFA to get the benefits of scale (see appendix for a diagram setting out its workings) – it would:

(a) be a new entity, owned by LAs and central government (a council controlled organisation);

(b) have the power to impose a ‘rate-like’ / levy charge ranking ahead of mortgages to ensure it gets repaid (enabling it to achieve a very high ‘government’ credit risk weighting – broadly in-line with the LGFA);

(c) raise low-cost, long-term financing from the debt capital markets (through an out-sourcing arrangement with LGFA) and pass this on to ratepayers at interest rates expected to be 1 – 1.5 per cent below standard mortgage rates;

(d) be off-balance sheet for LAs;

(e) undertake all the operational requirements associated with the ratepayer loans through an “IT heavy” platform (to minimise costs and benefit from economies of scale); and

(f) be an operational organisation only with no discretion in what it could lend money for, which would be dictated by LAs and central government.

13. The use of the RAS would be optional for qualifying ratepayers.

14. The operations and processes of the RAS would be structured so that there is a seamless interface with LAs - ratepayers would access RAS loans through their LA.

15. It is likely that LAs would include the RAS levy as an item on their rates invoices and act as collection agent. It is also likely that the RAS levy would rank equally with LA rates so the RAS would piggy-back on the LAs default/arrears processes. LAs would likely cover the administration costs incurred with these processes (in exchange for the benefits of being able to offer these arrangements to our ratepayers).

16. The RAS levy would be reflected as a charge on the property title (as per a mortgage). Any charge on the title would be dealt with during the conveyancing process when a property is sold.

Uses of the RAS

17. The RAS would be a flexible omnibus platform and multiple applications are possible (essentially any loan to property owners that LAs / central government decide to make).

18. To date the focus has been on three applications:

(a) rates postponement (RP)

(b) deferred development contributions (DCs)

19. In principle, the RAS could also be applied to other property related taxes and imposts including Infrastructure Funding and Financing (IFF) levies and Value Capture Taxes (VCTs).

Rates Postponement

20. RP provides flexibility regarding the timing of payments for LA charges and could be a valuable tool for LAs and option for ratepayers given:

· there is a major demographic change underway in New Zealand (increasing elderly population with fixed incomes);

· New Zealanders are facing cost-of-living challenges;

· LA rates are increasing significant, 5 to 10 per cent per annum increases are not unusual; and

· other charges (e.g. water levies, IFF levies and VCTs) are likely to increase over time.

21. The RAS would make the equivalent payment to LAs upfront on behalf of the ratepayer and get repaid from the proceeds on the sale of the property.

22. RP operates like a reverse mortgage but at significantly lower cost (negligible fees and interest rates ~4-5 per cent lower). There are two reverse mortgage providers in the New Zealand market, Heartland Bank and Southland Building Society.

23. The Productivity Commission has recommended a national RP scheme and we understand that Grey Power supports the establishment of the RAS.

24. Central Government’s rates rebate scheme (RRS) provides a direct subsidy of $60+ million per annum to 100,000+ ratepayers. We understand officials consider the scheme to be poorly targeted and that many users of the RRS could be candidates for RP, freeing the RRS for more appropriate beneficiaries.

25. British Columbia (population c.5.2 million) in Canada has had a successful Property Tax Deferral Scheme for many years – with 74,500+ users, NZ.$2.1 billion in loans in 2022 (it has almost tripled in size from ~NZ.$739 million in 2016 and now includes ~3.5 per cent of British Columbia households).

26. Many LAs already have RP policies in place with low uptake (although this is thought to be due to a combination of factors including low awareness, relatively high interest rates and “clunky” application processes).

Deferred Development Contributions

27. There has been significant inbound inquiry to LAs regarding alternative funding mechanisms to upfront DCs.

28. The RAS could provide an alternative to upfront DCs by making the one-off payment required to LAs and converting it into a rate like charge against the property. The targeted rate would be paid by the future property owner(s) to the RAS via an annual charge over ~30 years or alternatively fully repaid on sale of the property by the seller at the discretion of the buyer.

29. It is expected that buyers will pay a lower price because of the rate they will have to pay over time. This is likely to have an impact on the developer that is equivalent to the cost of if the developer paid a DC. However, it will reduce the cashflow demands on the developer. It will be financed at lower cost than the interest a developer would get from a bank. Lower financing demands on developers will have a marginal positive impact on development.

30. DCs in New Zealand total ~$600 million per annum (and it is expected that a large proportion of developers would take advantage of a deferred DC offering).

Property Improvement Loans

31. Current legislation facilitates LAs providing financing to ratepayers that can be repaid via voluntary targeted rates. Tauranga City Council currently does not have any of these schemes in place, due to the high cost of administration and the relatively low take up observed in Council’s that have offered this service.

32. In principle, PILs could be utilised to support a wide range of policy goals including:

· improving housing quality – e.g. insulation, heat pumps, double glazing

· developing infrastructure that mitigates the impacts of climate change – e.g. community seawalls, flood protection

· supporting de-carbonisation efforts – e.g. solar panels, EV chargers, home batteries

· enhancing the health and safety of homes – seismic strengthening, chimney removal, septic tanks replacement, water storage tanks and waterway fencing

Development to date

33. Significant work has been undertaken developing the RAS by the steering group supported by Cameron Partners, Russell McVeagh and PwC.

34. RAS development has been based on the establishment process for the LGFA which incorporates a number of stage gates - seeking to progressively identify key issues, confirm RAS viability and test interest from key stakeholders.

35. The most recent stage completed has involved:

(a) detailed financial analysis incorporating scenario analysis with assumptions based on objective data, precedents and expert input; and

(b) legal, accounting and tax red flags review.

36. To move forward requires support from Tauranga City Council, other key LAs and central government and funding commitment for the final development phase. While no firm commitment would be required at this stage (which would be subject to final due diligence) moving forward would be with an expectation of subscribing for shares in the RAS at its establishment.

37. Given the level of development already completed it is thought that with appropriate support from LAs and central government that the RAS could be established within 12 – 18 months.

Commercial analysis

38. To provide insight, Cameron Partners has developed an operating model, detailed business case and built a comprehensive financial model analysing multiple scenarios based on objective data and input from Steering Group members (in particular LGFA), the British Columbia Property Tax Deferment Scheme team, and IT service providers (IT costs and system requirements).

39. The scenarios analysed cover various combinations of RAS products and levels of uptake by ratepayers.

40. The basic economics of the RAS are that it will generate a net interest margin of ~1 per cent (i.e. it will make loans to ratepayers at ~1 per cent above what it borrows at). Ultimately its net interest will need to cover its operating costs in order to breakeven (e.g. if operating costs are $5 million per annum the RAS requires a loan book of $500 million to breakeven).

41. This can be achieved across all the products that the RAS offers and various data points support the RAS reaching breakeven in a relatively short timeframe (e.g. the British Columbia scheme has ~NZ.$2.1 billion in loans (growing at ~c.$250 million per annum); nationwide DCs total ~$600 million per annum; RRS supports >100,000 ratepayers).

42. Based on the analysis reviewed, it is expected that the RAS will be able to generate a surplus and provide a strong return to its shareholders. The Base Case RP and Deferred DC scenario indicates breakeven after three years and initial equity fully paid back after six years.

43. Funding from both central government and LAs will be required to capitalise the RAS at establishment.

44. It has been assumed that c.$25 million will be required from founding shareholders. The proposed $25 million (which includes ~$3 million for the final development before share capital is subscribed for):

· is a “catch all” amount (covering all transaction / establishment costs and initial operating losses before scale is achieved) on the basis that it is better to be over-capitalised rather than under-capitalised and need to go back to LAs for additional capital; and

· is based on a RP and deferred DC scenario and is considered to be conservative.

45. The funding recommended through this report and any further development funding provided by Tauranga City Council (and other LAs) would count as establishment capital.

46. The steering group (as sponsors and original funders) will be able to set the terms of any establishment capital to compensate those LAs providing early funding for the development risk being taken and to mitigate the “free rider” risk of other LAs delaying their commitment.

47. Once breakeven is achieved surplus capital could be distributed back to shareholders. Analysis also indicates that large surpluses could be achieved and used to either:

(a) provide returns to shareholders (the return on investment is potentially very high); and / or

(b) reduce the interest rate charged to ratepayers even further.

48. The establishment capital will be provided by all shareholders at establishment. There is a constraint on the investment of any single investor at 20 per cent of total capital (otherwise there is a risk that the RAS will be on-balance sheet for that investor) - so individual shareholders can take up to $5 million of the proposed $25 million capital.

49. The actual amount invested will depend on individual appetite and level of interest from other LAs (Attachment B shows the breakdown of LGFA shareholders at establishment).

50. As with LGFA there is merit in getting the widest shareholding spread possible to support uptake. Notwithstanding some members of the steering group have indicated a preference to limit the shareholders given the high potential returns and the investment / risk capital already put in by the current group warranting a preferential position.

51. In addition to share capital the RAS will benefit from additional funding support from central government in the form of preference shares that are subscribed for / repaid as the RAS balance sheet changes in size (in much the same way as Borrower Notes work for LGFA).

52. LAs will also provide limited joint and several guarantees in proportion to their ratepayers’ use of the RAS (based on the limited joint and several guarantee that LAs provide to the LGFA).

Legal advice

53. Legislation will be required to enable the RAS to have the powers to impose a “rate-like” levy and navigate Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 (CCCFA) issues.

54. Russell McVeagh has advised that there are strong precedents for the required legislation provided by the LGFA and IFF respectively and consequently this won’t involve “breaking new ground” and that there is a strong case for CCCFA exemptions in regard to RP and deferred DCs (which is simply changing the timing of payment of LA charges).

Accounting and tax advice

55. PWC has identified accounting and tax issues that will need to be addressed / confirmed including off-balance sheet treatment, guarantees being recognised as liabilities, income tax exemption and potential technical RAS insolvency from an inability to recognise multi-year levies.

56. PWC notes that none of the issues identified are considered insurmountable and would be resolved through an iterative process in final design / development.

Climate Change Impact

57. PILs would be approved for purposes that have both private and public benefits and could include climate change related policy initiatives (e.g. solar panels, home EV chargers, home insulation and window double glazing) and initiatives to mitigate the impacts of climate change (e.g. seawalls, retaining walls and other required infrastructure)

Strategic / Statutory Context

58. The RAS proposal has the ability to mitigate, for qualifying ratepayers, the ongoing impact of likely rates and DC increases as Council moves to meet increasing infrastructure, environmental and health and safety requirements.

59. It is expected to provide additional choice to ratepayers in how they meet these obligations.

60. There are no direct impacts on Council’s Funding and Financing Policies.

Options Analysis

61. There are no significant options besides investing or not investing in the RAS. We do note that the RAS has been under development for many years and Tauranga City Council has been a key supporter over that time. It is not known when the opportunity to act may come again.

Financial Considerations

62. The RAS will be off-balance sheet and off-credit so there will be no balance sheet implications for Tauranga City Council from its ratepayers using RAS products.

63. In principle, Tauranga City Council could transfer existing DC deferments to the RAS, potentially releasing ~$5 million for debt reduction and improving council’s debt to revenue ratio.

64. Tauranga City Council would no longer require “in-house” capacity and capabilities to administer deferred DCs.

65. Additional funding from Tauranga City Council will be required to support the further development and establishment of the RAS. In total ~$3 million across all funders is estimated to be required to complete development before a final decision to proceed with establishment is made. Total establishment capital is conservatively estimated to be $25 million across all shareholders and could be structured so that this amount is repaid from any RAS surpluses and / or to provide an ongoing return on investment.

66. The maximum quantum for an individual shareholder is limited to $5m and the amount will depend on the level of interest from other shareholders and Tauranga City Council’s investment appetite.

67. Funding for the RAS is currently unbudgeted and would need to be funded from budget reprioritisation or additional debt. This is proposed to be included in the 2024/25 LTP for up to $5M of RAS funding (less immediate funding). This would be loan funded (as it is expected to transfer into equity).

Legal Implications / Risks

68. The current stage gate in the RAS development process involves confirmation of central government and sufficient LA support to move to final development.

69. Confirmation of sufficient support is expected to be an iterative process as LAs look for leadership from central government and the larger metros.

70. It would be possible for Tauranga City Council to commit to a proportion of the up to $5 million funding required for final development on certain conditions – e.g. central government support for legislation and sufficient funding being obtained from other LAs.

Lack of demand

71. To be economically successful and sustainable the RAS will require ratepayers to use it.

72. Launching the RAS with both RP and deferred DCs as core products will maximise the likelihood of the RAS achieving breakeven in a reasonable timeframe.

73. Central government and LAs will be able to influence demand through policy support and raising awareness of RAS products through websites, invoices etc. In this regard a wide spread of LA supporters is preferable. Longer term, word of mouth is expected to underpin awareness and normalise use of RAS products.

Loan defaults

74. As with all financing arrangements there is risk of loan defaults.

75. Notwithstanding, full recovery of ratepayer loans is almost certain due to minimum equity requirements, property insurance requirements and the “super senior” ranking of RAS levy charges.

76. In addition, there are multiple safeguards in the RASs proposed capital structure and guarantee and liquidity arrangements to protect the RAS from default (in a similar manner to how the LGFA operates).

Operating costs higher than forecast

77. The most material cost item over which there is the greatest uncertainty is IT.

78. Significant independent IT input has been received during the detailed development stage.

79. IT procurement confirmation will be a key workstream during the next final development phase.

Legislation

80. Central government’s willingness to support the required legislation will be implicit in its support for the RAS in general. This is a critical stage gate before further development of the RAS would occur and funding would be required from Tauranga City Council

Consultation / Engagement

81. At this stage there is no specific consultation required or recommended.

Significance

82. The Local Government Act 2002 requires an assessment of the significance of matters, issues, proposals and decisions in this report against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Council acknowledges that in some instances a matter, issue, proposal or decision may have a high degree of importance to individuals, groups, or agencies affected by the report.

83. In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the likely impact, and likely consequences for:

(a) the current and future social, economic, environmental, or cultural well-being of the district or region

(b) any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or interested in, the .

84. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the decision is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

85. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the issue is of low significance, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to Council making a decision.

Next Steps

86. Should Tauranga City Council approve the recommendations in this report, the next steps are:

(a) Steering Group LAs confirm their support and funding for final development of the RAS on similar terms as approved by Tauranga City Council (although $ contributions could vary)

(b) Steering Group LAs approach central government (via the Steering Group) seeking to confirm its in-principle support for the RAS including a willingness to support the required legislation

87. Assuming central government support is obtained:

· the Steering Group commences final development of the RAS

· Central Government commences (amongst other things) preparation of legislation required to enable the RAS

Attachments

Nil

Attachment A - RAS diagram

Attachment B - LGFA shareholders at establishment

Attachment A - RAS diagram

RAS – key stakeholders and workings

Attachment B - LGFA shareholders at establishment

Ordinary Council meeting Agenda

27 November 2023

11.8 Transport System Plan Governance Update and Papamoa East Interchange Project Governance Structure

File Number: A15259569

Author: Chris Barton, Acting Programme Manager: Investments

Nick Chester, Principal Strategic Advisor

Jason Spencer, Transport Programme Manager - Dual Funded

Authoriser: Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Please note that this report contains confidential attachments.

Public Excluded Attachment	Reason why Public Excluded
Item 11.8 - Transport System Plan Governance Update and Papamoa East Interchange Project Governance Structure - Attachment 3 - PEI Project Independent Assurance Review Report - November 2023	s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.
Item 11.8 - Transport System Plan Governance Update and Papamoa East Interchange Project Governance Structure - Attachment 4 - PEI Independent Assurance Review - Key Issues and Proposed Action Plan (Confidential)	s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

Purpose of the Report

1. The purpose of the report is to inform council on progress being made on governance arrangements for all projects in the Transport Systems Plan generally, and the Papamoa East Interchange project specifically. It also summarises the recommendations from the independent expert advice related to Phase 3 of the Papamoa East Interchange project and how these recommendations will be addressed.

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report "Transport System Plan Governance Update and Papamoa East Interchange Project Governance Structure".

(b) Requires the Chief Executive to ensure that the following recommended actions of the Independent Assurance Panel (IAP) with respect to Papamoa East Interchange (PEI) construction programme are completed:

(i) Ensure the project contract adequately addresses contingency and risk allowances.

(ii) Host a workshop with HEB for a joint contract review, aiming to streamline critical items on the risk register.

(iii) Update and evaluate risks, linking them to contingency allowances.

(iv) Clearly identify objectives specific to next project phase.

(c) Note that the terms of reference and personnel for the Transport System Plan 5 Major Projects Governance Group will be reported to the Council on 11 December 2023.

(d) Endorse the proposed PEI project governance and management structure as outlined in this report.

(e) Requires the Chief Executive/Project team to adequately address and gain assurance that the HEB tendered price is robust and appropriate.

(f) Attachment 3 can be transferred into the open once the construction contract has been awarded.

(g) Attachment 4 can be transferred into the open once the construction contract has been awarded.

Executive Summary

2. The report outlines progress on developing governance and oversight arrangements for the 5 significant projects in the Transport Systems Plan. It also summaries independent expert advice related to Phase 3 of the Papamoa East Interchange project following an assurance review and outlines specific governance arrangements for this project. It seeks approval from Council on these governance arrangements and to undertake specific actions detailed in the independent expert advice.

Background

3. The Transport System Plan (TSP) is a 30-year plan with more than 80 chosen projects that will make it easier and safer for people to get to schools, jobs, healthcare and shops by walking, cycling or public transport, to easily connect within their local communities and to wāhi tapu, for freight and inter-regional links to be reliable, roads to be resilient from the effects of natural hazards and for lower emissions to help our environment.

4. Within the TSP there are 5 significant (in terms of fiscal scale, complexity and community impact) transport projects which will be progressed over the next few years. These projects each exceed $100m with the combined spend with our partners reaching more than $1.5 billion over the next 8 – 10 years. The 5 projects are:

· Papamoa East Interchange (PEI)

· Tauriko West Enabling Works (TWEW), and subsequent SH29 upgrade

· Cameron Road Stage 2

· Connecting Mt Maunganui

· 15^th Ave, Turret, Welcome Bay

5. The Chief Executive has brought to the attention of the Commission concerns around the risk management, project management, cost control and delivery of these significant projects. They are of a scale and complexity that TCC has limited experience in. Further both TCC and Waka Kotahi have a recent track record of cost escalation, time delays and scope change for large transport projects (ie Cameron Road Stage 1, Bayfair to Baypark). There has also been past experience of inadequate network integration between significant projects, in order to minimise disruption.

6. The Chief Executive advised Commissioners of his intention to explore alternative governance and partnership arrangements which would provide Council with a higher level of influence and assurance over the successful and timely delivery of these large projects within budget.

7. At the 11 September 2023 Council meeting a report on the ‘Papamoa East Interchange Contract Award’ was considered. Council approved the award of Contract TC219/23 for Papamoa East Interchange Phase 3. Council also included the following resolution requiring the Chief Executive to:

(i) Engage with Waka Kotahi to develop an appropriate and integrated governance and delivery structure for the Transport System Plan (TSP) suite of projects

(ii) Report back on the delivery structure for the TSP programme, governance and project specific management

(iii) Report back detailing the composition of governance and management structure, including technical and commercial skill, knowledge and experience of those identified in the delivery of this project (PEI), at the Council meeting on 27 November 2023.

TSP project governance and oversight

8. The “Large Scale Transport Project Review” (Tucker / Darlow review) report was commissioned by the Chef Executive to understand what lessons could be learned from the Cameron Road Stage 1 project, due to be completed at the end of 2023. The Tucker/Darlow report was received by TCC in August 2023.

9. The report outlines that whilst Cameron Road Stage 1 will meet its stated objectives, many lessons can be learnt to assist in shaping the way future projects in the TSP are delivered. It has 14 recommendations for improved outcomes for future TSP projects. The terms of reference and final report are included as Attachments 1 and 2.

10. One of the key recommendations of the report is to establish the right governance structure to oversee future TSP projects, with clear terms of reference and accountabilities at each level. This was a particular feature of Cameron Road Stage 1 that did not function well. The three layers of governance recommended are:

Layer	Responsibilities	Personnel
Council Transport Programme Governance Group	Review and monitor the programme of work with particular attention to objectives, funding, consenting, programme, risk, delivery models, stakeholders and Council reputation.	A group of independent governors plus Council’s Chief Executive with clear terms of reference The Director of Major Projects would report to this group. Similar to Te Manawataki o Te Papa Governance Group.
Project Steering Group	Established for each individual project, with clear terms of references, accountabilities and regular, structured meetings. The Council Project Director and the delivery partner’s Project Manager would report to the Project Steering Group, with attendant management reporting.	· An Independent Chair is strongly recommended. · Director of Major Projects · Senior executives from the design and construction partners · Engineer to the Contract (if applicable).
Functional Project Control Groups	Separate control groups for the review, monitoring and management of key project functions such as communications, consenting, design and construction.

11. Good governance is underpinned by quality monthly reporting that can inform projects in real time and lead to better decision making.

12. The Chief Executive advised Commissioners of his intention to explore alternative governance and partnership arrangements in line with these recommendations, which would provide Council with a higher level of influence and assurance over the successful and timely delivery of these large projects within budget.

13. Discussions are currently underway with Waka Kotahi on the governance model and delivery structure for the 5 TSP projects. These discussions have progressed well, with a draft Terms of Reference developed and persons with suitable skills and experience identified and approached.

14. The next stage will be to appoint a governance board to oversee the 5 key TSP projects, ensuring relevant skills and experience are represented. The terms of reference and personnel will be reported to the Council on 11 December 2023.

15. It has previously been agreed that until the developing governance arrangements for the TSP 5 projects are in place, interim arrangements will be progressed for 2 individual projects (PEI and TWEW) so that they can proceed.

16. Internal changes to accountabilities and resourcing are also being progressed through a proposed transportation division restructure process. The proposed structure seeks to strengthen the focus on the TSP 5 projects delivery and alignment with dedicated and suitably skilled resource. It is intended that there will be direct accountability through to the new governance board.

17. An update on Tauriko West Interchange Works was provided to Council on 11 October 2023, outlining the enabling works assessment of issues, and a proposed way forward. A further report is intended to be presented at the 11 December Council meeting.

papamoa east interchange (PEI) Independent assurance Panel

18. Whakawhitinga ki Pāpāmoa ki te rāwhiti - The Pāpāmoa East Interchange is one of the 5 significant projects being undertaken through the TSP to help unlock development in the area and better connect Papamoa to surrounding areas in Tauranga and the wider region.

19. The project is being delivered in three phases. The first two phases focussed on earthworks and the Te Okuroa Drive extension and began in July 2022. Phase 2 is due for completion in early 2024. Phase 3 of the project in focussed on the Papamoa East interchange and Sands Avenue construction and is due to commence in late 2023.

20. At the 11 September 2023 Council meeting a report on the ‘Papamoa East Interchange Contract Award’ was considered. Council approved the award of Contract TC219/23 for Papamoa East Interchange Phase 3 Construction to HEB Construction Ltd.

21. The Chief Executive has commissioned an Independent Assurance Panel (IAP) of individuals with significant skills and experience in complex infrastructure projects to provide assurance with respect to the PEI. This panel is made up of Neil Mason, Kevin McConnell, and Andrew Body and produced their work under the Vitruvius branding.

22. Subsequently expert advisors were engaged to review the IAP work and provide commentary. These expert advisors are Kim Wallace and Graham Darlow.

23. The Panel and the advisors have the overall purpose of identifying any key risks and opportunities associated with the delivery of the PEI project construction project. Their role is to review a report prepared by Vitruvius on the PEI project construction project contractual documents which identifies key points of note being:

· Good or innovate practice in terms of risk management, cost management, design principles, opportunities for better outcomes of delivery

· Areas for improvement, in terms of risk management, cost management, design principles, opportunities for better outcomes of delivery, which should be addressed

· Critical ‘red flag’ matters, in terms of risk management, cost management, design principles, opportunities for better outcomes of delivery, which must be addressed.

24. The Independent Assurance Panel provided a report (attachment 3) which noted the overall the project material reviewed was mature and well presented. The report identified 5 red flag topics which they recommended be addressed as a priority. These are outlined in attachment 4.

25. The expert advisors have reviewed the report and agree with the findings, especially regarding assurance with the tendered price. The expert advisors endorse the recommended actions of the panel.

26. It is recommended to Council that the Chief Executive take steps to ensure the matters raised by the IAP and expert advisors are addressed (including the proposed action steps as per attachment 4) are completed.

pei governance and management arrangements

27. As per the resolutions from the 11 September 2023 Council meeting a report on the ‘Papamoa East Interchange Contract Award’ Council requested a report back detailing the composition of the PEI project governance and management structure, including technical and commercial skill, knowledge and experience of those identified in the delivery of this project.

28. The proposed project governance and management structure is detailed as attachment 5, which notes three layers of governance consistent with the recommendations from the Tucker/Darlow review:

Layer	Responsibilities	Personnel
Council Transport Programme Governance Group	Review and monitor the programme of work with particular attention to objectives, funding, consenting, programme, risk, delivery models, stakeholders and Council reputation.	As outlined in TSP Project Governance & Oversight
Project Governance	Established for the Papamoa East Interchange project, with clear terms of reference, accountabilities and regular, structured meetings. Recommend a two phase approach as this project moves to construction/implementation phase – a Contract Management Board chaired by the Engineer to Contract including senior executives from design and construction partners, followed by a Project Governance Board.	Project Governance Board: · An Independent Chair with 20+ years experience in major project delivery & successful track record as Project Director and/or EtC for major projects of $100m+ · Project Director/Sponsor (TCC) with 20+ years experience in infrastructure project delivery incl. experience delivering major transport projects of $65m+ · Business Owner Rep (Waka Kotahi) with 7+ years experience in management of major projects · Project Business Owner (TCC) with 20+ years experience in infrastructure project delivery · Commercial Manager (TCC) with 20+ years experience in construction commercial management incl. experience delivering major projects of $50m+
Functional Project Control Groups / Project Management	Separate control groups for the review, monitoring and management of key project functions such as communications, consenting, design and construction.	PEI Phase 3 to be led by Senior Project Manager with 10+ years in construction project delivery including experience as the client project manager on complex and large scale ($50m+) transportation projects. Experienced with works on State Highways and structures and familiar with project multi-party funding. Support from Junior Project Manager & Project Coordinator.

Strategic / Statutory Context

29. The TSP generally, and PEI programme of works specifically are clearly supported by UFTI, SmartGrowth and the TSP. It is also reflected within TCC LTP.

Options Analysis

30. The decision Council is asked to make is how the issues identified in the independent expert advice will be actioned, and if the governance arrangements for the PEI are suitable. Recommended way forward is outlined in Attachments 4 & 5.

Financial Considerations

31. Financial considerations associated with project costs and funding are the key matters addressed within this report.

Legal Implications / Risks

32. The purpose of this report is to identify risks associated with the contract award for PEI and provide a pathway to address them.

Significance

33. The Local Government Act 2002 requires an assessment of the significance of matters, issues, proposals and decisions in this report against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Council acknowledges that in some instances a matter, issue, proposal or decision may have a high degree of importance to individuals, groups, or agencies affected by the report.

34. In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the likely impact, and likely consequences for:

(a) the current and future social, economic, environmental, or cultural well-being of the district or region

(b) any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or interested in, the matter.

35. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter is of medium significance.

ENGAGEMENT

36. Council has already engaged with the community on this project as part of previous Long Term Plan and Annual Plans. The community have told us that an additional transport connection to the Tauranga Eastern Link in the Papamoa East area is critically important not only for current development but also as an enabler for ongoing future development in the area and associated social and economic wellbeing outcomes.

37. Regular project updates to the community are ongoing.

Next Steps

38. The terms of reference and personnel for the TSP Governance Group will be reported to the Council on 11 December 2023.

39. The recommendations from the independent review of the PEI will be actioned and the project will proceed to next stage of construction.

Attachments

1. Cameron Road Stage 1 Review Final Report - A15318266 ⇩

2. Terms of Reference - Cameron Road Stage 1 Review - A15318269 ⇩

3. PEI Project Independent Assurance Review Report - November 2023 - A15316204 - Public Excluded

4. PEI Independent Assurance Review - Key Issues and Proposed Action Plan (Confidential) - A15316205 - Public Excluded

5. PEI Proposed Project Governance and Management Structure - A15316206 ⇩


AGENDA Ordinary Council meeting Monday, 27 November 2023
I hereby give notice that an Ordinary meeting of Council will be held on:
Date:	Monday, 27 November 2023
Time:	9.30am
Location:	Bay of Plenty Regional Council Chambers Regional House 1 Elizabeth 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	Commission Chair Anne Tolley
Members	Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston Commissioner Stephen Selwood Commissioner Bill Wasley
Quorum	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	As required

Option	Description	Pros	Cons
1 (recommended)	Image 1 – lease for lease with golf club; tee located at Oceanbeach Rd property boundary	Retains similar area of publicly accessible reserve and similar area to that originally envisaged for use by community garden	Potential compromise on available sunlight and safety risk added to community garden
2	Image 2 – lease old bowling club area to golf club	Better meets expectations of community garden	Loss of publicly accessible reserve Does not meet expressed intentions of golf club
3	Proceed per 13 June 2022 resolution	Meets community garden expectations	Does not enable golf club’s expressed intentions

Key Metric	27 November Final	30 October SFR update	4 September SFR Update
Total operating revenue	$358m	$354m	$354m
Total operating expenditure	$404m	$401m	$400m
Capital & operating subsidies	$118m	$118m	$108m
Net debt	$833m	$833m	$832m
Capital expenditure	$293m	$293m	$293m
Debt to revenue ratio	180%	192%	190%
Total assets	$7.2bn	$7.2bn	$6.8bn

66%	31%	3%
66/100 measures achieved	31/100 measures not achieved	3/100 measures unable to be assessed