AGENDA

 

Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting

Monday, 4 December 2023

I hereby give notice that a Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting will be held on:

Date:

Monday, 4 December 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

 


Terms of reference – Strategy, Finance & Risk Committee

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Commission Chair Anne Tolley

Deputy chairperson

Dr Wayne Beilby – Tangata Whenua representative

Members

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Commissioner Bill Wasley

 

Matire Duncan, Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana Chairperson

Te Pio Kawe         –   Tangata Whenua representative

Rohario Murray    –   Tangata Whenua representative

Bruce Robertson  –   External appointee with finance and risk experience

Quorum

Five (5) members must be physically present, and at least three (3) commissioners and two (2) externally appointed members must be present.

Meeting frequency

Six weekly

 

Role

The role of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee (the Committee) is:

(a)       to assist and advise the Council in discharging its responsibility and ownership of health and safety, risk management, internal control, financial management practices, frameworks and processes to ensure these are robust and appropriate to safeguard the Council's staff and its financial and non-financial assets;

(b)       to consider strategic issues facing the city and develop a pathway for the future;

(c)       to monitor progress on achievement of desired strategic outcomes;

(d)       to review and determine the policy and bylaw framework that will assist in achieving the strategic priorities and outcomes for the Tauranga City Council.

Membership

The Committee will consist of:

·         four commissioners with the Commission Chair appointed as the Chairperson of the Committee

·         the Chairperson of Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana

·         three tangata whenua representatives (recommended by Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana and appointed by Council)

·         an independent external person with finance and risk experience appointed by the Council.

 

Voting Rights

The tangata whenua representatives and the independent external person have voting rights as do the Commissioners.

The Chairperson of Te Rangapu Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana is an advisory position, without voting rights, designed to ensure mana whenua discussions are connected to the committee.

Committee's Scope and Responsibilities

A.  STRATEGIC ISSUES

The Committee will consider strategic issues, options, community impact and explore opportunities for achieving outcomes through a partnership approach.

A1 – Strategic Issues

The Committee's responsibilities with regard to Strategic Issues are:

·         Adopt an annual work programme of significant strategic issues and projects to be addressed. The work programme will be reviewed on a six-monthly basis.

·         In respect of each issue/project on the work programme, and any additional matters as determined by the Committee:

o          Consider existing and future strategic context

o          Consider opportunities and possible options

o          Determine preferred direction and pathway forward and recommend to Council for inclusion into strategies, statutory documents (including City Plan) and plans.

·         Consider and approve changes to service delivery arrangements arising from the service delivery reviews required under Local Government Act 2002 that are referred to the Committee by the Chief Executive.

·         To take appropriate account of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

A2 – Policy and Bylaws

The Committee's responsibilities with regard to Policy and Bylaws are:

·         Develop, review and approve bylaws to be publicly consulted on, hear and deliberate on any submissions and recommend to Council the adoption of the final bylaw. (The Committee will recommend the adoption of a bylaw to the Council as the Council cannot delegate to a Committee the adoption of a bylaw.)

·         Develop, review and approve policies including the ability to publicly consult, hear and deliberate on and adopt policies.

A3 – Monitoring of Strategic Outcomes and Long Term Plan and Annual Plan

The Committee's responsibilities with regard to monitoring of strategic outcomes and Long Term Plan and Annual Plan are:

·         Reviewing and reporting on outcomes and action progress against the approved strategic direction. Determine any required review / refresh of strategic direction or action pathway.

·         Reviewing and assessing progress in each of the six (6) key investment proposal areas within the 2021-2031 Long Term Plan.

·         Reviewing the achievement of financial and non-financial performance measures against the approved Long Term Plan and Annual Plans.

B. FINANCE AND RISK

The Committee will review the effectiveness of the following to ensure these are robust and appropriate to safeguard the Council's financial and non-financial assets:

·         Health and safety.

·         Risk management.

·         Significant projects and programmes of work focussing on the appropriate management of risk.

·         Internal and external audit and assurance.

·         Fraud, integrity and investigations.

·         Monitoring of compliance with laws and regulations.

·         Oversight of preparation of the Annual Report and other external financial reports required by statute.

·         Oversee the relationship with the Council’s Investment Advisors and Fund Managers.

·         Oversee the relationship between the Council and its external auditor.

·         Review the quarterly financial and non-financial reports to the Council.

B1 - Health and Safety

The Committee’s responsibilities through regard to health and safety are:

·         Reviewing the effectiveness of the health and safety policies and processes to ensure a healthy and safe workspace for representatives, staff, contractors, visitors and the public.

·         Assisting the Commissioners to discharge their statutory roles as "Officers" in terms of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015.

B2 - Risk Management

The Committee's responsibilities with regard to risk management are:

·         Review, approve and monitor the implementation of the Risk Management Policy, including the Corporate Risk Register.

·         Review and approve the Council’s "risk appetite" statement.

·         Review the effectiveness of risk management and internal control systems including all material financial, operational, compliance and other material controls. This includes legislative compliance, significant projects and programmes of work, and significant procurement.

·         Review risk management reports identifying new and/or emerging risks and any subsequent changes to the "Tier One" register.

B3 - Internal Audit

The Committee’s responsibilities with regard to the Internal Audit are:

·         Review and approve the Internal Audit Charter to confirm the authority, independence and scope of the Internal Audit function. The Internal Audit Charter may be reviewed at other times and as required.

·         Review and approve annually and monitor the implementation of the Internal Audit Plan.

·         Review the co-ordination between the risk and internal audit functions, including the integration of the Council's risk profile with the Internal Audit programme. This includes assurance over all material financial, operational, compliance and other material controls. This includes legislative compliance (including Health and Safety), significant projects and programmes of work and significant procurement.

·         Review the reports of the Internal Audit functions dealing with findings, conclusions and recommendations.

·         Review and monitor management’s responsiveness to the findings and recommendations and enquire into the reasons that any recommendation is not acted upon.

B4 - External Audit

The Committee's responsibilities with regard to the External Audit are:

·         Review with the external auditor, before the audit commences, the areas of audit focus and audit plan.

·         Review with the external auditors, representations required by commissioners and senior management, including representations as to the fraud and integrity control environment.

·         Recommend adoption of external accountability documents (LTP and annual report) to the Council.

·         Review the external auditors, management letter and management responses and inquire into reasons for any recommendations not acted upon.

·         Where required, the Chair may ask a senior representative of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) to attend the Committee meetings to discuss the OAG's plans, findings and other matters of mutual interest.

·         Recommend to the Office of the Auditor General the decision either to publicly tender the external audit or to continue with the existing provider for a further three-year term.

B5 - Fraud and Integrity

The Committee's responsibilities with regard to Fraud and Integrity are:

·         Review and provide advice on the Fraud Prevention and Management Policy.

·         Review, adopt and monitor the Protected Disclosures Policy.

·         Review and monitor policy and process to manage conflicts of interest amongst commissioners, tangata whenua representatives,  external representatives appointed to council committees or advisory boards, management, staff, consultants and contractors.

·         Review reports from Internal Audit, external audit and management related to protected disclosures, ethics, bribery and fraud related incidents.

·         Review and monitor policy and processes to manage responsibilities under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the Privacy Act 2020 and any actions from the Office of the Ombudsman's report.

B6 - Statutory Reporting

The Committee's responsibilities with regard to Statutory Reporting relate to reviewing and monitoring the integrity of the Annual Report and recommending to the Council for adoption the statutory financial statements and any other formal announcements relating to the Council's financial performance, focusing particularly on:

·         Compliance with, and the appropriate application of, relevant accounting policies, practices and accounting standards.

·         Compliance with applicable legal requirements relevant to statutory reporting.

·         The consistency of application of accounting policies, across reporting periods.

·         Changes to accounting policies and practices that may affect the way that accounts are presented.

·         Any decisions involving significant judgement, estimation or uncertainty.

·         The extent to which financial statements are affected by any unusual transactions and the manner in which they are disclosed.

·         The disclosure of contingent liabilities and contingent assets.

·         The basis for the adoption of the going concern assumption.

·         Significant adjustments resulting from the audit.

Power to Act

·         To make all decisions necessary to fulfil the role, scope and responsibilities of the Committee subject to the limitations imposed.

·         To establish sub-committees, working parties and forums as required.

·         This Committee has not been delegated any responsibilities, duties or powers that the Local Government Act 2002, or any other Act, expressly provides the Council may not delegate. For the avoidance of doubt, this Committee has not been delegated the power to:

o          make a rate;

o          make a bylaw;

o          borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance with the Long-Term Plan (LTP);

o          adopt the LTP or Annual Plan;

o          adopt the Annual Report;

o          adopt any policies required to be adopted and consulted on in association with the LTP or developed for the purpose of the local governance statement;

o          adopt a remuneration and employment policy;

o          appoint a chief executive.

Power to Recommend

To Council and/or any standing committee as it deems appropriate.

 

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

Order of Business

1          Opening karakia. 11

2          Apologies. 11

3          Public forum.. 11

4          Acceptance of late items. 11

5          Confidential business to be transferred into the open. 11

6          Change to order of business. 11

7          Confirmation of minutes. 12

7.1            Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 30 October 2023  12

7.2            Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 13 November 2023. 36

8          Declaration of conflicts of interest 50

9          Business. 51

9.1            Refreshed outline plan of the Committee's upcoming work programme. 51

9.2            Priority One Annual Report 2022/2023. 57

9.3            Mount Industrial Planning Study Key Recommendations. 60

9.4            Delivering on Our Direction - keeping it live. 89

9.5            Audit New Zealand - report to the commissioners on the audit of the consultation document for the 2024-34 long-term plan. 96

9.6            Growth & Land Use Projects Progress Report - December 2023. 113

9.7            City Plan Work Programme. 131

9.8            Review of policies on grants for development contributions on Papakāinga Housing and Community Housing. 136

9.9            Deliberations Report on the Street Use Policy. 161

9.10          Deliberations Report for Traffic and Parking Bylaw.. 172

9.11          Deliberations Report - Gambling Venues Policy. 180

9.12          LGOIMA and Privacy Report Q1 for 2023/2024 year 187

10       Discussion of late items. 190

11       Public excluded session. 191

11.1          Corporate Risk Register - Quarterly Update. 191

11.2          Internal Audit & Assurance - Quarterly Update. 191

11.3          Litigation Report 192

12       Closing karakia. 193

 

 


1            Opening karakia

2            Apologies

3            Public forum 

4            Acceptance of late items

5            Confidential business to be transferred into the open

6            Change to order of business


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

7            Confirmation of minutes

7.1         Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 30 October 2023

File Number:           A15343157

Author:                    Sarah Drummond, Governance Advisor

Authoriser:             Shaleen Narayan, Team Leader: Governance Services

 

Recommendations

That the Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 30 October 2023 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

 

 

 

Attachments

1.       Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 30 October 2023 

 

 


UNCONFIRMEDStrategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting minutes

30 October 2023

 

 

 

MINUTES

Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting

Monday, 30 October 2023

 


 

Order of Business

1          Opening karakia. 3

2          Apologies. 3

3          Public forum.. 3

4          Acceptance of late items. 4

5          Confidential business to be transferred into the open. 4

6          Change to order of business. 4

7          Confirmation of minutes. 4

7.1            Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 18 September 2023. 4

8          Declaration of conflicts of interest 4

9          Business. 4

9.1            Annual report 2022/23 - Presentation of revised document and update from Audit New Zealand. 4

9.2            Increase to ANZ Facility. 5

9.3            Credit Rating Results from Standard & Poors Global Ratings. 6

9.4            Q1 Financial Monitoring Report to 30 September 2023. 6

9.5            Local Government Funding Agency AGM Matters 2023. 7

9.6            Tauranga Māori Business Association Annual Report 2022/2023. 8

9.7            2021-31 Long-term Plan Actions Tracker 10

9.8            Approval of Draft Property Acquisitions and Disposals Policy. 11

9.9            Natural Hazard and Resilience Planning - Release of Natural Hazards Information (Slope Hazard Zones, Landslide Susceptibility) 13

9.10          Mount Planning and Delivery Programme Update - October 2023. 13

9.11          Tauranga Urban Design Panel and Framework Update. 15

9.12          Community Funding Policy Deliberations and Adoption. 15

9.13          2023 Q1 Health and Safety Report 16

9.14          Local Alcohol Policy Review: Deliberations. 17

10       Discussion of late items. 20

11       Public excluded session. 20

12       Closing karakia. 20

 

 


 

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council

Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting

HELD AT THE Bay of Plenty Regional Council Chambers, Regional House,

1 Elizabeth Street, Tauranga

ON Monday, 30 October 2023 AT 9am

 

 

PRESENT:                    Commission Chair Anne Tolley (Chairperson), Dr Wayne Beilby, Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston, Commissioner Stephen Selwood, Commissioner Bill Wasley, Te Pio Kawe, Ms Rohario Murray,

IN ATTENDANCE:       Marty Grenfell (Chief Executive), Paul Davidson (Chief Financial Officer), Barbara Dempsey (General Manager: Community Services), Nic Johansson (General Manager: Infrastructure), Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance), Alastair McNeill (General Manager: Corporate Services), Sarah Omundsen (General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance), Sheree Covell (Treasury and Financial Compliance Manager), Kathryn Hooker (Corporate Planner), Marin Gabric (Senior Financial Accountant (Compliance & External Reporting)), Kathryn Sharplin (Manager: Finance), Tracey Hughes (Financial Insights & Reporting Manager), Anne Blakeway (Manager: City Partnerships), Lisa Gilmour (City Partnership Specialist), Sarah Holmes (Corporate Planner), Jennifer Ross (Policy Analyst), Simon Collett (Manager Commercial Property), Natalie Rooseboom (Manager: Asset Services), Vicky Grant-Ussher (Policy Analyst), Carl Luca (Team Leader: Urban Communities), Sandy Lee (Policy Analyst), Richard Butler (Community Partnerships Funding Specialist), Darren West (Health, Safety & Wellbeing Manager), Jane Barnett (Policy Analyst), Nigel McGlone (Manager: Environmental Regulation), Coral Hair (Manager: Democracy & Governance Services), Wikus van Pareen (Application Support Specialist), Janie Storey (Governance Advisor), Sarah Drummond (Governance Advisor)

 

1            Opening karakia

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston opened the meeting with a karakia.

2            Apologies

Apology

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/1

Moved:       Dr Wayne Beilby

Seconded:  Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the apology for absence received from Committee Members Matire Duncan and Bruce Robertson be accepted.

Carried

 

Written comment from Committee Member Bruce Robertson regarding reports presented to the meeting are attached to these minutes.

3            Public forum

Nil

4            Acceptance of late items

Nil

5            Confidential business to be transferred into the open

Nil

6            Change to order of business

Nil

7            Confirmation of minutes

Committee Chairperson Anne Tolley proposed that both the open and public excluded unconfirmed minutes of 18 September 2023 be confirmed as one motion in the open meeting. It was noted by the Committee that a public excluded attachment to an open report remained on the agenda and would require the Committee to move into public excluded to discuss the item or seek answers from staff.

7.1         Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 18 September 2023

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/2

Moved:       Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded:  Dr Wayne Beilby

That the public and public excluded minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 18 September 2023 be confirmed as a true and correct record subject to the following amendment to Item 8 Conflicts of Interest.

Committee Member Rohario Murray declared that she had provided draft feed back and submissions on the proposed Three Waters legislation and Resource Management Act reform. However it was noted that she had not taken part in the drafting of the legislation on Three Waters, however there maybe potential interactions between the two pieces of legislation.arried

8            Declaration of conflicts of interest

Nil

9            Business

9.1         Annual report 2022/23 - Presentation of revised document and update from Audit New Zealand

Staff          Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Sheree Covell, Treasury and Financial Compliance Manager

Kathryn Hooker, Corporate Planner

Marin Gabric, Senior Financial Accountant (Compliance & External Reporting)

 

External    Leon Pieterse  Director, Audit NZ

 

Amendments to section 6 Council Controlled Organisations section of the Annual Report 2022/23 were tabled and  are attached to the Minutes.

 

Key points

·         At the previous 18 September 2023 meeting of the Strategy Finance and Risk Committee (The Committee) staff sought feedback from the Committee on proposed changes to the Annual Report.

·         The changes requested had been actioned by staff and they reported that there had been no change/effect to the final operating costs.

·         Two matters for the report remained outstanding and would be reported in the final report due 27 November 2023.

 

Discussion points raised.

·         The Committee and Mr Pieterse of Audit NZ commented that staff had worked under pressure to complete the Annual Report and had provided f a high quality, informative and comprehensive annual report, and continued to do so as the last reports were finished. 

·         The Committee Chair Anne Tolley, directed staff to provide a copy of the amendment tabled to this report to Committee Member Mr Bruce Robertson.

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/3

Moved:       Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded:  Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Annual report 2022/23 - Presentation of revised document and update from Audit New Zealand", and the tabled document memorandum -  Amendments to Section 6 – CCO – Section of and Annual Report.

Carried

Attachments

1        Strategy Finance and Risk Committee - Written  Comments of Bruce Robertson

2        Memo - Amendments to Section 6 Annual Report 30 October 2023 Attachments

3

 

 

9.2         Increase to ANZ Facility

Staff          Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Sheree Covell, Treasury and Financial Compliance Manager

Kathryn Sharplin, Manager: Finance

 

Key points

·         The proposed increase to the uncommitted bank facility of $100M would assist with the management of Council’s liquidity risk consistent with its Treasury Policy and the requirements of our lenders. This reflected the increase in gross debt and maturities requiring refinancing over the next three years.  .

 

In response to questions

·         The funding was comparable to Local government Funding Agreement.(LGFA) and could be another option to cover debt maturity.

 

 

 

 

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/4

Moved:       Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded:  Dr Wayne Beilby

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Increase to ANZ Facility".

(b)     Approves an increase of $100 million to the facility with ANZ bringing the total uncommitted bank facilities to $200 million.

Carried

 

9.3         Credit Rating Results from Standard & Poors Global Ratings

Staff          Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Sheree Covell, Treasury and Financial Compliance Manager

Kathryn Sharplin, Manager: Finance

 

Key points

 

·         Tauranga City Council (TCC) choose to have a credit rating to access lower interest margins on its borrowing and to allow borrowing covenants with LGFA that include a debt to revenue ratio limit of 280%.

·         Standard & Poors (S&P) has affirmed TCC’s long and short term ratings at A+/A-1.  Council had a stable outlook on the rating based primarily on the expectation that council would follow through with the planned rates increases and deliver on the. capital programme.  attached S&P report outlines the factors relevant to this rating.

·         Tauranga City Council (TCC’)s growing debt constraints are also being experienced by most other larger councils Tauranga City Council (TCC) had chosen to have a credit rating to access lower interest margins on its borrowing and to allow borrowing covenants with LGFA that include a debt to revenue ratio limit of 280%.  .

·         S&P had  affirmed TCC’s long and short term ratings at A+/A-1.  Council had a stable outlook on the rating based primarily on the expectation that council had followed hrough with the planned rates increases and deliver on its capital programme.  The attached S&P report outlines the factors relevant to this rating.

·         TCC’s growing debt constraints are also being experienced by most other larger councils

 

·         Standard & Poors (S & P) has affirmed Tauranga City Council’s (TCC’s)  A+ credit rating with a stable outlook based on the expectation that TCC would follow through with its planning rates increases and deliver on its capital programme.. 

·         The S&P rating report noted that our rating excludes the impacts of waters reform as it only looked forward to 2026.  The strongest rating factors for TCC included the Institutional Framework, Tauranga economy, TCC’s liquidity coverage and experienced financial management team.  Liquidity considerations included TCC’s approach to prefunding debt maturities and increasing uncommitted bank facilities as total debt levels increase.

In response to questions

·         The modelling used showed some forecasts were unfavourable.

·         There would be some correction completed to forcasting and data used in modelling. in the financial spreadsheets.

 

 

 

 

Discussion points raised.

·         The Report was an informing report only and requires no decision of Council.

·         Chairperson Anne Tolley asked that staff be made aware of the Committee’s compliments and thanks for the commitment they had shown in completing the work.

·         Chairperson Tolley further noted that the downside of borrowing was the resultant rise in costs, that occurred when growth in a city was not managed, and that the report should be compulsory reading for any person who had considered or would be standing for election.

Committee Resolution  SIR/23/5

Moved:       Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded:  Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Credit Rating Results from Standard & Poors Global Ratings".

Carried

 

9.4         Q1 Financial Monitoring Report to 30 September 2023

Staff          Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Kathryn Sharplin, Manager: Finance

Tracey Hughes, Financial Insights & Reporting Manager

Susan Braid, Financial Lead Projects Assurance

 

Key points

·         The report provided information on Council’s financial performance to 30 September 2023, which was the first quarter of the 2023/24 financial year.

·         Revised non-financial performance reporting will be provided separately with the first report proposed for the 6 months to end of December 2024.

·         The overall operating surplus was $3.2M unfavourable to budget with key drivers being  lower capitalisation offsets of personnel costs, slower receipt of development contribution revenue and vested assets and lower water by meter consumption than budgeted.

·         Capital Expenditure of $81m was delivered which compared to the year-to-date budget of $116m, excluding vested assets and projects delivered by third parties.

·         Gross debt was $949m at 30 September and net debt was $826m with $123m held in bank balances and term deposits. 

 

In response to questions

·         More consideration would be given to forecasting from the second quarter.

·         It was agreed that on page 47, the statement of comprehensive revenue and expense, the figures in the operating expenditure forecast were incorrect compared to budget, as these were showing a favourable variance rather than an unfavourable variance and this would be corrected.

·         The digital programme was considered an operational cost, however the programme was funded from loan and would be kept in the capital expenditure schedule to assist with monitoring of the programme.

 

·          

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/6

Moved:       Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded:  Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Q1 Financial Monitoring Report to 30 September 2023".

Carried

 

9.5         Local Government Funding Agency AGM Matters 2023

Staff          Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Kathryn Sharplin, Manager: Finance

 

Key points

·         The report sought approval for voting on various matters at the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA)  annual general meeting on 23 November 2023

·         The summary attached to the report provided a good explanation of the benefits provided by LGFA to its shareholders with the main benefit being the ease of access to borrowing .

 

In response to questions

·         A review of Director remuneration has resulted in a proposed increase, given the level of experience and qualifications required of a Director, LGFA sought to set a salary level at a midpoint of the salary scale.

 

 

Discussion points raised

·         It was expected that regular reviews of the director’s remuneration wouldlead to more steady increases..

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/7

Moved:       Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded:  Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Local Government Funding Agency AGM Matters 2023".

(b)     Approve the following resolutions to allow voting for the Local Government Funding Agency annual general meeting:

(i)      Receive and consider the financial statements of the company for the year to 30 June 2023 together with the directors and auditor’s reports to shareholders;

(ii)     Approve the re-election of Philip Cory-Wright as an Independent Director of the Company (Proxy Form Resolution 1(a));

(iii)     Approve the election of David Rae as an Independent Director of the Company (Proxy Form Resolution 1(b));

(iv)    Approve the re-election of Tauranga City Council as a Nominating Local Authority to the Shareholder’s Council (Proxy Form Resolution 2(a));

(v)     Approve the re-election of Western Bay of Plenty District Council as a Nominating Local Authority to the Shareholder’s Council (Proxy Form Resolution 2(b));

(vi)    Approve the following increases in directors fee payable (Proxy Form Resolution 3 (a) to (d)):

1)   With effect from 1 July 2023, the director acting as chair of the board of directors of $16,000 per annual, from $108,000 to $124,000 per annum;

2)   With effect from 1 July 2023, each of the other directors acting as members of the audit and risk committee, an increase of $10,000 per annum, from $63,000 to $73,000 per annum;

3)   With effect from 1 July 2023, the director acting as chair of the audit and risk committee, an increase of $11,000 per annum, from $67,000 to $78,000 per annum and

4)   With effect from 1 July 2023, each of the other directors an increase of $10,000 per annum, from $60,000 to $70,000 per annum.

(c)     Authorise by way of proxy, the Chair of Local Government Funding Agency to vote on behalf of Tauranga City Council and for a member of staff to attend the AGM as a shareholder representative of Tauranga City Council.

Carried

 

9.6         Tauranga Māori Business Association Annual Report 2022/2023

Staff           Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships

Anne Blakeway, Manager: City Partnerships

Lisa Gilmour, City Partnership Specialist

 

External     Te Rina McRae-Hape Kaitautoko, Lloyd  Rakaupai, Deputy Chairperson, Leone Farquhar Chairperson of the Tauranga Māori Business Association (the Association)

 

 

The PowerPoint Presentation presented by the Association  is attached to the minutes.

 

Key points

·         The Association was established in 2010 to create a network for Māori Business Owners, establishing social and other networks and providing educational opportunities for Māori business owners.

·         The Association noted that there were opportunities for collaboration that had been missed, and that the Association would benefit from further coaching from organisations such as KPMG.

·         All previous Members of the Association were volunteers until the establishment and appointment of a 0.25 FTE Kaitautoko role (10 hours per week) in July 2023 to nuture and grow its Pakihi Māori membership to achieve its vision

·         Thanked TCC for the funding of $20,000 towards the establishment of the Kaitautoko role and since that time Ms McRae-Hape had increased the membership and developed the five-year Strategic Plan working in conjunction with KPMG to contribute towards the success of Tauranga Moana’s Eco-system.

·         The Association thanked the Council for the contributions that it had made through funding and access to staff.

·         Mr Rakaupai was the vice-Chair of the Chamber of Commerce.

·         The Association sought the same amount of funding that the Chamber of Commerce received from the Council, $65,000 per annum to continue with its work and grow Māori businesses.

·         The Association had provided a voice for Māori and Pacifica people that had not previously had forums to speak together and was  a safe space for members to utilise and grow business skill sets.

 

In response to questions

·         The Association was not able to reach all businesses that it would like to. They saw their role as contributing to the environment and empowering other businesses to do the same.

·         When onboarding a new organisation the Association sought to set goals and direction with them that allowed for growth.

·         The Association had a good ongoing relationship with the Tauranga Chamber of Commerce and there was a Memorandum of Understanding between them.  Communications about Chamber events were relayed to the Association’s members, and both Boards were looking to increase their communications.

·         The Association recognised that social procurement was a big topic and they were keen for  Māori businesses to get a share of those opportunities.  The Association saw the need to work with Māori businesses to grow and develop their capacity to take on those opportunities.

·         Each month the Association caught up with other agencies and organisations through Priority One and sat on the Western Bay Infrastructure Forum, all undertaken in a voluntary capacity, which was why the continued funding was crucial to the Association.

·         The Association does have members who whakapapa to Tauranga Moana and the Association would like to have more connection with iwi and have talked about creating a position on the Board for an iwi member to provide that unique viewpoint.

 

Discussion points raised

 

·         The Committee Chair suggested that Mr Rakaupai’s request for further funding of the Association be put forward as a submission to the Long Term Plan 2024-34.

·         Commissioner Selwood offered his experience in developing membership should the Association wish to take up that offer.

·         The Committee acknowledged the importance of the relationship with the Association and  sought their feedback on how the relationship could be strengthened and grown to help maintain the success of the relationships built so far and strengthen new opportunities.

·         Given the importance of the relationship the Committee recommended that it be added to the briefing pack for the incoming new Council.

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/8

Moved:       Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded:  Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance & Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Tauranga Māori Business Association Annual Report 2022/23”.  ".

Carried

Attachments

1        Presentation of Tauranga Māori Business Association

 

9.7         2021-31 Long-term Plan Actions Tracker

·         Staff    Jeremy Boase (Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning)

·          

·         Key points

·          

·         The table in paragraph 4 had corrupted and should read as follows:

·          

·          

·         On Track

·         Off track

·         Completed

·         LTP

·         6

·         4

·         58

·         LTPA/AP

·         6

·         1

·         37

 

·         There would be a slight time lag in the information provided within the report. The General Managers’ would provide up to date information.

 

In response to questions

 

·         Commission Tolley raised concern about handing of the management of the Memorial Park project to Te Manawataki o Te Papa Limited (TMOTPL) prior to decisions on the scope of the project been finalised.  The Chief Executive advised that since moving into the design phase there had been change to the original scope of the project and he would revisit the decision to move the management to TMOTPL until final designs were approved.

·         The Auckland Council last week resolved to provide $600,000 funding towards the development of a national rating postponement scheme and staff would replicate that paper to the next available Council meeting. Auckland Council’s funding was dependent on other councils in the Steering Group contributing funding.  The Steering Group were looking to push this initiative following the central government election. The regional wide waste strategy was commenced prior to the Te Maunga Transfer Station project.  Staff were working towards a completed business case for Te Maunga in early December 2023.

 

Discussion points raised

·         More clarity on the proposal would show how a closure of the bus exchange in Arataki would provide certainty to the community, and what a closure looked like.

·         Frustrated due to the delay to the plan that implemented he National Scheme on Rating Structure proposals.

·         The initiative could address Rate Payers  concern on fixed revenue  method proposed. ratepayers on fixed revenue.

·         Recognised and congratulates staff on the achievement of 58 completed actions.

 

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/9

Moved:       Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded:  Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report ‘2021-31 Long-term Plan Actions Report’.

(b)     Notes the progress to date as reported in Attachment 1.

Carried

 

Meeting adjourned at 11.15 am

Meeting Resumed at 11.24 am

 

9.8         Approval of Draft Property Acquisitions and Disposals Policy

Staff          Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

Jennifer Ross, Policy Analyst

Simon Collett, Manager Commercial Property

 

Key points

·         The review of the policy would occur every two years.

·         This was the first review completed by staff who were pleased with the result.

·         When money was received from the disposal process it would be placed in the Asset Realisation Reserve .

·         Iwi and Mana whenua would be provided 30 days’ notice of the property disposal with a right of first refusal.

·         The disposal methodology process firstly determined if a property was strategic and if yes, then the Council went through the strategic process and if not then  a property would be on the list for general sale, and the right of first refusal would then be triggered.

·          

In response to questions

·         The 30 day timeframe and process was set by Council two years ago and it was a conscious decision at the time as 90 days was considered too long a process.  However it was considered that discussions would be held well in advance with mana whenua before a property was being considered by Council for disposal and a conversation about the classification would enable an early heads up well before the 30 days process commenced.

·         The process allowed for decision making on a case by case basis.

·         Iwi and hapū needed to be conscious that though a property was on the list it may not be placed on the open market for a number of reasons.

·         Council discretion was delegated to the Chief Executive or Mayor to grant an extension of time.

·         Staff agreed that where valuations for properties less than $500,000 differed by more than 10 percent these properties should be exempt from a third valuation being required.

·         Iwi had raised the issue of what would prevent Council from selling the property to another party on more favourable terms than presented through the right of first refusal process when mana whenua did not accept Council’s offer.  The legal position was that this was a contractual matter for Council, and mana whenua were not excluded from participating in an open market process and offering a lower price.

·         In order to ensure visibility of the open market process, wording could be added into the policy that where mana whenua had refused to purchase the property, Council must notify the iwi and hapū that the property was going on the open market and this notification would provide an opportunity to participate in the open market process. 

 

Discussion points raised

 

·         The 30 day timeframe provided to Iwi and Mana whenua to respond to the right of first refusal could be considered onerous in terms of meeting this timeframe as this did not work well with iwi and mana whenua decision making processes.

·         Comfortable enough that the 30 day timeframe would work as long as there was sufficiently long lead in times given to iwi and hapū, alongside the ability of the mayor and Chief Executive to exercise discretion around timeframes.

·         It was acknowledged that iwi and hapū were aware of the list of properties, however an early signal around movement on the list would be helpful.

·         It was suggested that the list of properties could be placed annually on Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana’s priority setting hui.

·         It was noted that most hapū had protocols or hapū management plans with the Council that included maps that identified lands of interest to hapū owned by Council.  It would be helpful if the list of properties was accompanied by maps from the Council’s GIS system, to enable a clear view of where these properties were located.  It was up to hapū to clearly identify what land was strategically important to them.  These protocols gave a lot of lead in time for hapū to identify those lands of interest that may come up for right of first refusal.

 

 

 

 

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/10

Moved:       Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded:  Dr Wayne Beilby

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Approval of Draft Property Acquisitions and Disposals Policy".

(b)     Agrees to make amendments to the policy that:

(i)      accommodate the Asset Realisation Reserve – sections 3, 5.6.7, and 5.8.5

(ii)     clarify market value determination – section 5.2.1 and add the words “with exemptions provided for properties valued $500,000 or less”

(iii)     clarify processes and engagement with mana whenua – sections 5.6.3.2, 5.6.3.3, and 5.6.3.4

(iv)    recognise the potential for cultural matters to be a consideration in the strategic disposal process – section 5.7.4

(v)     clarify processes for property where more than one iwi or hapū have an interest – section 5.9.4

(vi)   add wording to section 5.9 that where mana whenua had refused to purchase the property following the right of first refusal process, Council must notify mana whenua that the property would be placed on the open market and that mana whenua had an opportunity to participate in the open market process.

 

(vii)   make minor clarifications and updates to text.

(viii) the review date be amended to read “as required”.

(c)     Approves the Draft Property Acquisitions and Disposals Policy to be adopted with effect from 6 November 2023, subject to the amendments in (b) above..

(d)     Delegates to the Chief Financial Officer the authority to make minor editorial or presentation changes to the draft policy for correction or clarity.

Carried

 

 

 

9.9         Natural Hazard and Resilience Planning - Release of Natural Hazards Information (Slope Hazard Zones, Landslide Susceptibility)

Staff          Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure Services

Natalie Rooseboom, Manager: Asset Services

 

Key points

·         New mapping had been undertake to update the existing slope hazard maps based on new data. These were last updated in 2002 

·         The landslide susceptibility assessment was also completed on a city-wide basis which described the relative likelihood of future land sliding in an area.

·         15,000 letters were sent to affected land owners advising them of any change and four drop in sessions for land owners  would be held.

·         Feedback received from property owners observed that initially they had struggled to access the information on the website and use of the GIS system that allowed owners to search data for their proposed.

 

Discussion points raised

·         The work was not completed with the intention of scaring people, but to ensure that  property owners were fully informed of the hazards and could then make better decisions based on understanding the risks of living in certain locations.

·         The information also assisted the Council in making future decisions on land use.

 

·          

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/11

Moved:       Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded:  Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance & Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report Hazard and Resilience Planning – Release of Natural Hazards Information (Slop Hazard Zones, Landslide Susceptibility ".

Carried

 

9.10       Mount Planning and Delivery Programme Update - October 2023

Staff          Sarah Omundsen, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

Carl Lucca, Team Leader: Urban Communities

 

Key points

·         The report was a regular update provided to the Committee on the Mount Planning and Delivery Programme which was designed to provide oversight of all the projects happening at the Mount..

·         The Hub at Mount Maunganui had proved to be well used by staff and community groups..

·         Key messages had been aligned across all the projects to remind the community of what the Council was trying to achieve.

·         Staff were continuing to engage with tangata whenua to ensure they were provided with information, especially at the beginning of projects.

 

In response to questions

·         Staff were encouraging community groups to use the Hub and advised community groups that this was a temporary space although staff recognised the risks of raising community expectations.

·         In response to the concerns raised by the Committee, staff would  look at the viability of turning the temporary hub into a permanent service centre, including the role of the Mount Library...

·         Staff confirmed that fuller engagement with the community would be carried out to gain wider views on carparking at the Mount.

·         Staff would provide a timeline on the Arataki bus interchange project.

·         Staff would ensure that regular updates were included on the community gardens as part of the Golf Road Reserve master planning and implementation.

·         Staff would follow up with Priority One on the timing of the ‘blueprint’ and understood that this information was needed when the Council considered the Mount Industrial Plan.

·         A draft plan for Coronation Park had been prepared and it was on hold dependent on the waka structure and once that had been decided the draft Plan would come before the Committee.

·         Further updates would be included in the report on the railway crossing safety improvements.

·         There was an onus on the Bay of Plenty Regional Council, Tauranga City Council and Te Whatu Ora to report back to the Air Quality Working Group meeting in November 2023 and these meetings would be included in this report to the Committee.

·         The Committee workshop on the Mount Spatial Plan and the Mount Industrial Planning Study at the conclusion of this meeting would provide more detail on the work around the air quality and the impacts on Whareroa Marae and the wider interface of industrial land provisions in the Western Bay as well as community, mana whenua and business discussions on the location of businesses close to the port.

 

 

Discussion points raised

 

·         More information on Community views of the current Mount Maunganui car parking

·         Viwes should not only be sought from ratepayers and businesses but included a wider community who used carparks such as residents, shoppers, walkers and people who came to the beach. .

·         The independent review of the Air Pollution: Health Risk Assessment Mount Maunganui report would need to be of a standard to meet the Environment Court proof or evidence which the Council could rely on if any changes were proposed to the district plan from the Mount Industrial Planning Study.

·          

 

 

·         .

·          

·          

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/12

Moved:       Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded:  Dr Wayne Beilby

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Mount Planning and Delivery Programme Update - October 2023".

Carried

 

9.11       Tauranga Urban Design Panel and Framework Update

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

Carl Lucca, Team Leader: Urban Communities

 

In response to questions:

·         Staff would come back with a list of Urban Design Panel (the Panel) members in the new year and would consider the balance of panel members who lived locally as well as those with knowledge outside of Tauranga.

·         In terms of the use of the Panel, the Environmental Planning team had identified that three proposals should have gone through to the Panel, which indicated that the majority of projects were being captured and referred to the Panel.

·         Three to four panellists were selected for each proposal and if there were cultural elements then Panel members with cultural and Te Ao Māori design expertise were included in the Panel to consider those proposals.

·         Staff were conscious of anchoring urban design principles into the policy framework in the District Plan to have the statutory teeth to achieve good urban design outcomes.  These  would be supported by non-regulatory urban design guidelines.  When reporting back the plan change programme staff could make it clear where urban design would be included in future plan changes e.g. urban centres.

·          

 

Discussion points raised

·         The Committee expressed thanks to staff and  Panel

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/13

Moved:       Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded:  Dr Wayne Beilby

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Tauranga Urban Design Panel and Framework Update – October 2023".

Carried

 

9.12       Community Funding Policy Deliberations and Adoption

Staff          Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Community Services

Sandy Lee, Policy Analyst

Richard Butler, Community Partnerships Funding Specialist

 

·          

Discussion points raised

 

·         This has been a long but worthwhile process.

·         It was important that the Council had taken the time to build the partnerships and relationships with community groups.

·         The Committee acknowledged the hard work completed by both staff and community groups over a significant period to complete the work and achieve a policy that everyone could be proud of and achieve great results for the community.

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/14

Moved:       Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded:  Commissioner Stephen Selwood

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Community Funding Policy Deliberations and Adoption".

(b)     Agrees to:

(i)      align the purpose of community funding with the council’s strategic vision for the city per the consulted draft

(ii)     include in the policy the requirement to preference quality applications from organisations not already receiving funding from council, with the following clarification: “Where a decision must be made between quality applications that have scored similarly against the assessment criteria, preference will be given to applicants that do not already receive some other form of support from council” (see policy clause 5.6.2)

(iii)     include in the policy the requirement to restrict any single project to one source of council funding at any one time per the consulted draft, with the following definition of a project: A project is a discrete, often time-bound activity, distinct from an on-going service provided by a community organisation” (see definition in section 3 of the policy)

(iv)    include capital funding in the Community Funding Policy per the consulted draft

(v)     include community leases in the Community Funding Policy per the consulted draft

(vi)    increase the maximum amount for the Match Fund Small Grant from $1000 to $5000 per the consulted draft

(vii)   disestablish the Match Fund Medium Grant and increase the range of the Community Grant Fund from ‘$10,001 to $50,000’ to ‘$5001 to $50,000’ per the consulted draft

(viii)   establish a multi-year funding option per the consulted draft, and include an annual performance assessment (see details under Performance Monitoring in Schedule Three: Multi-Year Funding Agreements)

(ix)    keep Partnership Agreements in the Community Funding Policy with the amendments to reflect more genuine partnerships (see Schedule Six in the policy).

(c)     Adopt the revised Community Funding Policy and schedules included as Attachment 1 in this report.

Carried

 

9.13       2023 Q1 Health and Safety Report

Staff          Alastair McNeil, General Manager: Corporate Services

Darren West, Health Safety and Wellbeing Manager

 

Key points

·         Tauranga City was comparable with territorial authorities of the same size in terms of  the number of notifiable events, with six events in the last financial year, will all related to contractors. One notifiable event from New Years Eve December 2022 remained under review.

·         The Risk Fund was available to managers to develop effective solutions to risks where there was no internal budget available.

 

In response to questions

·         The ISO 45001 journey was being rolled out and training for staff on contractor management was well received by staff and provided a consistent approach, key documents, flow charts and information on how to be supportive to enable contractors to adhere to their safety plans.

·         Internal reporting was increasing due to training and staff awareness of the need to report events.

 

Discussion points raised

·         .

·         Congratulated staff on the readability of the report and enjoyed the challenges and solutions section.

·          

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/15

Moved:       Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded:  Dr Wayne Beilby

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "2023 Q1 Health and Safety Report".

Carried

 

 

 

 

9.14       Local Alcohol Policy Review: Deliberations

Staff          Sarah Omundsen, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

Jane Barnett, Policy Analyst

Nigel McGlone, Manager: Environmental Regulation

 

The PowerPoint presentation tabled with this report is attached to the minutes.

 

Key points

·         The Committee approved the first draft Local Alcohol Policy (LAP) for consultation on 1 November 2021.  The deliberations on the first draft LAP occurred in June 2022 and a revised draft LAP was then consulted on in August-September 2022 and the Committee heard from submitters in November 2022.

·         Deliberations were delayed until the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Community Participation) Amendment Act (Amendment Act) was passed, and this had now happened royal assent being received on 30 August 2023. Due to new legislation now in place, the Committee was asked to continue with the process and make decisions on the issues raised by submitters.

·         There was a confidential attachment to the report relating to legal risks and any discussion on that attachment would require the Committee to go into public excluded.  There was a change proposed to recommendation (f) to state that Attachment 4 be retained in confidential due to legal professional privilege.

·         The Amendment Act changed the process for finalising the LAP. The requirements to adopt a provisional policy and allow for an appeal process had been removed. Public notification was required to bring the LAP into force. If changes were made to trading hours and/or one-way door policy, then the earliest the LAP could come into force was three months after public notification (12 February 2024) to enable businesses to get prepared.  If no changes were to be made, then the LAP took effect 30 days after the date on which it was publicly notified.

·         Submitters had differing views on most issues. There was almost a 50 per cent split between those that supported the proposed later starting sale time for off-licensed premises, and those that oppose it. The only issue with a clear majority was the issue of locations for new bottle stores, with 64 per cent of submitters supporting restricting this compared to 24 per cent disagreeing.

·         In considering the options the Committee had several matters to consider. The primary consideration was the objective of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Act) – minimising harm from excessive and inappropriate consumption and whether it would allow for the safe and responsible sale, supply and consumption of alcohol. 

·         Decisions made by the Committee could be incorporated into a new LAP that would then be adopted and bought into force in accordance with the Act.

 

In response to questions

·         The Committee had delegated authority to make decisions and adopt the LAP.

·         People could purchase alcohol online from supermarkets and it could be delivered between 6:00 am and 6:00 pm. Alcohol Health Watch has raised the matter as they saw this as a gap in the legislation. Decisions from the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority (ARLA) had confirmed that the legislation did not enable the LAP to consider remote sales.

·         There were proposed restrictions in the LAP for new bottle stores located in an area with a deprivation index of 7 or above.  The Committee had been concerned with the establishment of new off-licensed premises in areas with vulnerable communities and had directed staff to look at the use of the deprivation index about a year ago, and staff had found a strong cluster of bottle stores located in areas with a deprivation index of 7 or above.

·         The legislation opened up a much wider scope of public objection to off and on-license applications.

·         There was no one-way door policy in Mount Maunganui as the on-licensed premises closed at 1:00 am.

 

Discussion points raised

Off-licensed premises trading hours

·         The proposed changes for the starting sales time for off-licenced premises were seeking to reduce alcohol related harm, reduce alcohol sales exposure for children and youth which was linked to harm and assisted in sending a strong message to the community on the harms associated with alcohol use.  These changes were supported by 50% of submitters and 72% of those surveyed in the Toi Te Ora Health and Wellbeing Survey who believed that 10:00 am or later was a suitable opening time.

·         The recent Supreme Court decision found that councils could rely on community preferences.

·         Some Committee members were not convinced that there was enough evidence to conclude that changing the hours of off-licensed premises from 7:00 am to 10:00 am would reduce the potential for alcohol related harm given the ability to order online. They believed the change to 10:00 am would cause inconvenience and confusion to tourists and residents.

·         It was requested that staff work with Police and Toi Te Ora on developing a methodology to collect information for a baseline data set to assist future councils/committee with more evidence-based information to inform future reviews of the LAP. 

 

New bottle stores

·         Some members expressed concern with using the deprivation index of 7 or more to control the location of new bottle stores regardless of the zone and were unsure how effective this provision would be given the ability of people to obtain alcohol by driving down the road or getting it delivered from online shopping.

·         The ready access to alcohol was an issue for communities.  By providing the licencing authority parameters for considering the location of new off-license premises, the Council would be helping the community and reflecting community desires.

·         It was recognised that the use of the deprivation index was one tool to reduce the number of new bottle stores and there was strong support from submitters with 67% agreeing to this restriction and there was evidence that those living in more socioeconomic deprived areas were at higher risk of alcohol related harm.

·         While the deprivation index was considered rudimentary, it was the best tool available to protect vulnerable communities. It was agreed that the deprivation index of 9 or more was more appropriate.

 

Discretionary conditions for off-licensed premises

·         It was agreed to include discretionary conditions however the condition “restrictions on sales based on the type of product and/or its price” was considered too vague and restrictive and was removed from the list of conditions.

 

New on-licensed premises in industrial areas

·         It was acknowledged that on-license premises were located in industrial locations in other cities.  It was agreed that new on-licensed premises could be located in industrial areas.

 

One-way door policy and final sales time for on-licensed premises in the city centre

·         These two decisions were linked.  In order to avoid people moving from Mount Maunganui, which had a final sales time for on-licensed premises of 1:00 am, to the city centre, the one-way door policy for the city centre was introduced from 1:00 am.

·         The change to the final sales time in the city centre from 3:00 am to 2:00 am would likely reduce alcohol related harm.

·         The initial draft LAP proposed the final sales time in the city centre to be 2:00 am with the one-way door provision from 1:00 am.

Committee Resolution  SFR7/23/16

Moved:       Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded:  Dr Wayne Beilby

 

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)       Receives the report "Local Alcohol Policy Review: Deliberations".

(b)       (i)      Approves 10:00 am as the starting sales time for off-licensed premises.

(ii)      Approves 10:00 pm as the off-licensed premises final sales time.

(iii)     Approves no new bottle stores (off-licensed premises) to be located in areas with a deprivation index of 9 or more.

(iv)    Approves no location restrictions for on-licensed premises.

(v)     Approves 2:00 am as the final sales time for on-licensed premises in the city centre.

(vi)    Approves a one-way door policy for the City Centre at 1:00 am.

(vii)    Approves the following discretionary conditions for off-licensed premises:

·      signs detailing statutory restrictions on the sale of alcohol to minors and intoxicated persons adjacent to every point of sale

·      maintenance of an alcohol-related incidents book

·      installation and operation of CCTV cameras on the exterior of, and within, premises

·      provision of effective exterior lighting

·      no single sales of shots or premixed shots

·      restrictions on single sales

·      restrictions on the display of RTDs at principal entrance to the store or within 3 metres of the front window

·      restrictions on the display of product or price specials.

(c)       Approves the final Local Alcohol Policy incorporating the options approved in (b) above and gives public notice in accordance with the regulations made under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

(d)       Approves the Local Alcohol Policy approved in resolution (c) above coming into force on 12 February 2024.

(e)       Delegates to the General Manager Regulatory and Compliance to make any necessary minor drafting or presentation amendments to the Local Alcohol Policy, prior to public notification.

(f)        Attachment 4 to remain in confidential, to maintain legal professional privilege.

(g)       Direct staff to investigate the means of measuring the impact of changes to the Local Alcohol Policy, and report back to the Committee in the New Year.

Carried

 

Commissioners Shadrach Rolleston and Bill Wasley wished their vote against (b) (iii) to be recorded.

Attachments

1        Local Alcohol Policy - Presentation to Strategy Finance and Risk Committee

 

10          Discussion of late items

Nil

11          Public excluded session

The meeting did not move into Public Excluded.

The Public Excluded minutes were confirmed in the open section of the meeting.

There was no discussion of the confidential attachment.

 

 

12          Closing karakia

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston closed the meeting with a karakia.

 

The meeting closed at 2.17 pm.

 

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed as a true and correct record at the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 4 December 2023.

 

 

 

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

CHAIRPERSON

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

7.2         Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 13 November 2023

File Number:           A15343277

Author:                    Sarah Drummond, Governance Advisor

Authoriser:             Shaleen Narayan, Team Leader: Governance Services

 

Recommendations

That the Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 13 November 2023 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

 

 

 

Attachments

1.       Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 13 November 2023 

 

 


UNCONFIRMEDStrategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting minutes

13 November 2023

 

 

 

MINUTES

Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting

Monday, 13 November 2023

 


 

Order of Business

1          Opening karakia. 3

2          Apologies. 3

3          Public forum.. 3

4          Acceptance of late items. 3

5          Confidential business to be transferred into the open. 3

6          Change to order of business. 3

7          Declaration of conflicts of interest 4

8          Business. 4

8.1            Submitters who wish to be heard. 4

8.1            Submitters who wish to be heard. 11

·                 The Committee requested commentary in the deliberations report on the following: 11

8.2            Hearings Report for the Traffic and Parking Bylaw.. 12

8.3            Hearings Report for the Street Use Policy. 12

8.4            Hearings Report - Gambling Venues Policy. 12

9          Discussion of late items. 13

10       Closing karakia. 13

 

 


 

MINUTES OF TAURANGA CITY COUNCIL

STRATEGY, FINANCE AND RISK COMMITTEE MEETING

HELD AT THE BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, REGIONAL HOUSE,

1 ELIZABETH STREET, TAURANGA

ON MONDAY, 13 NOVEMBER 2023 AT 9.30AM

 

 

PRESENT:                    Dr Wayne Beilby (Chairperson), Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston, Commissioner Stephen Selwood, Commissioner Bill Wasley, Ms Matire Duncan, Ms Rohario Murray, Mr Bruce Robertson

IN ATTENDANCE:       Jeremy Boase (Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning), Nigel McGlone (Manager: Environmental Regulation), Vicky Grant-Ussher,(Policy Analyst) Jennifer Ross, (Policy Analyst) Jennifer Ross (Policy Analyst), Coral Hair (Manager: Democracy & Governance Services), Shaleen Narayan (Team Leader: Governance Services), Anahera Dinsdale (Governance Advisor), Janie Storey (Governance Advisor), Sarah Drummond (Governance Advisor)

 

1            Opening karakia

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston opened the meeting with a karakia.

2            Apologies

Committee Resolution  SFR8/23/1

Moved:       Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded:  Mr Bruce Robertson

That apologies from Commission Chair Anne Tolley and Mr Te Pio Kawe be received and accepted.

Carried

 

3            Public forum

Nil

4            Acceptance of late items

A late submission from the Rano Community Trust to Item 8.4 Gambling Venues Policy, was tabled., The submission noted support for the proposed Policy.  The Committee resolved to accept the submission by way of an additional redolution (d) to Item 8.4.

 

5            Confidential business to be transferred into the open

Nil

6            Change to order of business

Nil

7            Declaration of conflicts of interest

Nil

8            Business

·         The Chairperson welcomed all parties to the hearing. He thanked submitters who had made a submission to any of the Traffic and Parking Bylaw, Street Use Policy and Gambling Venues Policy (The Policies and Bylaw) and thanked the submitters who were presenting their submission to the Committee.

·         The Chairperson advised that item 8.1 had been written as an administrative report only. The report grouped together submitters who had requested to speak on any or all of The Policies and Bylaw..

·         A full set of submissions received (that included submitters to be heard) was attached by appendix to each individual policy or bylaw report. The report and submissions of the Policies and Bylaw had been made available on line on the Tauranga City Councils (TCC) Meeting Agenda and Minutes website page. A copy of any presentations or documents tabled at the hearing would be available to view as attachments to the  unconfirmed minutes of the meeting.

·         The Chairperson advised the submitters who attended the meeting in person, that the Committee had received and read the full set of submissions for the Policies and Bylaws hearing.. Submitters that presented their submission were not required to read out their submission again.

·         All submitters had been allocated five minutes speaking time. including question time,

 

8.1         Submitters who wish to be heard

 

PowerPoint presentations, speaking notes and map documents tabled at hearing were attached to these minutes.

 

(1)      Sub ID: 1 –Dr Rachel Jordan, Public Health Medicine Registrar, Toi Te Ora, Te Whatu Ora

 

Key points

·         Submission on Gambling Venues Policy.

·         Te Whatu Ora did not support the proposed amendment to the Gambling Venues Policy and was concerned that the changes proposed would not reduce gambling harm in Tauranga. .

·         Gambling was a significant public health issue in New Zealand and was associated with significant harm to individuals, whanau and communities and harm also occurred with low levels of gambling. 

·         Electronic gambling machines were mostly located in medium to high deprivation areas and gambling harms were not distributed evenly with Māori three times more likely to be problem gamblers compared to non-Māori and Pacific peoples were 2.5 times more likely.  The Council must therefore meet Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations to reduce gambling harm to Māori and protect future generations from harm.

·         Toi Te Ora strongly opposed relocating gambling venues as this did not align with the purpose of a sinking lid policy to reduce gambling harm. Councils across New Zealand including Tauranga had introduced policies to reduce the number of gambling machines over time by not allowing gambling license transfer or relocation of venues, known as the sinking lid policy.

·         Recently published data from New Zealand, including from Tauranga, had shown that a sinking lid policy was effective at reducing gambling related spending and associated harms over time.  The change to the policy to allow the relocation  of venues may undermine the sinking lid policy and prevent the reduction in gambling venues and machine numbers over time.

·         Although some profits from gambling did make it back to the community, this was a fraction of the amount collected and did not make it back to the communities most harmed. A report commissioned by the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) showed that highly deprived communities provide 74% of gambling profits but only received 12% of grants back.

·         Benefits from funds gained from gambling profits did not make up for the harm caused by gambling.

·         Toi Te Ora therefore recommended that section 2.5 be removed from the Gambling Venue Policy as it promoted the inequitable distribution of funding and failed to prioritise the protection of the most vulnerable communities from gambling harm.

 

In response to questions

·         The preference of Te Whatu Ora was that the venue would have to shut down and cease their license rather than relocate to another area especially within 100 metres of deprived communities as this was still close and would not reduce the harm of gambling to those communities.

·         Te Whatu Ora challenged whether money going back to the community groups from gambling profits could be obtained from another source rather than a source that created such harm to communities.

·         Te Whatu Ora would advocate to funding going back to those communities it came from or to harm reduction and addiction services however that was not within their or councils jurisdiction but would definitely advocate.

·         In response to a question as to whether they had assessed the risk that if there was no ability to relocate venues out of high deprivation areas the license holder would stay rather than shift out of those areas, Te Whatu Ora advised that they had assessed this risk and believed that enforcing the sinking lid policy to not allow relocation, with eventual reduction in numbers over time, had been proven in New Zealand studies to reduce gambling spending and associated harms and their preference was to ensure that if venues needed to relocate they would be unable to.

·         Dr Jordan advised that while it was possible that people from high deprivation areas may access the sports and community organisations receiving funding, even if those organisations may not be registered in those areas, however she advised that the DIA report referenced in their submission did address this matter and included it as a limitation in the assessment of percentage of profits returned to communities but concluded that on balance it was significantly inequitable where the funding was going to.

 

 

(2)      Sub ID: 5 – Jarrod True, Gaming Machine Association of New Zealand (the Association)

 

Key points

·         Submitting to Gambling Venues Policy.

·         The Association wholeheartedly supported the proposed changes to the Gambling Venues Policy

·         The Association was working with members to upscale clubs and venues to create modern safe family environments.

·         The Association supported the relocation provision being expanded to allow Council to consider relocations in any circumstances, when the new site is more desirable from a harm minimisation perspective.

·         The aim was to enable venues to move to more suitable sites and lower deprivation areas, regardless of the reason for the move.

·         Currently relocation was allowed when the venue cannot continue to operate at the existing site due to a natural disaster, fire, public works acquisition or when the venue was earthquake-prone or has had its lease expire. The Association believed its members should not have to wait for a catastrophic event to move a venue to a more desirable location. 

·         2011 changes made to legislation, were made to allow venue moving or alteration to be a minimisation tool for Association Members.

·         Currently 63 % of Tauranga venues were located within very high or medium high deprivation areas and there needed to be a pathway for those venues to be moved out of those areas.

·         It was fair and reasonable to allow venues to relocate out of:

·                     Earthquake-prone buildings.

·                     Dangerous buildings.

·                     Insanitary buildings.

·         Prohibiting relocation would not lead to fewer machines, it simply entrenched venues in unsafe premises.

·         New more modern hospital premises in business districts would improve the economy, create employment and encourage tourism.

·         These proposed changes also protected community funding.  In 2022 Tauranga City-based community groups received $12.55m in grant funding

 

In response to questions

·         For every one dollar played 40% was returned to the community,  20% went to government in taxes, 15% was GST  1% was provided to the problem gambling fund and 16% went to the venue operator and 1-2% was administration costs.

·         In terms of 40% to the community this was distributed by gaming trusts who had committees (either regional or national) that made decisions and every Trust had a policy and authorised purpose statement that set out priority funding.

·         There was sufficient money available to fund problem gambling services. Every three years the Ministry of Health put a budget in front of the Gambling Commission and currently it was $27 M per year.

·         Applicants should be considered on a case by case basis with some flexibility to consider locations, especially to relocate to business districts.

 

 

(3)      Sub ID: 237 – Claire Dale

 

Key points

·         Submitting on Traffic and Parking Bylaw

·         Ms Dale thanked Tauranga City Council (TCC) Staff for ensuring that she could attend the hearing despite roadworks causing access issues to the building.

·         Ms Dale had previously presented a major petition to Central Government to make mobility parking a national law, increase the fines substantially, equally enforceable on public and private land to standardise mobility parking nation-wide.

·         Mrs Dale stated it was declared a human rights issue and should therefore be a central government responsibility, not local government, however until this was changed she was here to address the Council about parking in Tauranga.

·         Ms Dale contended that when central government amended legislation to reduce carparking to reduce carbon emissions. There was no intent to remove mobility parking.

·         Recently Tauranga  removed all mobility parks across  The Strand and CBD that had created a severe problem for access for those with mobility needs.

·         Ms Dale did not see any provision to enforce mobility parking with the use of CCTV cameras.  She formally requested that  the Council provided 24/7 enforcement of mobility car parking using CCTV cameras as had been undertaken by  the Queenstown District Council which had resulted in  large drop non-compliance.

·         Ms Dale formally requested the reinstatement of removed mobility carp arks, and the provision of 24/7 monitoring and enforcement either in person or through CCTV.

 

In response to questions

·         There needed to be substantially more mobility carparking spaces in the CBD and enforcement 24/7 as people knew that traffic wardens had gone home and people parked in mobility spaces without any consequences.

·         Queenstown was the gold standard with their enforcement through CCTV in their bylaw and it was also safer for the traffic wardens.

 

 

(4)      Sub ID: 314 – Claudia West, Chairperson - Mount Mainstreet Association

 

Key points

Gambling Venues Policy

·         The Mount Mainstreet Association (the Association) disagreed with the proposal to allow gambling venues to move without further criteria being put in place to assess each application on a case by case basis.

·         Further criteria to be considered should include the number of existing gambling venues in the same area. For example there were two gambling venues down the Mount Mainstreet within 1 km and the Association would not like to see more venues established.

·         Further criteria could also include the proximity of gambling venues to social/emergency housing as there was social housing in the Mount Mainstreet and that was not captured on the deprivation maps.

 

Street Use Policy

·         The Association stated the examples provided by the Council related to hospitality rather than retail and people were providing feedback based on this perception.

·         It was hard to agree or disagree with the question given that there was no indication of the potential fee. If there was a nominal fee to sign up to use the space, such as Hamilton or Wellington city councils, then this may be acceptable to businesses, however, if the charge was based on market rate then this may be thousands of dollars for businesses who were already paying high commercial rates.

·         The Mainstreet relied on businesses for vibrancy and safety. If high charges were in place then businesses would need to rethink their offering or pass on the charges to customers.

·         Foot traffic data for the Mainstreet from one camera location showed the seasonal nature of foot traffic which increased holiday goers and in the cruise season and was heavily impacted on weather however businesses would have to pay the charge annually when only able to use it for part of the year.

 

In response to questions

·         The Association was concerned that there could be up to 10 gambling venues on the Mainstreet as there was no criteria other than the deprivation zone. The Association wanted to see further criteria added for example there were homeless people living in Coronation Park which were not accounted for in the deprivation maps but needed to be considered. The question was how many gambling venues was considered too much?

·         The Mainstreet had a TAB which was primarily gambling and the other venue had pokies but did draw a clientele because of the pokies.

·         The Mainstreet was asked if they supported flexibility in the Policy and stated that they wanted each application to be assessed on a case by case basis with additional criteria.

·         The Wellington and Hamilton city councils charged a standard fee of $197 per year and the same to renew the licence.  It was fair to charge a bond and administrative fee but the rental fee based on a market rate would increase the rentable fee and that was what they don’t want.

·         The Association understood that the reason for the Street Use Policy was to control the street space and make better use of the footpath space to enable people with mobility issues to move around. When it was busy it did provide vibrancy.

 

 

(5)      Sub ID: 311 – Luke Van Veen, Regional Manager – Central North Island - Hospital New Zealand

 

Key points

·         Submitted on the Gambling Venues Policy and the Street Use Policy.

·         Hospitality New Zealand (“Hospitality NZ”) was a member-led, not-for-profit organisation representing around 2,500 businesses, including cafés, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, commercial accommodation, country hotels and off-licences and represented 180 operators.

·         The lack of clarity and information in the Street Use Policy was a concern to its members.

·         The industry was feeling a huge pinch in regulation and it was hard for them to support the introduction of licenses without knowing what was involved in obtaining a license and what it meant in terms of compliance and the impact on their clientele. It was considered another regulatory burden and unnecessary cost which was worrisome to members.

·         Hospitality NZ understood the long term aim of the Policy and were not wanting to be seen to be against the Smokefree Aotearoa, but needed to know what the wording of smoke free meant in the Policy.

·         Mr van Veen stated that he owned hospitality businesses in Tauranga but was here in his capacity as regional manager role for Hospitality NZ.

 

In response to questions

·         The Hospitality NZ members were not opposed to fair regulation but were concerned about adding a financial burden to businesses.  The Association wanted a clean city with easy access to venues.  However the lack of information meant that they opposed the Policy.

·         The additional cost of airspace would in his experience always be passed onto the tenant which was the reason for the grandfather clause.

·         In terms of detecting a problem gambler the Trusts provided assistance to operators and explored using technology such as face recognition.  Mr van Veen supported the proposal to move gambling venues away from the high deprivation areas and considering the applications on a case by case basis.

 

(6)      Sub ID: 320 – Ash Gee, owner Miss Gee's Bar & Eatery / Chair, Downtown Tauranga

 

Key points

·         Ms Gee spoke to her submission regarding the Street Use Policy.

·         Licence to Occupy agreements (LTO) must be no shorter than a 12-month agreement with six months’ notice to cancel. A business must put in a considerable amount of investment and planning to utilise these spaces and therefore needed certainty of occupancy and a month to month agreement did not provide this. Downtown Tauranga were trying to encourage vibrancy and that came from providing enjoyable open air spaces.  Ms Gee stated that we should be focusing on how we can make it easier for operators to use their LTO areas to full capacity to encourage them to make great spaces to attract more customers and increase vibrancy. 

·         Regarding the Street dining design guidelines, Tauranga City Council needed to consult with the  industry before this guideline was developed to ensure the requirements and expectations met industry requirements so that excellent outdoor dining spaces can be achieved. As the weather became more unpredictable, we needed to provide operators with ways to be able to waterproof their areas so that they can use their areas all year round.

 

·         Regarding the suggestion of operators ‘promoting smoke and vape-free areas’ operators needed clarity on what met the Council’s expectations of ‘promoting’.  The Council website stated that “as part of the policy, businesses using public streets for dining would need to have a smoke and vape-free policy for these spaces”.  If the intent was to ban smoking or vaping that should be clearly stated, not inferred.  Ms Gee requested the Council to be clear on this before formalising policy.  Many tourists smoked or vaped and this would have a negative effect on their experience.  If the intent was to make all LTO smoke free then the result would be smokers and vapers may end up leaving venues and smoking and vaping in public areas.  How was this regulation going to be enforced? Were smokers/vapers to be fined? This would add a risk to operators to manage people coming in and out of LTOs to smokie/vape and she noted that New Zealand was far from smoke free.  Operators should not be held accountable for individuals actions and we do not want to set up operators to lose their right to operate in the street if a customer was found to be smoking or vaping  Additionally time of day should be considered, as late night entertainment spaces would be impacted by smoking/vaping regulations. If the smoke/vape free requirement was targeted to areas where small footpath clearings/main walkways are used, then this should be on a case by case basis and for larger LTO spaces that do not directly encroach on footpaths and high foot traffic, this should be left up to the operator to manage and promote.

·         In terms of fees payable this should be a flat fee based on footfall, location and season.  If the hospitality chooses to make the most of their space and make it into a profitable part of their business then the city wins on vibrancy and mor foot traffic. Operators should not be penalised for providing great experiences for the public as well as increasing financial turnover.

·         Lease of airspace above streets, the suggestion of a 75% fee for this area would again have a negative effect on operators.  This area was presently accounted for in their private leases and both floor area and airspace charges being passed onto the tenant.  This would result in the operator paying twice for the same amount.  This charge had already been charged to tenants utilising balconies so we do not support another charge.  If the Council proceeds then it should only apply to any new building or lease agreements.

 

In response to questions

·         In terms of design guidelines, the wording of the seating and table requirements in LTOs was prescriptive and did not leave room for flexibility such as accommodating big groups and longer tables.  Operators wanted to have flexibility on how these spaces were used and it would be helpful if the Council worked with the operators.

·         In terms of maintaining outdoor spaces so they did not look “shabby” it was important to  providing guidance to operators on what was expected without being overly prescriptive.   For example Palmerston North City Council provided street use guidelines in a one page document with infographics which laid out clearly the dos and don’ts and expectations of what this should look like.  Downtown Tauranga could work with businesses to find suppliers for bollards etc to get a unison feel around the city.

 

 

(7)      Sub ID: 309 – Jo Veale, Mount Backpackers

 

Key points

·         Ms Veale owned three business in the Mount area including Mount Backpackers, a retail clothing store and a retail gift shop and was speaking on the Street Use Policy.

·         Ms Veale felt that the research had been lacking, especially the explanation for the levies and the impact on various types of businesses.

·         Ms Veale asked the question “what showed the need for an intervention?” and asked was there really a problem? If there were businesses creating barriers for the public on footpaths they should be spoken to, rather than put in a blanket policy.

·         Ms Veale wanted to see data comparisons with other thriving tourist towns.

·         Ms Veale considered that the public comments may be not as informed as it could be in relation to what businesses paid.

·         Ms Veale criticised the consultation process that was open online for four weeks and did not include any face to face opportunities for business owners to speak to Council. This singular modular forum limited the consultation process.  The Mount Hub was set up for other consultation processes and could have been used in this process.

·         The current compliance fees for businesses such as her backpackers were increasing however there were other businesses such as air b n b that did not pay those compliance fees and charges.

·         Ms Veale asked about other areas outside the zones who wanted to use footpaths and was concerned with the potential high levels of enforcement.

 

In response to questions

·         Ms Veale criticised some of the wording used and felt there was insufficient information to assist people to make an informed decision for example it would be helpful to understand what the current design guidelines were before commenting on the proposed design guidelines.

 

(8)      Sub ID: 3 – Martin Cheer, Pub Charity Ltd

 

Key points

·         Mr Cheer, Managing Director, Pub Charity Ltd, which had been operating gaming machines since 1987 and was the largest operator in New Zealand.

·         Pub Charity Ltd had a limited presence in Tauranga with two operators and in the last 12 months returned $1.9M in charitable grants to Tauranga.

·         Mr Cheer presented his submission on line and thanked the Committee for the opportunity to do so.

·         Mr Cheer spoke about the relationship between exposure to gaming machines and gambling harm.  There has been a substantial reduction in gaming machine numbers in New Zealand since 2004 with the exposure rate per capita had halved with 1 gaming machine to 164 people in 2004 reducing to 1:363 in 2023.  However the promise that there would be a subsequent reduction in associated gambling harm has not materialised, due to the nature of the neurobiological disorder associated with pathological and problem gambling.  This was not linear but followed an epidemiological curve based on demographics.

·         The Ministry of Health stated that there had been no detectable change in the rate of problem gambling prevalence and therefore the risk of problem gambling was not related to exposure but related to demographics.

·         Mr Cheer stated that currently there was no commercial incentive to move gaming machines out of high deprivation areas and the introduction of a relocation clause that enabled venues to move to a more suitable location was in fact a harm minimisation tool.

·         The intent of the Gambling (Harm Reduction) Amendment Act 2013 recognised the discouragement of venues moving to a more suitable location and encouraged venues to move to more suitable locations.

·         Mr Cheer could not understand why the health authorities opposed this relocation as they were an improvement in the risk profile in high deprivation areas.  While it was not the silver bullet, it did improve the situation and the Council could take comfort from that.

·         Mr Cheer referred to a study by Professor Chris Erwin and concluded that sinking lid policies had over seven years reduced the gambling spend by 0.97% in nominal terms.

 

In response to questions

·         The expenditure of gaming machines, inflation adjusted for per capita spend, had reduced by 40%.

·         Harm could be grouped into two categories. The obsessive compulsive disorders, of which problem gambling was one, was part of neurobiological disorders, that impacted about 0.1% of the population.  The latest treatment patterns were genomic based.

·         The other form of harm was “poor decisions”. This was much bigger and this was where the demographic risk was located.  Relocation of venues could reduce this risk.

·         There was talk about using Artificial Intelligence but facial recognition can be used now for people struggling with control, with their permission. Facial recognition then alerted staff and people were removed from the venue.  This technology was not supported by the Ministry of Health or Department of Internal Affairs however he believed this should be mandatory. While there was concerns about privacy, these were individuals who gave permission to have their face recognised.

·         Two out of every three people in the system had relapsed and statistically that was a fact.  To address this known cohort of people who needed assistance, regulations were coming to put pressure on venues to be more preventative but he believed there was the potential to work more collaboratively with providers to get better outcomes.

 

Attachments

1        Presentation J True from Gambling Assoc New Zealand- to Strategy Risk and Finance

2        Presentationn by M Cheer - Pub Charity Ltd - Strategy Finance and Risk

3        Presentation Mount Business Assiations - C West  Strategy Finance and RIsk Committee

 

8.1         Submitters who wish to be heard

 

The Committee requested commentary in the deliberations report on the following:

·         Aligning the deprivation index in the Gambling Venues Policy with the Local Alcohol Policy, which was set at 9 and 10.

·         Commentary on whether the lack of enforcement of the sinking lid policy had increased rather than reduced the number of gaming machines as referenced by Te Whatu Ora and Appendix 4, Social Impact Assessment of Class 4 Venues.

·         The number of gambling venues within permitted areas.

·         Streets Use Policy – commentary on the Wellington, Hamilton, Queenstown and Palmerston North City Councils policies and in particular how restrictions on smoking/vaping was addressed by these councils.

·         Understanding the License to Occupy agreements, how these would be enforced and what penalties would be applied and the potential impacts on businesses.

·         Commentary on the consultation process.

·         Understanding of mobility parking spaces, what spaces were removed as part of city upgrade, how long they would be out of use and how the Council informed people where they can park.

Committee Resolution  SFR8/23/2

Moved:       Mr Bruce Robertson

Seconded:  Commissioner Bill Wasley

 

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Submitters who wish to be heard".

 

Carried

 

 

 

 

8.2         Hearings Report for the Traffic and Parking Bylaw

 

Committee Resolution  SFR8/23/3

Moved:       Mr Bruce Robertson

Seconded:  Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Hearings Report for the Traffic and Parking Bylaw".

(b)     Receive the written submissions on the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw (Attachment 1).

(c)     Receive the verbal submissions from those submitters who wish to speak to their submission.

Carried

 

8.3         Hearings Report for the Street Use Policy

 

Committee Resolution  SFR8/23/4

Moved:       Mr Bruce Robertson

Seconded:  Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Hearings Report for the Street Use Policy".

(b)     Receives the written submissions on the draft Street Use Policy (Attachment 1).

(c)     Receives the verbal submissions from those submitters who wish to speak to their submission.

Carried

 

 

8.4         Hearings Report - Gambling Venues Policy

 

Committee Resolution  SFR8/23/5

Moved:       Mr Bruce Robertson

Seconded:  Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Hearings Report - Gambling Venues Policy".

(b)     Receives the written submissions on the draft Gambling Venues Policy.

(c)     Receives the verbal submissions from those who wish to speak to their submission.

(d)     Accepts and receives the late written submission from the Rano Community Trust.

Carried

 

The Chairperson thanked all submitters for participating at the hearing and noted that deliberations  would be undertaken at the Strategy Finance and Risk Committee on 4 December 2023.

 

9            Discussion of late items

Nil

 

10          Closing karakia

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston closed the meeting with a karakia.

 

 

The meeting closed at 11.46am.

 

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed as a true and correct record at the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 4 December 2023.

 

 

 

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

CHAIRPERSON

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

8            Declaration of conflicts of interest


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9            Business

9.1         Refreshed outline plan of the Committee's upcoming work programme

File Number:           A15123342

Author:                    Anne Payne, Principal Strategic Advisor

Josh Logan, Team Leader: Corporate Planning

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

 

Purpose of the Report

1.      To present an update on the Committee’s outline work programme that was last considered at the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting of 27 March 2023.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Refreshed outline plan of the Committee's upcoming work programme".

(b)     Notes the updated outline work programme for the Committee per Attachment 1.

 

 

Background

2.       One of the responsibilities of the Committee, noted in the scope section of its terms of reference, is to ‘adopt an annual work programme of significant strategic issues and projects to be addressed’.   The scope also notes that this programme should be reviewed on a six-monthly basis.

3.       On 20 September 2021, the Committee resolved to adopt such a work programme.  Updates to the work programme have subsequently been considered by the Committee at its meetings of 13 December 2021, 16 May 2022, 12 September 2022 and 27 March 2023.    

4.       An updated version of the adopted outline work programme is now included as Attachment 1 to this report.

5.       Changes made to the outline work programme since it was last updated in March include:

Structure

(a)     Removal of reference to now-passed meetings from March 2023 through November 2023.

(b)     Inclusion of the January-March 2024 and April-June 2024 quarters to take the programme through to the end of the Committee’s tenure ahead of the 20 July 2024 elections. 

(c)     Addition of a ‘new Council’ column to identify where processes that are underway will need to be considered for completion (or not) by the new council when it is elected and in office. 

Strategic framework, strategy development and reviews

(d)     Removal of each of the line-items referencing individual strategies, approaches, or action and investment plans that were included in the suite of Our Direction documents adopted by Council on 21 August 2023.  A report on the wider Our Direction project, closing out the development project and explaining the ongoing monitoring process, is included elsewhere on this meeting’s agenda.

(e)     Relocation of the urban design action and investment plan line-item to the ‘growth management’ section of the programme.

(f)      Added the six-monthly update of the Treasury Strategy.

Growth management

(g)     Removal of the ‘planning pathways’ line-item as this has been incorporated into the growth projects quarterly progress reporting process (as flagged in the last update to the work programme).

(h)     Removal of the Housing Infrastructure Fund line-item as regular future updates are not foreseen.

(i)      Removal of the dynamic road pricing line-item as that is included in the Long-term Plan consultation process, the outcome of which will be reported to Council rather than through the Committee.

Long-term Plan

(j)      Removal of the category and all items.  Projects that were included in this category during the last update of the work programme have now transferred into the Long-term Plan consultation process and will be reported back to Council rather than through the Committee.  The line-item relating to the ‘LTP actions tracker’ (tracking progress against prior LTP decisions) has been moved to the ‘Other six-monthly and quarterly reporting’ category.

Policy and bylaw development

(k)     Removal of the public art framework line-item as this was approved by the Committee for inclusion in the Long-term Plan budgets on 27 March 2023. 

(l)      Removal of the alcohol control bylaw review as this was considered by the Committee on 26 June 2023 and temporary alcohol bans resolved for the summer period.

(m)    Removal of the local alcohol policy, community funding policy, and property acquisition and disposal policy line-items as these were adopted by the Committee on 30 October 2023.

(n)     Deferral of the review of levels of service policies (particularly in the Spaces & Places activity) until a new council is elected.  Staff will continue to work on information gathering and reviewing the existing policies but, rather than split the governance-level work across two council terms, we recommend delaying introducing the project to the committee until the new council is elected. 

(o)     Added the landslide events policy, election signs policy, and freedom camping bylaw review line-items for projects that have been initiated since the March update. 

(p)     Added a new line-item covering the review and potential harmonisation or amalgamation of four policies that relate broadly to fundraising for council activities and facilities.  These are the sponsorship from corporates and others policy, the city partnership programme policy, the community share agreement policy, and relevant elements of the naming policy.  This will be considered by the incoming council post-election.

(q)     Added new line-items relating to the existing trees and vegetation policy (following feedback from operational staff) and the psychoactive substances policy (as a scheduled five-yearly review).  As with the ‘fundraising’ policies above, work will commence at a staff level with a view to engaging with the incoming council post-election.  

Risk deep dives

(r)      Removed the category as regular scheduled reporting is no longer anticipated.

 

Regular reporting

(s)     Added line-items for quarterly capital programme performance reporting and annual reporting from economic development partners.

6.       In reading the outline work programme it should be noted that for some projects the timing of ‘next steps’ will be determined by feedback on, and decisions about, earlier stages in the project.  This makes timing of latter stages difficult to determine.  This difficulty is recognised in Attachment 1 by the annotation “(?)” as part of various elements of the work programme. 

7.       As projects and initiatives are reported to the Committee, each report will have a better indication of the timing of subsequent steps than can be provided by this report.

Strategic / Statutory Context

8.       Many of the priority projects on the outline work programme relate to council’s strategy documents or the planning/reporting accountability cycle.  Others relate to the management of growth or the government’s reform programme.  Each of these matters are of high strategic importance to the city.

Significance

9.       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.

10.     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

(c)   the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.

11.     In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter of the Committee’s work programme is of high significance.  However, the decisions to receive this report and to note the updated outline work programme are of low significance as this report is an update on a previous decision and simply collates existing work programmes into one place.

ENGAGEMENT

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

13.     Note that for many of the projects listed on the outline work programme specific engagement plans and approaches will be prepared that are suitable to that project.

Next Steps

14.     Work will continue on each of the projects listed on the outline work programme.  An update report on unfinished work that has been before the Committee will be prepared for the last meeting of the Committee (17 June 2024) prior to the local body elections.

Attachments

1.       Outline of topics to SFR Committee 2023-24 (December 2023) - A15123314  


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 



 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.2         Priority One Annual Report 2022/2023

File Number:           A15073927

Author:                    Lisa Gilmour, City Partnership Specialist

Authoriser:             Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships

 

Purpose of the Report

1.       That Council receives Priority One’s Annual Report for 2022/23, in accordance with the terms of the joint partnership agreement between Priority One and the two councils.

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Priority One Annual Report 2022/2023".

 

 

Executive Summary

1.       Priority One’s Annual Report for 2022/23 covers the key outputs of their work during that period.

2.       The report, provided at Attachment 1, addresses the requirements under the partnership agreement with Tauranga City Council and Western Bay of Plenty District Council to report annually to Council on actions taken.

3.       Priority One align their agreed priorities set out in the partnership agreement with those of their board and membership base through their strategic plan.

4.       The contract with Priority One is in accordance with the status and powers of local government as set out in section 12 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Background

5.       The Annual Report is provided by the economic development agency to Council as part of its role to ensure the organisation’s performance is consistent with Council’s partnership agreement with them.

6.       Priority One is the Western Bay of Plenty’s economic development organisation, established in 2001 by the business community, in partnership with the sub-region’s local authorities. Priority One’s role is to grow the economy of the region. They work with local authorities to ensure local government, and business needs and aspirations are aligned.

7.       Key achievements outlined in the report include:

·    The formation and launch of the Western Bay of Plenty Infrastructure Forum in April 2023. This was in response to a worsening infrastructure situation in our region and acknowledgement of the need for the business community to be more involved.

·    Launch of the Talent Action Plan, a comprehensive strategy to deliver a sustainable supply of talent to local businesses. Through the Instep Programme, the Priority One team have engaged with over 3,500 students, equipping them with the tools they need to join the workforce. The Future of Work portfolio has empowered local businesses with the tools necessary to support youth in the workplace, and prepare for a future where readily accessible talent will be increasingly constrained.

·    In 2022, the sub-region witnessed a 3.7 percent uptick in job placements, and a 6.8 percent increase in mean annual earnings to $63,960.

·    The skills and employment hub, Ara Rau – Pathways to Work, has successfully guided 132 people, categorised as NEETs (not in employment, education or training), into jobs or training during the year. Their commitment to offering entry-level job opportunities and pastoral care ensures enduring employment success.

·    The Priority One team have resumed international talent and investment attraction activities with investor migrants in North America and Asia. Additionally, they represented Tauranga Moana at the international education fairs in Korea, showcasing our city as a prime destination for international students.

·    An environmental sustainability strategy was launched during the year, with events and several high-impact projects spanning transportation, energy, waste, and land, focusing on decarbonisation and the circular economy. Alongside partners, the team delivered a decarbonisation programme, supporting local businesses to craft and implement their own internal sustainability strategies and a project to collaboratively enable construction businesses to divert waste from their projects across the region.

Strategic / Statutory Context

8.       Council’s partnership with Priority One helps us deliver our community outcomes and contribute to a city that is well planned, with a variety of successful and thriving compact centres, and resilient infrastructure.

9.       A successful economic development organisation plays a key role in making a significant contribution to the social, economic, cultural, and environmental wellbeing of the region.

10.     Tauranga is a city that attracts and supports a range of businesses and education opportunities, creating jobs, and a skilled workforce.

Options Analysis

11.     There are no options, as Council is only receiving Priority One’s Annual Report for 2022/23.

Financial Considerations

12.     The financial considerations are outlined in the attached Annual Report.

Legal Implications / Risks

13.     The Annual Report meets the legislative requirements for the economic development agency to provide Council with an overview of performance.

Consultation / Engagement

14.     No consultation or engagement is required or planned.

Significance

15.     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.

16.     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; and

(c)   the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.


 

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

ENGAGEMENT

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

Next Steps

19.     Priority One will have an opportunity to present their Annual Report and answer any questions during the Committee’s consideration of this paper on 4 December 2023.

20.     The report will be published on Priority One’s website.

Attachments

1.       Priority One Annual Report 2022/23 - A15307115 (Separate Attachments 1)   

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.3         Mount Industrial Planning Study Key Recommendations

File Number:           A15332453

Author:                    Carl Lucca, Team Leader: Urban Communities

David Phizacklea, Consultant - Mount Maunganui Industrial Study

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

 

Purpose of the Report

1.       The purpose of this report is to present the vision, objectives and key recommendations from the Mount Industrial Planning Study and seek decisions on three policy interventions to support land use management in the Mount industrial area.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)   Receives the report "Mount Industrial Planning Study Key Recommendations".

(b)   Endorses the vision and objectives from the Mount Industrial Planning Study, being:

An economically productive, healthy and connected industrial area that fits with the surrounding environment and communities.

We will work together to deliver on this vision by:

·     Proactively managing land use activities to enhance the environmental, cultural and social wellbeing of our community

·     Recognising the importance of the area to mana whenua

·     Adopting best practice and innovation

·     Improving accessibility and movement within and through the area of both people and goods

·     Promoting opportunities for higher value land uses

·     Delivering the necessary infrastructure to support business growth

·     Considering our response to climate change, technological changes and hazard risks.

(c)   Recognises that achieving the vision will require partnership with Bay of Plenty Regional Council – Toi Moana, mana whenua and stakeholders.

(d)   Endorses the key interventions listed in Attachment B to this report for consideration through the Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan and notes the implementation of these is dependent on funding and commitments from all agencies and stakeholders.

(e)   Approves the following land use policy interventions for consideration through the Tauranga City Plan, subject to robust analysis and the requirements of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991 being met:

i)     Adopting the appropriate zoning to manage existing and future industrial activities, consistent with the National Planning Standards 2019 requirements.

ii)    Introducing controls to regulate future industrial land use activities adjacent to sensitive land uses in proximity to:

·    Whareroa

·    Newton Street and MacDonald Streets

for the purpose of providing a buffer between heavy industrial and sensitive land uses, and/or requiring any new heavy industrial activities to go through a resource consent process for the use of that land.

iii)   Restricting residential activities in current commercial zoned areas of the Mount Maunganui Airshed.

iv)  Provide for the ongoing operation and investment of existing businesses where environmental impacts are able to be effectively avoided or mitigated.

(f)   Supports a joint agency approach to better managing noise, air quality, odour, amenity, hazards, climate change and transport within the industrial area and adjoining sensitive land uses.

(g)   Acknowledges that mana whenua and the community has requested to see health and environmental impacts addressed.

 

 

 

Executive Summary

2.       The Committee is asked to consider the outcomes of the Mount Industrial Planning Study (MIPS) and to endorse the vision, objectives and key interventions for the future of the industrial area. A programme of actions, which considers current issues and the needs of all stakeholders, is intended to be delivered through the Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan and its implementation programme when this is reported to the Committee in early 2024.

3.       The Mount industrial area sits on the western side of the Mount Maunganui isthmus, approximately six kilometres from Tauranga Central Business District. The wider Mount Maunganui area contains New Zealand’s largest export port, within a unique coastal location with residential and recreational amenity. There is a challenge in how each of these opportunities is optimised, while safeguarding the well-being of the people who live and work here and improving environmental, cultural and amenity outcomes. Nearby residents, mana whenua and the Whareroa community have identified concerns over noise, traffic, air quality/odour, visual amenity and water pollution.

4.       Attachment A provides a summary of the vision, objectives and key interventions for the future of the Mount industrial area as a result of the MIPS. The vision for the Mount industrial area is to achieve “An economically productive, healthy and connected industrial area that fits with the surrounding environment and communities”. Eight objectives have been identified to achieve this vision. These set the strategic direction for the future of the Mount industrial area.

5.       Draft intervention options have been considered in relation to existing and future transport and economic requirements of industry and the port, as well as air quality, amenity, traffic congestion and other issues that mana whenua, stakeholders and the wider community have identified. As a result, a set of recommendations is put forward for endorsement by the Committee. The specific land use interventions which would require implementation by Tauranga City Council are presented and options discussed.

6.       The proposed Mount Industrial Planning Study interventions are set out in Attachment B. In presenting these, consideration has also been given to the expected direction from the:

(a)     Priority One Mount Maunganui Industrial Blueprint, currently under development; and

(b)     Connecting Mount Maunganui transport and movement options, which will recommend a preferred option in presenting an Indicative Business Case for the transport and movement interventions for the Hewletts Road/State Highway 2/Totara Street corridor in April 2024.

7.       The decisions of the Committee will inform the interventions and work programme of the Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan (MSP), which will include a specific section and actions for the Mount Industrial area.

8.       It is recommended that Council consider introducing change(s) to the operative Tauranga City Plan to regulate and better manage future land use activities within the Mount industrial area to improve environmental and cultural well-being outcomes, while recognising existing use rights of businesses and providing for their future operation.

9.       Land use change is intended to:

(a)        Maintain industrial land uses within the identified interface areas, with a progressive transition to lighter industry over the longer term;

(b)        Recognise existing use rights of businesses and providing for their future operation;

(c)        Reduce effects on sensitive land uses and not permit any new emitting industries within the Whareroa and Newton Road/MacDonald Street interface areas.

10.     Tauranga City Council can only effect change for future users of the land, through change in land use or new land use. It cannot address existing land uses that have existing use rights under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). Council sought and made available legal advice presented to the Council meeting on 24 February 2023.

11.     Investigating where the suite of  National Planning Standards 2019 zones are applied spatially across the city could improve the transition between emitting industry (heavy industry) and lighter industrial uses in proximity to sensitive areas. A ‘Light Industry’ zone is described in the National Planning Standards as: “Areas used predominantly for a range of industrial activities, and associated activities, with adverse effects (such as noise, odour, dust, fumes and smoke) that are reasonable to residential activities sensitive to these effects.”

12.     Businesses have given clear feedback they do not support land use intervention and are opposed to any change in zoning to restrict heavy industrial activities, or similar regulatory controls. They have stated an ongoing commitment to improve environmental practices and reduce emissions where possible.

13.     Mana whenua and some parts of the community have given similarly clear feedback that the current effects from activities in the Mount Maunganui Airshed on people’s health and the environment are not being addressed and, therefore, they support greater land use controls, with emitting industrial activity removed.

14.     Toi te Ora have identified that industry, traffic, and port activities all contribute to the poor air quality in the Mount Maunganui area and have an impact on people’s health. The Mount Maunganui health risk assessment report, released in July 2023, found that more needs to be done to improve the health and well-being of Mount Maunganui residents.

15.     Bay of Plenty Regional Council – Toi Moana (BOPRC) is embarking on a range of prioritised actions through its Mount Maunganui Airshed work programme, including the development of a Mount Maunganui Airshed Management Strategy and proposed plan change to commence in the next 12-24 months.

16.     Council’s policy response is proposed to be reflected in the City Plan work programme and would be refined through the development of any draft and proposed plan change(s). TCC will look to work with BOPRC to provide consistency and integration across policy and plan changes where appropriate.

background and context

17.     The Mount Industrial Planning Study commenced in October 2022 in conjunction with the MSP. The study set out to prepare a plan for the future of the industrial area and identify a programme of actions, which considers current issues and the needs of all stakeholders. Those issues include future land use, cultural and social impacts, natural hazards, air quality, transportation, and economic growth.

18.     The intervention actions from MIPS will act as a plan for future development and land use of the area. Key interventions are to be incorporated into the MSP, within a specific section relating to the Mount industrial area.

19.     An assessment has been undertaken of the issues and options to address the issues identified for the Mount Maunganui Industrial area. This has included consideration of the views and any feedback received from tangata whenua, businesses, local and central government agencies and other stakeholders.

20.     The key challenges (issues) for the Mount industrial area are summarised in the graphic below.

21.     Through a series of workshops with key stakeholders, including mana whenua, community groups, government agencies and businesses three draft scenarios were prepared in response to the key challenges and assessed – (1) business as usual, (2) expansion and (3) environmental limits. From these, a developing scenario was prepared in response to feedback received, with draft intervention actions responding to the key challenges. That scenario has continued to be refined from ongoing engagement feedback and is shown in Attachment A.

22.     A number of existing actions are currently being delivered relating to the Mount industrial area through the programmes of local and central government agencies, mana whenua and businesses.

Strategic context

23.     The Mount Maunganui industrial area is critically important as the largest industrial area in the Bay of Plenty region. The industrial area is home to more than 850 businesses that employ over 11,000 people. The significance of the Port of Tauranga as the country’s largest export hub also makes the industrial area attractive to those businesses who need to be in close proximity to the port.

24.     SmartGrowth has recently undertaken an industrial land study for the western Bay of Plenty subregion to identify potentially suitable areas for future business (industrial) land use to meet expected longer-term demand for strategically located business land. A technical study and further investigations have identified potential sites within the north, western and eastern growth corridors to meet this future business land demand. The SmartGrowth Strategy/Future Development Strategy being prepared by the SmartGrowth partnership under the National Policy Statement on Urban development 2020 (NPS-UD) is expected to confirm potential long-term strategic growth areas for business land.

25.     Priority One in conjunction with businesses in the Mount industrial area is preparing a ‘Mount Maunganui Industrial Blueprint’ document. The blueprint is expected to make recommendations on actions to be taken for the industrial area from an industry perspective.

( Refer Attachment F)

26.     While the Mount Maunganui Industrial Area has grown to meet demand, the city has continued to also grow around it. This has created tension between the needs of an adjacent growing residential community (including provision of more growth) and the industrial area. Industry and stakeholders have implemented a number of initiatives to reduce environmental impacts and risks from the operations in the area and have demonstrated quantifiable results.

27.     The Connecting Mount Maunganui project, being led by Waka Kotahi, is assessing transport intervention options for Hewletts Road/State Highway 2 and Totara Street, including the Mount industrial area. An indicative business case setting out the preferred option is expected in March 2024.

Whareroa

28.     Whareroa Marae and the adjoining community is situated on the shore of Tauranga Harbour neighbouring the Mount industrial area. The Whareroa Marae is a traditional pa site and key marae for Ngāi Tukāirangi and Ngāti Kuku hapū of the Ngāi Te Rangi Iwi. Whareroa Pā has been present for around 160 years, making it one of the oldest kainga in the area.

29.     There is only a narrow 70m buffer area between industry and the marae, residential area and the community who live there. The people who live here are constantly exposed to the air and visual pollution that comes with these industrial activities. This community are concerned about the growth and expansion of this industrial area, the effects on their people and the wider community and the impact it has on their cultural practice.

30.     Whareroa is also at risk from the effects of climate change with rising ground water, coastal inundation and flooding.

Air Quality

31.     In November 2019 the Ministry for the Environment declared Mount Maunganui a polluted airshed after Bay of Plenty Regional Council requested more management tools from Central Government to address increasing concerns around dust and poor air quality in the area. As a polluted airshed action is required to reduce emissions, with a focus on PM10 (fine particulate matter).

32.     A number of existing actions are being delivered relating to the Mount Industrial area through the programmes of agencies, tangata whenua and businesses. This is a complex situation that has been generations in the making and improving air quality in the Mount Industrial area requires a partnered, multi-agency approach.

33.     Recent monitoring has shown improvements in PM10 particulate matter with a reduced number of exceedances with the polluted Mount Maunganui Airshed in the past two years.

34.     Bay of Plenty Regional Council Toi Moana is responsible for air quality management under section 30 of the RMA. It has a regulatory role in setting rules for activities and as the consent authority for the control of discharges of contaminants into or onto land, air, or water. BOPRC also undertakes monitoring and reporting on air quality. A summary of air quality management and the regional consenting framework is provided in Attachment C.

35.     Tauranga City Council has a role as a local authority under the Health Act 1956 and under the Resource Management Act 1991. Under section 31 of the RMA Council has the function of the control of any actual or potential effects of the use, development, or protection of land. This role is through the framework of the Tauranga City Plan in managing land use and subdivision activities, through zoning and other methods.

36.     Under section 23 of the Health Act, Council has a duty to improve, promote and protect public health within its district, and if satisfied that an activity is likely to be injurious to health or offensive must take all proper steps to ensure the activity is abated.

37.     The National Environmental Standards for Air Quality (NES-AQ) provide limits for discharges to air. These are exceeded in the Mount Maunganui Airshed, but even if emissions were reduced to under the NES-AQ or World Health Organisation guideline levels, there would still be a health impact from activities in the airshed.

38.     Toi Te Ora is the Bay of Plenty public health authority and works with councils to promote local planning and policy-making to achieve good health outcomes for the community.

39.     Toi Te Ora considers efforts should be aimed at bringing down the average exposures not just the spike in concentrations of contaminants. This requires a reduction in contaminants across the Mount Maunganui Airshed.

40.     A health report commissioned by Toi Te Ora, “Air Pollution: Health Risk Assessment Mount Maunganui” was released on 24 July 2023. The report assessed health risks of exposure to identified air pollutants in the Mount Maunganui area, with the aim of key interested parties collaborating to reduce discharges. The health risk assessment supports initiatives to reduce emissions within the Mount Airshed to reduce health impacts on Whareroa and Mount Maunganui residents.

41.     The health risk assessment substantiates mana whenua and community views that there is an unacceptable cumulative effect associated with air discharges occurring across the wider Mount industrial area.

42.     The findings of the health risk assessment are consistent with information previously received by Council which resulted in programmes of work to ensure land is used appropriately in the area. Tauranga City Council and Bay of Plenty Regional Council are commissioning an independent review of the health risk assessment, which is expected in early 2024.

43.     At the same time as the health report was released, the “Mount Maunganui Air Quality Monitoring Review 2022” was released, providing a review of the Bay of Plenty Regional Council ambient air quality monitoring data from the Mount Maunganui Airshed for the years 2019 through 2022. The monitoring data shows that ambient air quality in some parts of the Mount Maunganui Airshed remains impacted by industry, port activities and traffic. However, there has been a significant reduction in concentration levels of particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) and sulphur dioxide (SO2).

VISION AND OBJECTIVES

44.     In developing the vision for the future of the Mount industrial area, options were considered through the scenario development. Those draft scenario options were:

1.      Status quo

2.      Expansion

3.      Environment limits

The future scenario and vision has landed on a balanced approach.

45.     The stakeholder workshop held on 7 March 2023 identified the following four group visions, developed among the various stakeholders:

·    An environmentally healthy and connected industrial area that fits into surrounding environment.

·    Co-existence; pride of place; symbiotic with community and the environment; success of the area; enable business; connection to the port; heavy industry links; vibrant, safe and healthy; reflects uniqueness; green, efficient connectivity; local transformation; supporting wellbeing for everyone.

·    Land = people = wellbeing = environment; industry and community co-exist in harmony, with benefits to New Zealand/Aotearoa and Bay of Plenty; sustainable location; fit-for-purpose standards to buy into that show best practice.

·    Global standard for industry and community to exist together; a hive of activities invisible to the environment; growth without intrusion.

46.     The following vision is recommended for the Mount industrial area as a result of engagement with mana whenua, businesses, the community and other stakeholders:

An economically productive, healthy and connected industrial area that fits with the surrounding environment and communities.

We will work together to deliver on this vision by:

·     Proactively managing land use activities to enhance the environmental, cultural and social wellbeing of our community

·     Recognising the importance of the area to mana whenua

·     Adopting best practice and innovation

·     Improving accessibility and movement within and through the area of both people and goods

·     Promoting opportunities for higher value land uses

·     Delivering the necessary infrastructure to support business growth

·     Considering our response to climate change, technological changes and hazard risks.

47.     The vision and objectives set the strategic direction for the future of the Mount industrial area.

48.     Mana whenua, the community and businesses all see the future of the Mount industrial area differently. A vision should be aspirational and enable all stakeholders to be part of the journey to deliver on that vision over the next 30+ years.

49.     Engagement with businesses has identified that they see the future of the Mount industrial area is about ‘co-existence’ between industry and the community. This is intrinsically provided for within the vision and objectives through recognition of both economy and industry and the need for enhancing the environmental, cultural and social wellbeing of our community.

FUTURE scenario and INTERVENTIONS

50.     A summary of the future scenario and interventions for the Mount industrial area is included within Attachment A. This has been refined from engagement feedback.

51.     The detailed descriptions relating to these recommended interventions are set out in Attachment B. These support the identified objectives to ensure the vision can be achieved.

52.     As part of the recommended interventions, possible land use intervention options in response to health, amenity, noise and cultural effects have been assessed and discussed with partners and key stakeholders. A key consideration has been to determine what action (if any) is required within the interface area between industrial and nearby sensitive land uses, including marae, residential and education facilities. In particular, the two interface area at Whareroa and Newton Street/MacDonald Street bordering the eastern and southern boundaries of the Mount industrial area.

53.     Other interventions for the Mount industrial area include a landscape plan (delivered in partnership with business and key stakeholders) for the industrial area to improve amenity and appearance, internal roading and safety improvements, and recognising the cultural importance and customary practices of tangata whenua associated with the area.

54.     The intervention actions require various agencies, including Tauranga City Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council, Waka Kotahi, Priority One, Ministry for the Environment and Te Whatu Ora/Toi te Ora to work alongside tangata whenua, businesses and the community to achieve the outcomes.

55.     Attachment B identifies which interventions are funded or unfunded currently. For some interventions there is the opportunity to fund these through a targeted rate or environmental levy on businesses within the Mount industrial area, or through direct funding or cost share with businesses. Streetscape and amenity improvements are an obvious example where this could be applied.

56.     The exploration of direct contributions, targeted rate or other funding approaches is to be explored further with Priority One and the industrial steering group.

57.     The future scenario also proposes the following key interventions to address air quality, amenity and cultural concerns raised by mana whenua, stakeholders and the community:

(a)     Introducing controls into the operative Tauranga City Plan to:

1. Regulate future industrial land use activities adjacent to sensitive land uses in proximity to:

i.   Whareroa

ii.  Newton Street and MacDonald Street.

          2. Restrict residential activities in commercial zoned areas of the Mount Airshed.

These controls would likely be through the implementation of a city-wide business hierarchy to better identify the types of industrial activities - general industrial, heavy industrial, light industrial and port zones consistent with the National Planning Standards 2019 for district plans.  

(b)     Establishing an Environmental Accord with businesses, led by Priority One, committing to ongoing environmental improvements. This is expected to be a key action from the Priority One Mount Maunganui industrial blueprint; businesses have indicated their support for an accord.

(c)     Preparing a Mount Maunganui Airshed Management Strategy to implement Environment Court direction, led by Bay of Plenty Regional Council – Toi Moana. This is a commitment of BOPRC reflecting the Environment Court strongly recommending such a plan be prepared.

(d)     Investigating changes to the operative Bay of Plenty Regional Natural Resources Plan to further address the polluted Mount Maunganui Airshed.. The development of area specific provisions for the Mount Maunganui Airshed (as Proposed Plan Change 18) will be considered by BOPRC after the resolution of the remaining processes arising from Plan Change 13 to the Regional Natural Resources Plan.

REGULATORY INTERVENTION

58.     An aspect of the planning study has been on what can be done to respond to issues identified by Whareroa marae hau kainga, mana whenua and the wider community, and whether a move away from emitting industries in this area can be achieved over time.

59.     Managing the effects of industrial activities is through the regional consenting framework and land use planning. Adequate separation between industry and sensitive uses can assist in avoiding potential impacts of hazards, along with limiting sensitive activities establishing in close proximity to existing industry. Guidance suggests a separation distance of between 300m to 500m for heavy industrial activities. Maintenance of appropriate separation distances is primarily a land-use planning issue that is managed through district plan provisions. Further information is provided in Attachment D.

60.     Council obtained legal advice in February 2023 which advised that many existing industrial activities in the area hold existing use rights to operate under the RMA and that there is no legal mechanism to extinguish those existing use rights. The legal advice was reported to the 27 February 2023 Council meeting[1] and shared with mana whenua, businesses and the community.

61.     Tauranga City Council can only effect change for future users of the land, through change in land use or new land use. It cannot address existing land uses that have existing use rights under the RMA.

62.     Any land use change must recognise the importance of the Mount industrial area for Tauranga, the wider region and New Zealand and seek to ensure that existing businesses that can minimise their environmental impacts are able to remain.

63.     Bay of Plenty Regional Council – Toi Moana has potential regulatory tools to consider existing use rights through declining consents or introducing stricter conditions when they come up for renewal.

64.     A sinking lid approach could also be considered by BOPRC for the Mount Maunganui Airshed, where the levels of emissions overall from individual business are required to be reduced over time.

65.     An informal workshop paper ‘Mount Maunganui Airshed Work Programme’ was presented by BOPRC staff to a Strategy and Policy Committee workshop on 28 September 2023[2]. That workshop paper sets out the work programme and priorities for BOPRC.

66.     The Environment Court’s interim decision for PC13 (Air Quality) to the Natural Resources Plan strongly recommended that BOPRC develop a Mount Maunganui Airshed Management Strategy to manage air quality in the airshed. The BOPRC work programme includes the preparation of an Airshed Management Plan, which is a key recommendation of MIPS and an intervention action set out as art of the MSP work programme.

67.     Regional council staff are considering review of existing regional consents (consent review clauses) following the interim Court decision direction on PC13. BOPRC is likely to consider whether imposing stricter contaminant limits is needed through Proposed Plan Change 18 after they have been through the section 293 RMA process with the Court on PC13.

Existing Use Rights

68.     The Simpson Grierson legal opinion dated 21 February 2023 stated that if land at the Mount Maunganui industrial area was rezoned for a different land use activity (e.g. open space) this would not have any bearing on existing use rights. Existing uses which meet the tests set out in sections 10(1), (2) and (3) of the RMA are protected by existing use rights. A district plan change cannot terminate section 10 existing use rights. Rezoning under the City Plan could therefore potentially constrain future activities carried out under the City Plan, but not activities that are protected by section 10 existing use rights.

69.     For regional consents there are no existing use rights as such – rather there is a right to discharge with a finite term imposed through a resource consent (unless permitted by a regional rule eg. certain stormwater discharges). Existing use rights only apply to use of land, they cannot be sought with respect to regional consenting matters like discharge permits.

70.     Existing use rights under section 10 cannot be terminated through a change to a district plan. However, activities which have existing use rights under section 10 may be prevented from continuing by a change to the regional plan, if the plan change is for one of the purposes in section 30(1)(c).  Such a regional plan change could effectively override existing use rights under section 10.

71.     The purposes in section 30(1)(c) relate to soil conservation, water quality and quantity, ecosystems in water bodies and coastal waters, and natural hazards.  The primary matters of concern in relation to the Mount Maunganui industrial area do not directly come within these section 30(1)(c) purposes.

Hazards and Climate Change

72.     Parts of the Mount industrial area are at risk from the effects of natural hazards and climate change. In particular, the south-west area which includes the Whareroa interface area, Whareroa Marae and Hewletts Road as shown in Figure D5 in Attachment D. This map shows the expected impact of harbour inundation, erosion and flooding in 2130 with a 1.05m sea level rise during a 1% AEP storm event.

73.     Climate change adaptation planning is an action currently underway by agencies working with the Whareroa community and businesses. This is included as a key intervention from the Mount Industrial Planning Study. Any future response action is beyond the 30 year horizon of the Mount Industrial Planning Study as an expected intervention in the Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan for the wider area.

74.     In addition, Emergency Management in conjunction with Work Safe and Fires and Emergency New Zealand has been planning, mitigating and responding to the storage, transport and mitigation of hazardous sites and hazardous substances.

75.     Rising sea levels, erosion, harbour inundation and predicted liquefaction are projected to have an impact on the Mount industrial area. The Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement (RPS) requires all new development (greenfield, intensification and at a development site level) to achieve a low level of risk, considering the effects of climate change. A low level of risk is required to be achieved for buildings, loss of life and lifeline outage times. This approach aims to build in long term resilience to natural hazard events. The Proposed National Policy Statement for Natural Hazard Decision-making 2023 is expected to be finalised in 2024 and will provide direction to decision makers on managing natural hazard risks.

76.     Ongoing and evolving central government policy on climate change adaptation and response planning is expected to provide direction for how low-lying coastal areas, such as Mount Maunganui, will need to respond to the effects of climate change over the next 100 years.

77.     It is also expected that decarbonisation of heavy industry and transport will play a strong role in future emissions reductions. This is included as a key intervention from the Mount Industrial Planning Study.

Engagement Outcomes

78.     The position, preferred outcomes and feedback on the interventions from mana whenua, the community and businesses is presented below.

Mana whenua

79.     The two hapu of Ngai Te Rangi iwi who hold authority over the Mount industrial area are Ngāi Tukāirangi and Ngāti Kuku.

80.     The mana whenua reference group for MSP and MIPS met on 21 July and provided feedback on the draft intervention options that are proposed to improve environmental outcomes and address the issues the Whareroa community is facing. They considered these to be the highest priority actions.

Community

81.     The Phase 1 community engagement survey identified environmental concerns, including air, noise and water pollution as highest for the Mount industrial area.

82.     Community groups such as Clear the Air consider that the adverse effects from activities in the Mount Maunganui Airshed on people’s health and the environment are not being addressed and support greater land use controls, with emitting industrial activity removed.

Businesses/industry

83.     Key businesses have attended the stakeholder workshops. In addition, Council staff have met with the Priority One industrial steering group of businesses and at senior management level with businesses in the Whareroa interface area, including Ballance Agri-nutrients, Lawter NZ and Waste Management NZ that hold regional air discharge consents for their activities.

84.     Businesses have given clear feedback they do not support land use intervention and are opposed to rezoning to ‘light industrial zone’ or similar regulatory controls. They have stated an ongoing commitment to improve environmental practices and reduce emissions where possible.

85.     Those businesses engaged with were also given the opportunity to provide written feedback. All feedback received has been considered.

OPTIONS ASSESSMENT

Policy interventions for land use

86.     The options assessment is for the three identified land use policy interventions and are a subset of the possible interventions for the Mount industrial area. The options are being specifically analysed and presented for decision because they are required to inform the City Plan work programme and Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan.

87.     To respond to the key issues associated with residential communities in close proximity to industrial – noise, odour, amenity, air quality, etc. options that have been considered include:

(a)     Existing methods / status quo

(b)     Increased monitoring - including in sensitive areas (schools/kura, residential, childcare)

(c)     Industry innovation – working with businesses to continue improvement to on-site outcomes, monitoring and transparency

(d)     An Environmental Accord with businesses committing to certain outcomes

(e)     Improvements to the current regional consenting framework and possible changes to the Regional Natural Resources Plan

(f)      Relocation of sensitive land uses

(g)     Amending the Tauranga City Plan - zone and/or rule changes eg. light industry or bespoke

(h)     Applying National Planning Standards and other regulatory options:

i.      Overlays – an overlay spatially identifies distinctive values, risks or other factors which require management in a different manner from underlying zone provisions.)

ii.     Precincts - a precinct spatially identifies and manages an area where additional place-based provisions apply to modify or refine aspects of the policy approach or outcomes anticipated in the underlying zone(s). Examples include a boat building precinct in a light industrial zone.

iii.    Specific controls within the zone - a specific control spatially identifies where a site or area has provisions that are different from other spatial layers or district-wide provisions that apply to that site or area.

88.     The current and possible future district planning approaches and examples for managing industrial interfaces is provided in Attachment D. This considers the Auckland Unitary Plan and Proposed Wellington City District Plan approaches in adhering to the National Planning Standards 2019 industrial zone descriptions.

OPTIONS ANALYSIS

89.     There are four policy issues that have been identified for decision and these are set out below:

(a)     Whareroa industrial interface

(b)     Industrial land use interface area – Newton Street / MacDonald Street

(c)     Residential activities in the Mount industrial area

(d)     Providing for existing businesses.

90.     The Whareroa and Newton Street/MacDonald Street interface areas are shown in the map in Attachment E with the current City Plan zonings for these areas set out in Figure D3 and Figure D4 in Attachment D.

91.     Any recommended option that includes an amendment to the City Plan will require a section 32 evaluation report to meet the requirements of the RMA and requires Council adoption to publicly notify the plan change.

Whareroa industrial interface

92.     The possible high-level Tauranga City Plan intervention options considered for the industrial interface area adjoining the Whareroa community are presented in Table 1 below.

93.     The Whareroa interface area comprises 39.57 ha of land zoned ‘industrial’ in the operative Tauranga City Plan, which is 10.4% of the total ‘industrial’ and ‘port industrial’ zoned land in the Mount industrial area. The interface area comprises 16 land parcels with 12 businesses currently operating here, of which three require regional consent to discharge contaminants to air; Ballance Agri-nutrients, Waste Management NZ and Lawter NZ.

Table 1: Options to consider for managing Whareroa industrial interface area

Option

Comment

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option 1: Status quo – providing for heavy industrial activities in this area

 

The land between Whareroa Marae and Hewletts Road would retain its current Industrial zoning

Is the option sought by those businesses Council has engaged with in the interface area.

This option would rely on physical intervention only such as landscape enhancements.

This option would rely on regional council controls and non-regulatory interventions.

The current industrial zone rules of the City Plan would apply.

Business able to continue to operate under the City Plan as usual.

No cost or funding implications for Council.

 

Reinforces that emitting industry can continue.

Could see further impacts on environmental and cultural values and the well-being of the Whareroa community Health and environmental concerns may not be adequately addressed.

Relying on physical interventions, such as landscape enhancements, is considered inadequate in responding to the issues.

Option 2: Introducing controls to regulate future industrial land use activities

(Recommended)

Amendments would be made to the industrial zone or other planning provisions to better manage heavy industrial activities in the interface area.

Possible land use control mechanisms under this option could include:

(a) Requiring any new ‘heavy industrial activity’ to obtain land use consent

(b) Rezoning the interface area to “Light Industrial” zone using the National Planning Standards 2019 zone description

Signals the longer-term vision to move towards land use activities that have no or limited emissions.

Restricts the types of activities that can occur in future in the interface area, reducing impacts and risks on the Whareroa Marae and community. 

Is not supported by businesses.

May de-value land and present a barrier to future development of existing business operations.

Option 3: Relocation of industrial businesses with tighter controls under the City Plan

Under this option the land would be rezoned to limit existing businesses in any future expansion and would signal a long-term transition for the area through applying an Open Space, Commercial, or other zone.

Is the option sought by mana whenua (Ngāti Kuku) and the Whareroa community.

Would enable over time for land to be repurposed for open space uses. Any new industrial activities and residential uses would be prevented from establishing.

Provides for repurposing of land to other long-term uses.

 

Does not align with the proposed vision and objectives for the Mount industrial area.

Prevents any redevelopment, upgrading to best practicable option and other initiatives by business for the foreseeable future.

Would not remove existing use rights of existing businesses to continue to operate.

Unlikely to meet section 85 RMA in placing an unfair and unreasonable burden on the landowner. 

Lack of suitable sites to for existing businesses to relocate to.

Recommended option:

94.     The recommended option is Option 2 to introduce controls to regulate future industrial land use activities. Attachment D provides examples from the Auckland Unitary Plan and Proposed Wellington City District Plan of how this could be achieved.

95.     The Schedule 1 RMA process would consider all available options for the implementing land use change through the City Plan, which may include:

(a)     Rezoning the Whareroa interface area to a ‘light Industrial’ zone. The same zone would have general applicability across other relevant industrial areas in Tauranga City. The intent is that land uses which require a discharge to air, water or land in the light industrial zone would be a non-complying activity. Specific land uses set out in the Regional Natural Resources Plan could also be identified as inappropriate in the interface area through new policies and/or rules in the City Plan.

(b)     Requiring any new ‘heavy industrial activity’ to obtain land use consent to proceed. This would require any defined ‘heavy industrial activity’ to seek resource consent as a discretionary activity with additional objectives and policies that would determine whether an activity can proceed. It would allow for a case-by-case consideration of effects from any new activity, similar to the Proposed Wellington City District Plan approach.

96.     Changes to the City Plan would signal that any future land uses are to not cause adverse effects on people, adjoining uses and the environment in these interface areas.

97.     For the Whareroa interface area the delay to promote a plan change, rezone or impose a precinct overlay, has a low risk of new heavy industry establishing which may have adverse air quality effects, as the regional consenting framework and polluted airshed would likely see any consent declined. What could however happen is different activities occur, such as more container storage areas, which may have noise, dust and traffic effects.

98.     It should be recognised that the status quo (Option 1) is unlikely to remain as Council is required to adopt the National Planning Standards 2019 industrial zone descriptions and prepare appropriate rule frameworks for each zone in the City Plan. A city-wide approach to applying the National Planning Standards to the current industrial and commercial areas is being considered as part of the City Plan work programme agenda item reported separately to the Committee.

Industrial land use interface area – Newton Street / MacDonald Street

99.     As part of the evidence base, an analysis report on the Maunganui Road and Newton Street interface area has been prepared. This outlines how a transitional approach could be taken through land use options within the area between the existing industrial zone and the general residential zone on the eastern side of Maunganui Road.

100.   The Newton Street / MacDonald Street corridor along with the Eastern Trunk railway reserve provides an existing buffer to some noise, amenity and other effects from industrial activities. Attachment E shows the current commercial and industrial zoned land parcels along the Newton Street / MacDonald Street corridor with set-back or buffer distances from the residential zone boundary along Maunganui Road.

Table 2: Options to consider for the industrial interface area along Maunganui Road, Newton Street and MacDonald Street

Option

Comment

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option 1: Status quo - retain existing Industrial and Commercial zones

Sufficient market-led distinction between commercial zoned activities with Newton Road area zoned commercial transitioning to the railway line and then Maunganui Road.

No cost or funding implications for Council.

Existing businesses can remain with no conflict between use and zoning.

Does not meet National Planning Standards requirements.

Does not address current limited availability of commercial zoned land in the area, which has seen these land use activities within industrial zoned land.

Does not provide for sufficient buffer between industrial and residential uses.

Option 2: Create a larger separation between industrial activities and residential zoned land

(Recommended)

This would see a move away from the existing industrial zone in the corridor which provides for heavy or emitting industry through rezoning or amending other plan provisions.

Could consider overlays or precincts with specific rules in ‘transition’ area.

 

Able to reflect current actual and intended use of the area.

Able to adopt ‘best practice’ as to what a suitable buffer distances between industrial and residential activities might be.

May encourage redevelopment and high value use of existing sites.

May restrict future uses an expansion of sites.

Could see a loss of industrial land in the area and may create further demand that is not able to be met.

May result in some businesses being forced to move out.

May result in increased traffic generation if encouraged more commercial uses.

Recommended option:

101.   It is recommended that Council investigate creating a larger buffer between industrial activities and sensitive uses ie. residential zoned land. This would provide an increased separation between potential heavy industrial activities and the residential zone boundary at Maunganui Road from approximately 140m to between 225 to 250m.

102.   Under this option, changes to the City Plan could involve:

(a)  Retaining the existing ‘Commercial’ zoned land on the eastern side of Newton Street and MacDonald Street but investigating the appropriate zone on the western side to the unused rail corridor to provide a better transition between sensitive areas and the industrial zones (comprising 11.22 ha).

(b)  Amending the industrial zoning on western side of Newton Road and MacDonald Street to ‘Commercial’ zone one section/block back as shown in Appendix E.

Residential activities in the Mount industrial area

103.   The Mount Maunganui airshed (shown in Figure C1 in Attachment C) includes areas currently zoned ‘Commercial’ in the operative Tauranga City Plan. Within the Commercial Zone residential activities are a permitted activity subject to standards being met, set out in Chapter 17 of the operative Tauranga City Plan (rule 17A.11).

104.   Census information indicates there are over 200 dwellings in the Mount Maunganui airshed. Enabling further residential dwellings within the airshed may increase the exposure of people to adverse effects from industrial activities that are legitimately operating within the airshed.

105.   Ministry for the Environment guidance advises that a combination of separation between non-compatible activities and managing effects at source is considered the best approach for health protection. 

106.   The operative Tauranga City Plan makes ‘residential activities’ a non-complying activity in the Industrial and Port Industrial zones, but allows for places of assembly, such as churches and gyms. However, parts of the study area are zoned Commercial along the eastern side of Newtown Road and adjacent to the northern end of Totara Street. Within the Commercial Zone ‘residential activities’ and ‘visitor accommodation’ are permitted.

Table 3: Options to consider in managing residential activities in the Mount industrial area

Option

Comment

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option 1: No change – Retain operative plan rules

Rely on regional council controls, local bylaws and other regulations to manage noise, amenity, odour and other effects on residential activities.

No cost to Council involved as reflects status quo.

Existing businesses are unaffected.

Recognises sufficient distinction between commercial zoned activities with Newton Road area zoned commercial transitioning to the railway line and then Maunganui Road.

Allows residential activities as a permitted activity in the Commercial zone, provided permitted standards for building height and other requirements are met

Option 2: Restrict residential activities in current areas zoned commercial in the Mount Maunganui Airshed at Newton Street and MacDonalds Streets

(Recommended)

The current City Plan allows for residential activities in the ‘Commercial’ zone which may increase environmental and health/well-being effects due to proximity to emitting industry and other activities.

A plan change would look at amending the current activity rules for “residential activities” from permitted to non-complying, with supporting policy, if required within this area.

Reduces land use conflicts between residential and commercial.

Reduces conflict with rail line, including reducing the need for people to cross/introduce crossings.

Less opportunity for people to ‘live, work, play’ in the area.

Potentially allows for heavier industrial activities to locate within Newton Street and MacDonalds Streets. Would also likely prevent other uses that currently exist here.

Could impact property values and future uses.

Recommended option:

107.   It is recommended that Council amend the activity status for residential activities to restrict residential activities in the commercial areas of Newton Street and MacDonald Street.

108.   Restricting people living in the Mount Airshed/industrial area being exposed to contaminants and other adverse effects is the recommended outcome of this report. This could be achieved through options to be explored through the Schedule 1 RMA process, with consideration given to applying provisions to the Newton Street and MacDonald Street commercial zoned land parcels (comprising 14.25 ha) in which the activity status for ‘residential activities’ is more restrictive.

109.   For Newton Street and MacDonald Street there is a low risk in waiting 2-3 years for the future Commercial and Industrial Plan Change to be notified, in terms of whether residential activities could establish in the meantime. While an Owens Place situation of low-rise apartments in the Commercial zone is not anticipated, this remains a possibility.

Continued operation and investment of existing businesses

110.   The ability for existing businesses to be able to continue to meet economic needs and good business practice has been raised as an issue by those businesses within the Mount industrial area, and in particular those businesses who would be directly affected by any plan change within the Whareroa and Newton Street/MacDonald Street interface areas.

Table 4: Options to consider in relation to existing business operations in the Mount industrial area

Option

Comment

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option 1: Rely on existing use rights and regional consent requirements

Under this option, any new activity on a site would require resource consent to be obtained in relation to the underlying zoning.

Assumes existing businesses are unaffected by any changes to the City Plan.

 

 

No special treatment given to existing businesses beyond existing use rights provided under section 10 of the RMA.

 

A change in zoning to ‘light industrial’ for example, may limit expansion and redevelopment of businesses.

Lack of recognition of the economic and social contribution that existing businesses make.

Option 2: Provide for the ongoing operation and investment of existing businesses where environmental impacts are able to be effectively avoided or mitigated

(Recommended)

A plan change to amend the underlying ‘industrial’ zoning of the current City Plan would also provide for the ongoing operation and investment of existing businesses where environmental impacts are able to be effectively avoided or mitigated.

Recognises the economic and social contribution that existing businesses make.

Could be considered to provide special treatment to existing businesses beyond existing use rights provided under section 10 of the RMA that would not apply to any new industrial activity.

Recommended option:

111.   It is recommended that the ability for existing businesses to continue to operate be provided for. This would enable the ongoing operation and investment of existing businesses where environmental impacts are able to be effectively avoided or mitigated be provided for in any plan change to the City Plan.

112.   While the physical footprint of a business may stay the same over time this recognises that the nature of the activity may change in some manner. Redevelopment and investment could occur which better manages any adverse effects and reflects best practice as this evolves. A number of businesses have indicated during engagement they are planning to do this.

ENGAGEMENT

113.   Engagement with mana whenua, the MSP/MIPS Reference Group and the wider community has occurred as part of the MSP engagement. In addition, specific engagement on MIPS has also occurred.

114.   Hui were held with the Whareroa community, Bay of Plenty Regional Council Toi Moana, Waka Kotahi, Priority One, Port of Tauranga, Kiwirail, Tauranga airport and key businesses.

115.   Three facilitated workshops with industrial stakeholders were held as part of the MIPS:

·     Workshop 1: 7 March 2023 - this workshop identified the issues and opportunities for the industrial area. It also developed individual and group visions for what the area should look like in 30 years.

·     Workshop 2: 11 May 2023 - presented three scenarios and required actions for feedback (1) Business as usual (2) Expansion of the industrial area and economic focus (3) Environmental limits.

·     Workshop 3: 8 August 2023 - presented Council’s draft developing scenario and proposed intervention actions. It also explored the options around land use intervention and the advantages and disadvantages of each option.

116.   Those invited to the stakeholder workshops were included in the 26 June 2023 report to the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee (provided in Appendix B to the Mount Planning and Delivery Programme Update - May 2023 report).

117.   Following the third stakeholder workshop and requests from a number of participants to those workshops, further engagement has occurred with businesses, including those identified within the Whareroa interface area.

118.   A workshop with a steering group of businesses established by Priority One to provide input on the industrial blueprint was held on 13 October 2023. Written feedback on the draft intervention option has been received by Ballance Agri-nutrients, Lawter NZ, Waste Management NZ and Fulton Hogan. A further workshop was held on 24 November 2023.

119.   It is anticipated that further engagement will be undertaken with Whareroa marae, mana whenua and businesses through the Schedule 1 RMA process should the recommended land use interventions result in plan change(s) proceeding.

Financial Considerations

120.   The timing and priority of interventions (physical projects and policy changes) identified as part of the spatial plan process will be considered as part of Council’s LTP process and in partnership with project delivery partners, including central government. Consideration will also be given to alternative funding options, including cost sharing arrangements with external parties including the private sector.

Legal Implications / Risks

121.   Any change to the operative Tauranga City Plan will need to meet the requirements of the RMA through a notified Schedule 1 process.

122.   A plan change to affect change in future land uses is likely to be opposed by those directly affected businesses. By contrast some parts of the community and mana whenua may consider the approaches recommended in this report do not go far enough and do not meet the aspirations/expectations of ahi kaa and residents.

123.   Under section 85 of the RMA, proposed plan provisions must not render the subject land incapable of reasonable use and place an unfair and unreasonable burden on the landowner.  The question is whether the landowner will be left with a realistic and economic land use. Any plan change proposal would need to be supported by the usual statutory considerations, including consideration of costs and benefits under section 32 of the RMA.

Significance

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

CONCLUSION AND Next steps

125.   To address the effects of activities in the Mount industrial area on adjacent or proximal sensitive land uses requires a both non-regulatory and regulatory intervention. A sub-set of these interventions would sit with Tauranga City Council in terms of its role in managing subdivision and land use under the RMA, and managing the impacts of activities on health under the Health Act.

126.   The Priority One industrial blueprint is expected to set out the way forward from a business perspective and key recommended actions. The blueprint is likely to identify that businesses and stakeholders need to actively manage and deliver improvements to support the future growth of the area to ensure Mount Maunganui remains vibrant and continues to support economic benefits and community wellness. The intent is that businesses within the Mount Maunganui industrial area and the adjacent communities can co-exist.

127.   A proposed comprehensive commercial and industrial plan change(s) to consider business land across the city is intended to deliver MIPS outcomes through changes to the operative Tauranga City Plan. This would allow for a comprehensive approach to the management of industrial activities across the city. Refer separate City Plan work programme agenda item to the 4 December 2023 Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting.

128.   A city-wide plan change would also enable matters such as the demand and supply of industrial land to be considered arising from the SmartGrowth Industrial Land Study and SmartGrowth Strategy/Future Development Strategy, when this is confirmed by the SmartGrowth partners in April 2024.

129.   The implementation of the interventions arising from the Mount Industrial Planning Study through the Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan relies on collaborative partnerships with mana whenua, businesses, other stakeholders and the community, with implementation delivered by Tauranga City Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council – Toi Moana, central government agencies and private sector businesses.

130.   The Mount Industrial Planning Study outcomes will be incorporated into the Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan and presented to the Committee in early 2024. The decisions of the Committee will confirm the final recommendations of arising from the Mount Industrial Planning Study.

 

Attachments

1.       Attachment A - Te Mahere ahumahi o Mauao Mount Industrial Planning Study Summary - A15282700

2.       Attachment B - Recommended interventions - Mount Industrial Planning Study - A15283557

3.       Attachment C - Summary of air quality management and the regional consenting framework (A15282894) - A15343500

4.       Attachment D - District planning approaches and industrial interface examples (A15283430) - A15343501

5.       Attachment E:   Map of Whareroa and Newton Street/MacDonald Street interface areas - A15308037

6.       Attachment F -  Mount Industrial Blueprint memo - Priority One - A15343342  

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 




Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 





Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment c

Mount Industrial Planning Study Key Recommendations

Attachment C - Summary of air quality management and the regional consenting framework (A15282894)


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment d

Mount Industrial Planning Study Key Recommendations

Attachment D - District planning approaches and industrial interface examples (A15283430)


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 



Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 



 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.4         Delivering on Our Direction - keeping it live

File Number:           A14546955

Author:                    Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy and Corporate Planning

Josh Logan, Team Leader: Corporate Planning

Sarah Holmes, Corporate Planner

Anne Payne, Principal Strategic Advisor

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

 

Purpose of the Report

1.       This report closes out the Our Direction (strategic framework refresh) project, and outlines the monitoring, reporting and review processes that are now under development.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

a)   Receives the report "Delivering on Our Direction - keeping it live" for information, and

b)   Notes the proposed monitoring, reporting and review programme outlined in this report.

 

 

Executive Summary

2.       The Our Direction project commenced in its current form in mid-2021, with the aim of ensuring Council’s strategic direction is clear, coherent and accessible to our communities and our own people.

3.       The project has facilitated development of a community vision for Tauranga, the short form of which is: Tauranga, together we can prioritise nature, lift each other up and fuel possibility.  Council has also adopted this as our vision. The project also created Our Direction framework, which outlines how the council contributes to the vision for Tauranga, and refreshed all its strategies and plans within this framework. The final strategies and plans (now called action and investment plans, or AIPs) were adopted on 21 August 2023, effectively completing the project.

4.       We will briefly introduce te Kupenga, the visual representation of Our Direction framework, and Our Direction online at this Committee meeting.

5.       Attention has now turned to delivering on Our Direction, which is the main focus of this report. The Corporate Planning team is leading development of Our Direction monitoring and reporting processes. These will come into full effect next financial year to report on progress against the first year of the 2024-2034 Long-term Plan, and will include new six-monthly reporting on both non-financial measures and current year AIP actions.

6.       A new three-yearly outcomes report is also proposed, to track progress against Our Direction’s strategic goals over time. From the next reporting period, in February 2024, it is proposed that all corporate monitoring and reporting is structured by Community Outcome, so that progress against the aspirations of Our Direction can start to be measured.

7.       All strategies and AIPs within Council’s Our Direction framework will be reviewed in the year prior to development of each long-term plan. The level of review will vary depending on age, currency and relevance of each strategy or AIP.

Background AND WHERE WE ARE NOW

8.       The Our Direction (strategic framework refresh) project began in its current form in mid-2021.  The project sought to ensure that Council’s strategic direction is clear and coherent, and to enable a clear line of sight between the council’s day-to-day operations and what we are aiming to achieve for our communities, now and in the future.

9.       The planning cycle diagram below, from the Our Direction document[3], shows the elements of the project and where we are now:

10.     Key project milestones were:

·    13 June 2022 – Council endorsed and adopted the community’s vision for Tauranga, the short-form of which is: ‘Tauranga, together we can prioritise nature, lift each other up, and fuel possibility’[4].

·    12 December 2022 – Council adopted Our Direction, its strategic framework and high-level direction.

·    21 August 2023 – Council adopted two new primary strategies, Tauranga Mataraunui – Inclusive City Strategy and Tauranga Taurikura – Environment Strategy, and nine new action and investment plans to fill existing gaps in the strategic framework.

11.     Te Kupenga – we have worked with Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana to develop te Kupenga (a type of fishing net), which is a visual representation of Our Direction framework.  Te Kupenga is included in the strategic / statutory context section of this report, and will be introduced by the Manager: Strategic Māori Engagement at this Committee meeting.

12.     Our Direction online – Council’s website now includes a section for Our Direction[5], which aims to be a one-stop-shop to show Council’s high-level direction, and how all of our strategies and plans[6] contribute to it. We will briefly introduce Our Direction online at this Committee meeting.

Acknowledgements

13.     As noted at the Council meeting on 21 August 2023, we would like to acknowledge:

·        The significant contribution to this project from many staff across the organisation, and from many people, groups and organisations in our communities – all of whom have provided valuable input along the way; and

·        Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana for their significant contribution to this project, particularly during development of Te Kupenga (the visual representation of our strategic framework), our two new strategies, and all nine new AIPs.  We particularly acknowledge and thank the Te Rangapū representatives appointed to each AIP for their additional time and input, often with quite short turnaround times, during the AIP development process.

keeping our direction live and relevant over time

14.     Our focus is now on embedding Our Direction into the organisation, to ensure it becomes a part of ‘how we do things around here’ so that we deliver on it over time.  The key pieces of work now underway are outlined as follows:

Within the organisation

15.     Induction module – we are developing an induction module to explain Our Direction for our new people, so they know how Tauranga City Council contributes to the vision for Tauranga, how their work fits into this picture, and where to find more information when needed.

16.     Roles and responsibilities for remaining AIPs – during the project we identified owners, roles and responsibilities for the primary strategies and new AIPs.  We are now doing the same for the remaining AIPs so that our new monitoring, reporting and review processes can run smoothly and effectively.  We intend to make this information available for our people on the organisation’s intranet.

17.     Approaches – organisational implementation plans have been developed and approved by the Executive for each of our three new approaches (to Te Ao Māori, Sustainability, and Working beyond Tauranga).  Implementing our approaches consistently across the organisation will drive the culture change required to deliver on Our Direction.

Monitoring and reporting

18.     Council’s Corporate Planning team is leading development of the monitoring, reporting and review processes for Our Direction. These new processes will become part of the organisation’s standard planning, monitoring and reporting suite of processes, managed by the Corporate Planning team with content input from relevant teams within council.

19.     Outcome measures:

·    Our outcome measures come from our community outcomes and primary strategies, and some (but not all) are now included in our draft 2024-2034 Long-term Plan (draft LTP).

·    It is proposed to prepare a one-off report before the end of June 2024 that will include all LTP outcomes measures.

·    Our annual report will include all LTP measures (outcome and non-financial performance), with outcomes measure baselines having been established by the June 2024 report described above.

·    New report for the Council – a three-yearly outcomes report is also proposed, to track overall progress towards Our Direction.

20.     Non-financial performance measures:

·    Our draft LTP non-financial performance measures include some AIP measures, but are mostly measuring how well we are delivering our ongoing services (i.e. our everyday core services, which by definition aren’t included in our AIPs).

·    Frequency of reporting – it is proposed that progress against our new LTP non-financial performance measures is reported six-monthly, with the second report continuing to be provided by the Annual Report.

·    The first report in March 2024 will enable us to test our LTP non-financial performance measures and check that we have got them right.  This timing will enable us to improve any measures that aren’t providing the information needed, and incorporate these tweaks into our final LTP, and into the final LTP updates to our new AIPs.

·    However, it should be noted that the 2023/24 Annual Report will still include the current 2021-2031 Long-term Plan measures.

21.     Action and Investment Plan (AIP) actions:

·    New report for the Council – it is proposed that progress on current year AIP actions is reported every six months, with reporting to be aligned with the actions from the LTP deliberations (LTP actions tracker). Incomplete AIP actions at the end of each year could be carried over to the following year’s reporting.

·    As the AIPs are long-term (normally 10-year) roadmaps for delivery on our strategies and community outcomes, the six-monthly AIP progress report will only report on actions that are prioritised and funded to occur in the current year.

·    For clarity: AIP actions that are prioritised and funded for future years, prioritised but unfunded, or not prioritised, will not be underway and will be excluded from the six-monthly reports. These actions will be reassessed during each three-yearly AIP review.

22.     From the next reporting period, in March 2024, it is proposed that all corporate monitoring and reporting is structured by Community Outcome so that progress against our aspirations can be measured. This applies to non-financial performance reporting, current year AIP action reporting, and future annual reporting after the 2023/24 report.

23.     It is recommended that implementation plan progress for our three approaches (to Te Ao Māori, Sustainability, and Working beyond Tauranga) is reported to the Executive by the business owners at a frequency determined by the Executive.

24.     In summary, the proposed monitoring and reporting timeframes are shown in the table below:

Reporting and monitoring (by Community Outcome)

Frequency

Timeframes

LTP outcome measures – baseline report

One-off

By Jun 2024

Current year non-financial performance measures

6-monthly[7]

Mar 2024, Feb 2025, etc

LTP outcome measures and non-financial performance measures

Annually

Annual Report 2024/25

Current year AIP actions

6-monthly

Oct 2024, April 2025 etc

Actions from LTP decision-making

6-monthly

Oct 2024, April 2025 etc

Triennial Outcomes Report

3-yearly

By June 2026 (to inform the next LTP)

Three approaches: Te Ao Māori, Sustainability, and Working Beyond Tauranga

 

As determined by the Executive

 

Review

25.     All of the strategies and AIPs within Council’s Our Direction framework will be reviewed in the year prior to development of each long-term plan.

26.     The level of review required will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Newer strategies and AIPs are expected to only require a relevance check and minor update, to ensure they are still fit-for-purpose. Older strategies and AIPs may require a more comprehensive review, particularly if a review schedule is not already in place. Reviews of joint strategies and AIPs will need to be agreed with relevant partners.

27.     The Strategy team will lead the strategy/AIP review needs analysis process, and the Corporate Planning team will lead the actual review processes. Both processes will require input from the strategy and AIP owners across the organisation.

Strategic / Statutory Context

28.     The short form of our community’s vision for Tauranga is Tauranga – together we can prioritise nature, lift each other up, and fuel possibility.  Council’s contribution to achieving the vision is articulated by our strategic framework, called Our Direction.

29.     Our Direction comprises Council’s five community outcomes (what we are aiming to achieve for our communities, now and in the future) with our three approaches (how we do everything).  Our Direction is visually represented by te kupenga (a type of fishing net):

30.     All of Council’s strategies and plans, and the work programmes to deliver them, contribute to delivering Our Direction for our communities.  Council’s Our Direction framework is available online at:  https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/our-future/our-direction.

 

Financial Considerations

31.     Embedding Our Direction within the organisation is part of normal business activities and will be funded through existing operational budgets, for example developing an induction module for new staff.  Driving the organisational culture change required to implement our approaches is funded within the current year budget and/or the working draft 2024-2034 Long-term Plan. 

32.     Some IT system development may be required to enable effective monitoring, reporting and review processes.  Some budget for this is included within the current year and draft LTP, but actual requirements will only be determined once system requirements and scoping have been completed.

Legal Implications / Risks

33.     The primary risk is that the council may not monitor implementation, and the resultant impact, of the actions identified in the plans and strategies over time, or periodically review the plans and strategies for continued relevance.  As a result, the council may not be able to deliver on its aspirations articulated within Our Direction. The work described in this report aims to mitigate this risk.

Significance

34.     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.

35.     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 issue of Council’s strategies and plans.

(c)   the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.

36.     In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the issue of delivering on Council’s direction through its strategies and plans is of high significance, however as no decisions are required, the report is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

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

Next Steps

38.     Next steps are as outlined in the ‘keeping our direction live and relevant over time’ section of this report.  This is the final Our Direction project update report.

Attachments

Nil

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.5         Audit New Zealand - report to the commissioners on the audit of the consultation document for the 2024-34 long-term plan

File Number:           A15320282

Author:                    Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy and Corporate Planning

Authoriser:             Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer

 

Purpose of the Report

1.      To present Audit New Zealand’s report to commissioners following their audit of the consultation document for the 2024-34 long-term plan.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

a)   Receives the report "Audit New Zealand - report to the commissioners on the audit of the consultation document for the 2024-34 long-term plan".

 

Background

2.       The 2024-34 long-term plan consultation document is prepared under the Local Government Act 2002 (“the Act”).  Under section 93C of the Act, Audit New Zealand is required to audit:

·  whether the consultation document gives effect to its purpose as set out in the Act[8]; and

·  the quality of the information and assumptions underlying the information provided in the consultation document.

3.       Audit New Zealand formally provided its audit opinion on the 2024-34 long-term plan consultation document to the Council meeting on 13 November 2023, shortly before Council adopted the audited consultation document for the purposes of public consultation.

4.       Audit New Zealand has now provided its ‘report to the commissioners’ on the audit and its findings.  This is included as Attachment 1 to this report.

5.       The report to the commissioners:

·    notes the matters identified pre-audit that would be a focus for the audit and explains the audit findings on those matters

·    explains the audit opinion and the three ‘emphasis of matter’ paragraphs within that opinion

·    explains the link between the audit of the consultation document and the audit of the final long-term plan, scheduled to be adopted on 22 April 2024.

6.       The report to the commissioners confirms that the audit went well and that council staff and the Audit New Zealand team worked well to identify and resolve issues as they arose.  This despite Tauranga’s being the first long-term plan consultation document to be audited in the 2024-34 round and therefore something of a ‘test case’ for disclosures around water service reforms following the election result in October.

7.       The report to the commissioners notes that the consultation document is ‘free from material misstatements, including omissions’ and makes no specific recommendations for future follow-up.

Significance

8.       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.

9.       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.

(c)   the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.

10.     In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter of the audit of the long-term plan consultation document is of medium significance, but that the decision to receive the report on the audit’s findings is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

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

Next Steps

12.     The 2024-34 long-term plan consultation document is currently with the community for public consultation.  That closes on 15 December 2023.  Submissions will be heard in February 2024 and deliberations on the matters raised through the submission process will occur in March 2024.  Once decisions have been made, staff will prepare the final long-term plan and will subject that to the audit process.  An audit opinion will be provided by Audit New Zealand prior to final adoption, scheduled for 22 April 2024. 

13.     At this stage it should be noted that there is some uncertainty around the final nature of the long-term plan with regards to water services reform.  If legislation is changed by the incoming government before the adoption of the final long-term plan we will respond in an appropriate manner to that legislation and any transitional provisions it includes.

Attachments

1.       TCC - Report to Commissioners (LTP CD) - A15320296  

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 
















 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.6         Growth & Land Use Projects Progress Report - December 2023

File Number:           A15255931

Author:                    Andy Mead, Manager: City Planning & Growth

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

 

Purpose of the Report

1.      Tauranga City is continuing to experience rapid growth.  Managing this growth is a significant issue for Council.  The report enables the Committee to monitor progress on key projects relating to managing growth in a sustainable manner, including land use planning projects and related transport, infrastructure and funding workstreams.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Growth & Land Use Projects Progress Report - December 2023"

(b)     Confirms that the:

(i)   Plan Change 33 process will identify the future residential zoning for the Mount to Arataki area.

(ii)  Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan will reflect the outcomes of the Plan Change 33 process and provide direction on future investment and policy to support the existing community and future growth.

 

 

Executive Summary

2.       Managing growth is a significant issue for Council, particularly the challenge of ensuring growth is sustainable in a four well-beings context for both current and future communities.

3.       The attached report outlines the progress being made in relation to a number of projects necessary to manage this continued growth. 

KEY UPDATES

4.       The key points to note in this update are outlined in the paragraphs below.

Plan Change 33 and Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan

5.       Plan Change 33 to implement the Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) and intensification within and around centres is progressing.  The hearing was split into two sessions, Session 1 covering strategic matters in July and Session 2 covering substantive matters in October this year. Recommendations from the Independent Hearings Panel are anticipated to be received in March 2024.

6.       A key matter to be addressed through Plan Change 33 is where greater height and density of buildings is enabled around centres, including the Mount Town Centre to give effect to Policy 3(d) of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). As part of the plan change process, the Independent Hearings Panel specifically sought to understand the relationship between the Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan (MSP) and Plan Change 33.

7.       The MSP, currently being prepared, seeks to deliver a 30-year blueprint that provides strategic direction for existing and future growth needs of the area, forming the basis for the coordination of decision making within and across multiple agencies in a growth context.

8.       Unlike Te Papa and Ōtūmoetai, the MSP commenced following the notification of PPC33 and therefore seeks to support the residential land use outcomes anticipated through PPC33 and the direction of the NPS-UD. Plan Change 33 proposes to enable residential intensification within and around the Mount Maunganui North town centre, Bayfair town centre and Central Parade local centre, and elsewhere through the medium density residential provisions.

9.       Having regard to the above, the draft MSP land use layer, and in particular as it relates to proposed future residential zoning, reflects the extent of intensification recommended in the s.42A report for the Session 2 hearing. Any refinements made to the proposed zoning from the plan change process will be reflected in the final MSP. 

10.     It is important to note that all three spatial plans prepared by Tauranga City Council to date are premised on the same principles for growth, supporting intensification around centres and consistent with the outcomes anticipated through the Urban Form and Transport Initiative and the NPS-UD. Further, through the preparation of the MSP, the land use layer was ‘tested’ through the projects design sprint workshops, which included attendance by 30 subject matter experts from Tauranga City Council, mana whenua representatives, partner organisations and key stakeholders.

11.     Having regard to the above, the draft MSP focuses on the following matters, to support the existing community and as it grows in the future: 

(a)     The wellbeing of our communities as they continue to grow

(b)     The way we move around

(c)     Culture and heritage 

(d)     The natural environment and the features we want to protect

(e)     Public open space: playgrounds, parks, and community facilities

(f)      The shopping, entertainment, and business centres; and

(g)     How to manage the different land uses and their interfaces, including industrial, residential, and commercial.

12.     The draft 2024-34 Long Term Plan (currently subject to consultation) includes significant investment to support projected growth in the MSP area (anticipated to grow by 5,000 residents by 2058). In particular, this includes more than $200m investment to support outcomes relating to movement, open space and public realm, stormwater resilience, and cultural outcomes. Notably, within this proposed funding are a number of bulk funds (open space, movement and cultural related) to support the outcomes of the MSP action plan, once these specific outcomes have been endorsed.

13.     The final MSP is proposed to come before the SFR Committee in March 2024.

14.     It is also noted that the MSP and the Mount Industrial Planning Study processes will also take account of and recommend measures to address potential impacts related to health and the activities within the Mount industrial area. This will be reported separately to Council. 

Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan Engagement Summary Report

15.     The second round of Community engagement on the MSP occurred from 11 September through to 8 October 2023. An engagement summary report is attached as Appendix B. Feedback from stakeholders, tangata whenua and the wider community will assist to inform the Mount to Arataki Spatial Plan and Mount Industrial Plan Study alongside wider technical inputs. The engagement report will be publicly available on the MSP webpage. 

SmartGrowth Strategy 2023

16.     Consultation on an updated SmartGrowth Strategy including the Future Development Strategy requirements of the National Policy Statement for Urban Development has been completed.   94 submissions have been received. The topic/chapter leads are now currently working through the submissions and drafting Issues & Options Papers to reflect responses received, which are due mid-Dec. WBOPDC is hosting the hearings on 4th and 5th Dec.  Key matters include:

(a)     The timing of development in Te Tumu (requests to bring forward)

(b)     The scale and timing of development of the Western Corridor

(c)     The request to include a new development area in Bell Rd (named Wairakei South).

Tauriko West and Te Tumu

17.     These projects are the subject of separate reports on the 11 December Council meeting agenda and are therefore addressed only briefly in this cover report.  Report updates are also provided in Attachment A.

(a)     Flood risk assessment continues to be the main focus of work for Tauriko West

(b)     Nonetheless, the Tauriko West plan change is on track for notification in February or March 2024

(c)     Procurement is well advanced for enabling works construction.

(d)     As outlined in a report to the 11 September Council meeting, the focus areas for future work on Te Tumu relate to infrastructure corridors through Māori land, tangata whenua engagement, deliverability of the Kaituna Stormwater Overflow and updates to other technical reports required for future plan change processes.

Māori housing information

18.     Following discussion at the last SFR meeting, work is underway to provide additional information on current and future Māori housing.  This work will be reported through the next quarterly update. 

Future Plan Change Work Programme

19.     There is a separate report on this SFR agenda in relation to the current and future work plan change programme for the City Planning & Growth Team. 

Strategic / Statutory Context

20.     The projects covered in this report are framed under the strategic direction of SmartGrowth and UFTI, the proposed Future Development Strategy, the 30-year Infrastructure Strategy and Long-Term Plan.

Options Analysis

21.     There is no options analysis; this report is for information only.

Significance

22.     While growth is a significant issue for Tauranga City, this report does not require any substantive decisions and is not significant in itself.

Next Steps

23.     Council will continue to progress the projects and works as identified in the report and Attachment A.

Attachments

1.       Appendix A - Quarterly Update - Growth, Land Use Planning and Transport Strategy Projects - December 2023 - A15343507

2.       Appendix B - Mount to Arataki Engagement Summary Report - A15343510  

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment a

Growth & Land Use Projects Progress Report - December 2023

Appendix A - Quarterly Update - Growth, Land Use Planning and Transport Strategy Projects - December 2023


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 
















Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.7         City Plan Work Programme

File Number:           A15261882

Author:                    Andy Mead, Manager: City Planning & Growth

Janine Speedy, Team Leader: City Planning

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

 

Purpose of the Report

1.      To provide an update of current City Plan projects and to seek endorsement to commence a comprehensive plan change for commercial and industrial land.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "City Plan Work Programme".

(b)     Notes the current and committed plan change projects.

(c)     Approves proceeding with the development of a plan change to comprehensively review the commercial and industrial zones and relevant provisions in the City Plan, including the commercial centres network and hierarchy.

(d)     Notes that work programme updates will be provided through the regular three-monthly progress reporting to the Committee.

 

 

Executive Summary

2.       There is a significant work programme of plan changes to the Tauranga City Plan (City Plan) underway in various stages of development or being progressed through the formal plan change process.

3.       Plan Change 27 - Flooding from Intense Rainfall is at the appeals stage.  Plan Change 33 - Enabling Housing Supply (PC33) recommendations from the Independent Hearings Panel are expected in March 2024 with TCC decisions required by June 2024.

4.       Greenfield urban growth areas continue to work through the structure planning process and preparation of plan changes for notification. This includes potential private plan changes.

5.       With PC33 and spatial planning coming toward completion it is an appropriate time to consider the next priorities for the City Plan. 

6.       The plan change work programme requires adequate resourcing to ensure technically robust outcomes. Recent experience with current plan changes demonstrates that this has taken more time and resource than initially foreseen given the complexity of the Resource Management Act (RMA) planning system, including recent government policy changes.

7.       Given the significant workload to progress the existing work programme, it is recommended that the Committee only approves initiation of one further plan change at this point in time, this being a comprehensive review of commercial and industrial land. If this is supported, it is intended that a more detailed report is brought to the Committee outlining the proposed scope of this work.

8.       There are a number of other resource management issues that the team would continue to progress. Some of this does not involve the need to change to City Plan and some may require future plan changes. This includes a range of work with Tangata Whenua in respect of matters such as papakainga, Significant Māori Areas and viewshafts as well as a work in relation to Baypark.

9.       It is proposed that the priority plan change work programme is updated and reported to the Committee through the regular quarterly reporting cycle.

Background

10.     On 15 November 2021, Council resolved to progress with a series of priority plan changes in place of the City Plan Review due to the proposed Resource Management reform and the RMA Amendments in respect of the Medium Density Residential Standards (MRDS)and wider intensification requirements.

11.     The last Labour government passed its Resource Management reforms into law in August 2023. However, the incoming government looks set to repeal this legislation and commence working on its own replacement to the RMA. Local authorities will likely be operating under the RMA for the foreseeable future.

12.     We have identified a number of national policy statements that require changes to be made to the City Plan. Giving effect to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development is well underway with the progression of PC33. Future plan changes are required to give effect to National Policy Statements on Freshwater, Indigenous Biodiversity and Highly Productive Land. These changes are not urgent and do not need to be made for at least two years. They may also be subject to further amendment. 

13.     We are awaiting the formation of a government and its policy agenda to determine whether it will have any impact on our plan change work programme, including possible change to the MDRS which could affect PC33 and changes to National Policy Statements.

CURRENT AND Committed projects

14.     The following table shows plan change work that Council has underway or has otherwise committed to through a Committee resolution.  This includes Private Plan changes that are being prepared.

Project

Overview

Comments

Plan Change 27 (Flooding from Intense Rainfall)

Planning framework to reduce risk from flooding.

Currently at appeals stage assume will take until end of 2024 to complete

Plan Change 33 (Enabling Housing Supply)

Rezoning and provisions to implement the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act.

Recommendation from Independent Hearings Panel expected in March 2024 with TCC decisions soon thereafter

Tauriko West

Structure planning and rezoning to provide for urban development of Tauriko West

Anticipating notification early 2024.  Working to complete Plan Change by 30 June 2025. 

Keenan Road

Structure planning and rezoning to provide for urban development of Keenan Rd

Anticipate 2-3 year process to complete Plan Change

Tauriko Business Estate extension

Structure planning and rezoning to provide for industrial development of the lower Belk Road area

Private Plan Change lodged with Council. Assessing further information requirements. Anticipate a Council report in early 2024 to accept or reject the private plan change. If accepted, public notification will follow. Anticipate 2 years to complete Plan Change (assuming no appeals)

Belk Road rural residential

To incorporate an area of existing rural residential housing adjacent to the TBE extension into the City Plan (currently in the WBOP District Plan)

Anticipate notifying Plan Change alongside TBE extension Plan Change.  Relatively small plan change

Te Tumu

Structure planning and rezoning to provide for urban development of Te Tumu

Review of project underway with reporting to 11 December Council meeting. Focus on key risks and challenges over coming 12 months.  Significant technical work to update and complete.  Timeframes require more consideration and will be influenced by progress on key issues. Unlikely that Plan Change could be notified ahead of 2026.

Ohauiti South

Structure planning and rezoning to provide for urban development of Tauriko West

Private Plan Change lodged with Council. Some challenges in achieving alignment with MDRS requirements.  Assessing further information requirements. Anticipate a Council report in early 2024 to accept or reject the private plan change. If accepted, public notification will follow. At least 2 years of work from now.

Poteriwhi

Structure planning and rezoning to provide for housing development on part of this TCC owned land in Bethlehem

Structure planning work commencing will take at least 12 months. Likely to take 3 years to complete Plan Change.  Considering consenting pathways.  RMA consent under City Plan challenging and uncertainty with new consenting process under RM reforms (including likely repeal of RM reforms)

 

15.     A common theme in recent years with a number of the above projects has been significant delay. For example:

(a)     Residential intensification was delayed by around two years by the RMA Amendments that requires TCC to introduce the MDRS and give effect to Policy 3 of the NPS-UD. This required TCC to withdraw Plan Change 26 - Housing Choice and notify PC33.

(b)     Tauriko West and Te Tumu have been delayed for a variety of reasons especially government policy changes (eg freshwater).

(c)     Both TCC and private plan changes have faced a range of challenges with stormwater and flood risk management.

16.     As a result of these delays both FTE and financial resource remains allocated to projects that we previously envisaged would be much further advanced, if not complete. This affects the extent to which additional Plan Change work programme can be sustainably resourced within existing staff numbers and planning budgets. 

POTENTIAL PROJECT - Commercial and industial land

17.     Plan Change 33 and the greenfield structure planning and rezoning projects rightly place a large focus on housing supply which is an acute issue for the City. There is however limited focus on the resource management issues associated with commercial and industrial land in the City. 

18.     Based on our assessment of priorities we recommend that work should commence on a comprehensive plan change to review the commercial and industrial zones and associated provisions in the City Plan, including the hierarchy of commercial centres. This would be a significant plan change covering existing and potentially new commercial and industrial land across the City. There are a number of key drivers for this work including:

(a)     The lack of clear commercial hierarchy in the current City Plan;

(b)     Issues raised by representatives of a number of commercial centres around current City Plan provisions;

(c)     The lack of alignment of the City Plan with the National Planning Standard commercial and industrial zones;

(d)     Provisions within the City Plan that are no longer fit for purpose for development in the commercial and industrial zones, such as transportation;

(e)     The need to better address effects between industrial zones and adjoining or nearby more sensitive zones, including outcomes from the Mount Industrial Planning Study.

19.     A project of this scale alongside the existing work programme is likely to utilise the full amount of resources in the team, leaving limited resources for other new projects. We would however still look to progress other matters which are ongoing within the existing work programme. Some of this would not involve the need to change to City Plan and some may require future plan changes. This includes a range of work with Tangata Whenua in respect of matters such as papakainga, Significant Māori Areas and viewshafts.

Strategic / Statutory Context

20.     A comprehensive review of commercial and industrial components of the City Plan aligns with the Connected Centres philosophy from the Urban From & Transport Initiative and has clear links across the four well-beings (economic, social, cultural and environment).

Options Analysis

21.     The recommended option is to initiate a plan change to comprehensively review the commercial and industrial zones and provisions in the City Plan. 

22.     Alternatively, there may be other resource management matters that the Committee wishes to focus on in respect of the City Plan. 

Financial Considerations

23.     There are no financial considerations associated with this report. The cost associated with the work programme are anticipated to be met within existing budgets.  Further detailed project planning will allow budget requirements to be firmed up.  If additional funding is required this will be reported to the Committee or Council as appropriate.

Legal Implications / Risks

24.     All plan changes will be prepared to meet the legislative requirements under Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

25.     Each plan change process has a risk register that is revisited on a regular basis. Key risks identified across the work programme are:

(a)     Plan change scope increasing and resource being insufficient.

(b)     Meeting community, tangata whenua and stakeholder expectations.

Consultation / Engagement

26.     Consultation and engagement through a number of projects and forums has identified the need for a review of the commercial and industrial provisions in the City Plan.

27.     Communications and engagement plans are prepared for tangata whenua, key stakeholders and the wider community for all plan changes.

Significance

28.     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.

29.     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.

(c)   the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.

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

ENGAGEMENT

31.     Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the decision is of medium significance, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to Council making a decision.  Engagement will occur through the development of the plan change and submissions can be made on a plan change once publicly notified.

Next Steps

32.     Should the Committee endorse the recommendation to proceed with a comprehensive commercial and industrial plan change a further scoping report would be brought to the Committee early in 2024.

Attachments

Nil

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.8         Review of policies on grants for development contributions on Papakāinga Housing and Community Housing

File Number:           A14982548

Author:                    Sharon Herbst, Policy Analyst

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

 

Purpose of the Report

1.       To consider amendments to the Grants for Development Contributions on Papakāinga Housing Policy and Grants for Development Contributions on Community Housing Policy.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Review of policies on grants for development contributions on Papakāinga Housing and Community Housing".

(b)     Makes the following amendments to the Grants for Development Contributions on Papakāinga Housing Policy:

(i)      update the policy to reflect the recent decision to extend the allocation of $500,000 per annum for a further three years to 2027. This will include amendments for consistency in the definitions of the Grant Fund for Community Funding, the Grant Fund for Papakāinga Housing, and clause 5.1.1.

(ii)     update the policy from an annual review to a three-yearly review. This will include amendments for consistency in the review date/process box on page one, and clause 5.5.1 and 5.5.2.

(c)     Make the following amendments to the Grants for Development Contributions on Community Housing Policy:

(i)      update the policy to reflect the recent decision to extend the allocation of $500,000 per annum for a further three years to 2027 This will include amendments for consistency in the definitions of the Grant Fund for Community Funding, and the Grant Fund for Papakāinga Housing, and clause 5.1.1.

(ii)     update the policy from an annual review to a three-yearly review. This will include amendments for consistency in the review date/process box on page one, and clause 5.5.1 and 5.5.2.

(iii)     update the definition of a registered community housing provider to include that the Community Housing Regulatory Authority requires the community housing provider to “either retain ownership of the community housing, or to oversee tenancy management for the duration of their Income-Related Rent Subsidy agreement.”

(iv)    update clause 2.2 to include leasehold home ownership schemes, so that it reads “community housing developed and owned by, or on land leased from, registered community housing providers (registered CHPs) and accredited transitional housing providers.”

(d)     Adopt the revised policies included as Attachment 3 and 4 in this report and delegate authority to the General Manager: Strategy, Growth and Governance for any minor tidy ups prior to publication.

 

 

Executive Summary

2.       As part of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan, funded from the proceeds of the Elder Housing portfolio sale, Council established two housing grant funds of $500,000 each per year for three years: the Community Housing Grant Fund and the Papakāinga Housing Grant Fund.

3.       In October 2021, two policies were adopted to set out a structured and transparent approach to the distribution of the grant funds. The policies are required to be reviewed annually, with this report being the second review. In both reviews, significant engagement resulted in very minimal changes, and it is recommended that the policies be reviewed again in three years.

4.       On Monday 14 August 2023, Council decided how to reinvest proceeds from the sale of the elder housing villages and approved a further allocation of $3 million for the community housing and papakāinga housing funds ($500,000 per fund per year for three more years, to 30 June 2027.

5.       Working with recipients and potential recipients of the grant funds, staff have reviewed the policies and made recommendations for amendments.  A summary of consultation feedback is available in Attachment 1. Direction is sought from the committee before the amended policies are adopted and implemented. 

Background

6.       The Community Housing Grant Fund is to assist registered community housing providers to increase and retain the stock of community housing in Tauranga city by fully or partially subsidising citywide development contributions (DCs). The Papakāinga Housing Grant Fund is to reduce the financial burden of DCs on papakāinga housing developed for the benefit of shareholders and/or beneficial owners of Māori land.

7.       The Grants for Development Contributions on Community Housing Policy (the community housing policy) and the Grants for Development Contributions on Papakāinga Housing Policy (the papakāinga housing policy) were adopted in October 2021.

8.       The policies were reviewed in late 2022 and a few minor changes were recommended along with unused funds for both policies rolling over after the three-year timeframe has passed. These changes were adopted at the 14 November 2022 Committee meeting.

9.       This is the second review of both these policies and provides recommendations on potential amendments.

Review of the papakāinga housing policy

10.     The papakāinga housing policy distributes grants on a first in, first served basis, where eligible developments have their DCs paid directly by the council at the time they fall due.  This is done through in-house council transfer processes at the time building consents are approved.

11.     A total of $223,333.91 has been distributed so far. A detailed summary is available in Attachment 2. While this is only a fraction of the fund, we note that a number of papakāinga developments are underway and due to be completed in the next three years (60 at Kaitemako, 15 at Hangarau and 17 at Te Reti Views), which would calculate to around $1.8 million in DCs. In the years following, another 270 homes in Kaitemako are planned, and if realised, would be approximately $5.4 million in DCs.

12.     Overall feedback showed that the grant is easy to apply for and is a crucial part of helping local Māori Land Trusts realise their papakāinga aspirations, alongside substantial support from the contracted papakāinga kaiarahi and the city planning team. The main issues were that delays in building may be causing a lack of uptake of the fund, concerns about the long-term sustainability of the fund, and suggestions to widen the criteria to support early stages of building, bringing unconsented homes up to standard, or including Papakāinga type housing built on general title land. A summary of feedback is available in Attachment 1.

 

Review of the community housing policy

13.     The community housing policy outlines a grant fund distribution process that occurs at the end of the financial year. Eligible developments receive a retrospective grant on a pro-rata basis according to the dollar value of citywide development contributions paid during the previous year.

14.     A total of $505,636.00 has been distributed so far. A detailed summary is available in Attachment 2. With only a third of the fund distributed at this stage we do note that four registered community housing providers (CHPs) and one transitional housing provider have confirmed 30 dwellings are being completed this year and will be eligible for the grant for the 2023/24 year (approximately $600,000), and 257 dwellings are being planned in the coming years, with an estimated total of around $5.14 million in DCs for these future dwellings. If all of these occur the demand will be greater than the whole of the fund.

15.     Feedback showed an appreciation for the fund. Issues were raised around inclusion of progressive home ownership and transitional housing. There were also concerns about the long-term sustainability of the fund, the definition of a registered Community Housing Provider, including other models of progressive home ownership, the treatment of GST, having several rounds per year, and whether the grant should be retrospective or first in first served. A summary of feedback is available in Attachment 1.

Strategic / Statutory Context

16.     The City Vision adopted by Council and developed in conjunction with the community outlines our collective vision for the city. ‘Tauranga, together we can’ captures the vision for a collaborative approach to realising a city that ‘prioritises nature’, ‘lifts each other up’, and ‘fuels possibility’.

17.     Housing supply across all sectors-of-need is a significant issue in Tauranga that impacts on our ability to deliver the city vision. Through the Long-Term Plan 2021-31 process, it was recognised that reducing the cost of developing new community and papakāinga housing by subsidising development contribution fees was a priority action that Council could take to assist these sectors.

18.     The TCC Community Funding Policy has recently been updated and adopted. The changes suggested in this paper align with that policy. It should be noted that if a CHP receives DC Grant funding for a particular development, then they can't also apply for and receive a community grant for the same development.

Options Analysis

19.     One issue raised through consultation that applied to both of the grant funds was that the short-term, three-year, nature of the grant funds may make it hard for potential developers to commit to building as the grant fund may not be available when they are ready to build. We were asked whether the committee could consider extending the grant fund past the three years or focus on a different strategy to support housing in Tauranga but note that these types of decisions need to be made as part of our Long-Term Plan process and are outside the scope of this review.  

​Papakāinga Housing Policy issues and options 

20.     As only a small portion of the fund has been allocated to date, feedback often focused on that and suggested: 

·    expanding the scope of the policy to include other costs to better utilise the grant. 

·    increasing the eligibility criteria to allocating some of the grant to support with the resource consent process and/or infrastructure costs to help prepare the land for building, or to help bring existing unconsented homes up to standard.  

·    include papakāinga type housing being developed for the benefit of Māori whānau, but on general title land.

21.     As noted above, only a small proportion of the fund has been allocated, however there are a number of potential developments in the pipeline, which would use up the fund over the coming years if all are realised.

22.     ​ Table One: Options for Papakāinga Housing Policy 

​ 

​Option 

​Advantages 

​Disadvantages 

​1A 

​Update the policy to reflect the recent decision to extend the allocation of $500,000 per annum for a further three years to 2027 

​(Recommended

·    ​Consistent with recent Council decision 

·    ​Provides continued funding through the policy 

·    ​Doesn’t address the desire for longer-term certainty around the fund 

1B

Change the policy from an annual review to a three yearly review

(Recommended)

·    Significant engagement in two annual reviews have shown the policy is working well and only minimal changes were needed

 

​1C

​Only citywide DCs are included in the policy  

​(Status quo) 

(Recommended

·    ​Maintains the status quo that was decided when the policy was developed

·    Meets industry expectations set by current policy 

·    ​Does not acknowledge the initial challenge of getting the land ready for building 

​1D

​Expand the scope of the policy 

​(Not recommended) 

·    ​Acknowledges the challenges in getting the land ready for building 

·    ​Could address potential health and safety issues by providing support for unconsented houses to be brought up to standard 

·    ​Supports innovative papakāinga housing being built to provide opportunities for local Māori whānau with no connection to local Māori land 

·    ​Recognises that some general title land may be used for housing whānau (i.e. papakāinga housing) 

·    ​Moves away from the purpose of the policy to reduce the financial burden of DCs 

·    While only a small portion of the fund has been used to date there is work underway that anticipates using the entire fund

·    ​Bringing unconsented houses up to standard doesn’t add to housing stock 

·    ​Does not acknowledge that building on Māori land is more challenging compared to general land 

·    ​Potential risk that the fund is all spent and individual whānau building on Māori land with more inherent challenges may miss out due to larger developments on general land 

 

 

 

Community Housing Policy issues and options 

 

​Considerations of the purpose, scope and community housing definition 

 

23.     Like the fund for papakāinga, the high balance of the community housing fund still waiting for distribution attracted feedback in the form of possible issues with the definitions and eligibility criteria. As noted above, there are a number of potential developments in the pipeline which are likely to use or exceed the fund in the coming years. 

24.     The Community Housing Regulatory Authority noted that some CHPs do not retain ownership of community housing, but at least oversee the tenancy management for the duration of their Income-Related Rent Subsidy agreement, which is longer term (20-25 years). This is inconsistent with the explanation of registered community housing providers in our current policy definition. We recommend updating this definition for consistency.  

​Clarifying the Eligibility of Progressive Home Ownership Schemes 

 

25.     Progressive home ownership schemes may be eligible for DC grants from our community housing policy.  

26.     The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development provides three definitions of progressive home ownership: rent-to-buy, shared equity, and leasehold. The first two result in freehold home ownership, the latter does not.  

27.     The current wording of clause 2.2 in our community housing policy supports the first two models, but not the third. It could be argued that the third is most in line with the purpose of the policy as it maintains ownership of the land with a CHP who are able to generate ground rent which can feed back into further community housing projects. 

28.     As an example, Manawa Community Housing Trust have sourced funding from Ministry of Housing and Urban Development for a leasehold model, which provides progressive home ownership via long-term lease. The CHP owns and leases the land, and the whānau own the house, raising the loan themselves, with the help of a $100,000 interest free subsidy from the CHP to use as a deposit (sourced from Ministry of Housing and Urban Development Progressive Home Ownership Fund). So technically, the CHP never ‘own’ the house and so it does not fit into the current policy definition.  

29.     Amending clause 2.2 so that it includes leasehold home ownership schemes could address this issue.  

​Identified issues with grant process 

 

30.     Stakeholders identified issues they experienced with the funding process and made suggestions to: 

·    Change to a first in first served model for these grants too, however, the current intent of splitting the fund pro-rata ensures that the fund will be distributed more fairly across eligible dwellings, and not just to those who built their dwellings first. When the policy was developed, the majority of CHPs favoured the retrospective application process. 

·    Introduce multiple funding rounds per year, rather than only one, to help ease cashflow slightly. Currently, the lag between paying for a DC, waiting for the dwelling to be built, and then waiting for the annual funding round could be 12-24 months. A bi-annual or quarterly funding round splitting the fund evenly across each round could help to speed up payments, whilst still maintaining a pro-rata approach. However, this may reduce the fairness of the fund.

 

31.     Following investigation of these suggestions, we do not recommend making any of the changes suggested to the grant process.

 

 

Treatment of GST

32.     One CHP raised a concern about the treatment of GST. The CHP is not GST registered as landlords cannot claim GST for landlord expenses. Currently, because the grant is retrospective, GST is initially paid as part of the DC and is passed on to the IRD. If the CHP is not GST registered, then when the grant is paid, the GST portion is not refunded. This effectively leaves the CHP out-of-pocket as the full amount of the DC paid is not covered by the grant. It was suggested by the CHP that either the full GST inclusive amount is refunded, or the discount is applied when the DC is paid (i.e. First in first served model). The GST issue was not raised by a small local CHP, but by a larger corporate charity, who last financial year made a net profit of $52 million and had accumulated funds in excess of a quarter of a billion dollars.

33.     Changing to a first in first served model is not recommended to address this issue. If the Committee decides to cover the full GST inclusive amount for non-GST registered applicants, a clause to this effect can be added to the funding allocation process at 5.3.1. A potential clause is included in Attachment 4.

34.     Table Two: Options for Community Housing Policy 

​ 

​Option 

​Advantages 

​Disadvantages 

​2A 

​Update the policy to reflect the recent decision to extend the allocation of $500,000 per annum for a further three years to 2027 

​(Recommended

·    ​Consistent with recent Council decision 

·    ​Provides continued funding through the policy 

·    ​Doesn’t address the desire for longer-term certainty around the fund 

2B

Change the policy from an annual review to a three yearly review

(Recommended)

·    Significant engagement in two annual reviews have shown the policy is working well and only minimal changes were needed

 

​2C 

​Make no changes to the purpose, scope and definition of community housing  

​(Status quo) 

·    ​Maintains a consistent approach 

·    ​Does not address the issues raised about the policy wording 

​2D 

​Update the definition of a registered community housing provider to include that Community Housing Regulatory Authority requires the CHP to “either retain ownership of the community housing, or to oversee tenancy management for the duration of their Income-Related Rent Subsidy agreement.”  

​(Recommended

·    ​Ensures our definition matches what is required to be registered by the Community Housing Regulatory Authority 

​2E

​Update clause 2.2 so that it includes leasehold home ownership schemes, so that it reads “community housing developed and owned by, or on land leased from, registered community housing providers (registered CHPs) and accredited transitional housing providers.”

​(Recommended

·    ​Supports more Ministry of Housing and Urban Development schemes as it also recognises progressive home ownerships schemes  

·    Consistent with the intention of the policy

 

​2F 

​Review the principles and processes of the policy to change it: 

1.   ​to a first in first served model 

2.   ​to biannual grants rounds 

 

​(not recommended) 

·    ​Could address issues with feasibility planning with the uncertainty and delayed payment in the current model 

​ 

·    ​Does not follow the overall principle of the policy that was agreed at the start about fairness and equity across CHPs so they wouldn’t be competing against each other 

·    ​May reduce the fairness and equity of the grant fund 

2G

Only provide a grant to the equivalent value of the DCs paid (i.e. GST Exclusive)

(Status quo)

·    A clean and simple approach that is consistent for all grants

·    Non-GST registered applicants are out-of-pocket as they do not receive back the GST portion paid

2H

Where an applicant has indicated they are not GST registered, allow grants to cover the GST-inclusive value of DCs paid.

·    Ensures that the DC transactions are cost neutral for all applicants

·    Supports the policy principle of ‘fairness and equity’

·    Increased administrative complexity for staff

·    Perception that council money is being used to fund central government tax

·    Different approaches for different applicants

·    Less money available for other applicants

​ 

35.     The draft policies in Attachments 3 and 4 show tracked changes based on the recommendations above. Should the Committee adopt other options, the appropriate clauses would need to be amended, with delegated authority to the General Manager Strategy, Growth & Governance to approve the final wording of the policy.

Financial Considerations

36.     Funding of $500,000 per annum (for three years) was provided through the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 process, and a further three years approved at an August 2023 Council meeting. Other than staff time to assess and process the distribution of grant funds, there are no further costs associated with the development and application of the distribution policy.

Legal Implications / Risks

37.     There are no known legal or risk implications of amending the policies as recommended.

 

Consultation / Engagement

38.     The substantive decision to create the new grant fund was made, and consulted on, as part of the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 development process.

39.     The draft policies relate solely to the distribution (eligibility, application, assessment and approval) processes for the new grant fund.  As there are only a small number of potential recipients for the grant funds, council staff worked directly with those parties to review the distribution policy to ensure it continued to best meet the intended purpose of the grant fund.

40.     As noted in paragraph 5, a range of organisations in our community have been contacted regarding the policies. A list of those organisations and a summary of their responses is provided as Attachment 1.

41.     As the affected parties have had the opportunity to input to the policy review process, and as the substantive decision to implement the grant funds was made as part of the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 process, staff consider that no further public consultation on the draft policies is required.

Significance

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.  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.

(c)   the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.

44.     In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter of the policies is of medium significance, however the decision proposed in this report to amend the policies is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

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

Next Steps

46.     If the Committee agrees to the minor amendments to the policies, stakeholders involved in the review of the policies will be informed of Council’s decision and the adoption of the policies. The updated policies will be published on Council’s website. Internal processes and communication will continue to be developed to raise awareness and enable simple implementation of the policies.

47.     If the Committee requests further consideration of issues, these will be considered and brought back to the next committee meeting.

Attachments

1.       Summary of Consultation for Papakainga and Community Housing - A15321073

2.       Summary of Grant Allocations For Papakainga and Community Housing - A15321072

3.       Draft Grants for DCs on Papakainga Housing Policy 2023 PDF - A15321074

4.       Draft Grants for DCs on Community Housing Policy 2023 PDF - A15321075  


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 




Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 



Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 









Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 







 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.9         Deliberations Report on the Street Use Policy

File Number:           A15182941

Author:                    Vicky Grant-Ussher, Policy Analyst

Authoriser:             Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

 

Purpose of the Report

1.      To provide analysis of the submissions received on the draft Street Use Policy and provide the draft Street Use Policy for adoption.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Deliberations Report on the Street Use Policy".

(b)     Approves the following direction be confirmed in the attached consolidated Street Use Policy:

(i)      zoned dining charges for street dining

(ii)     zoned dining charges for balcony dining at 75 percent of the street dining rate

(iii)     smoke-free and vape-free requirement for new licences or leases for street dining

(iv)    prohibit the use of artificial grass on berms.

(c)     Adopts draft Street Use Policy (Attachment One) to take effect on 1 March 2023.

(d)     Delegates to the General Manager: Infrastructure authority to make any necessary minor drafting or presentation amendments to the consolidated Street Use Policy, prior to it taking effect.

 

 

Executive Summary

2.       From 4 October to 4 November 2023, we consulted on the draft Street Use Policy (policy), focussing on the changes for street and balcony dining, smoke and vape free requirements and prohibiting the use of artificial grass on berms.

3.       There were mixed views on charging for street and balcony dining, many people felt it was fair to charge when businesses were profiting from the use of public space, however others felt street dining was a benefit to the city and expressed concerns about the ability of businesses to cover these costs, especially in the short-term. The need to phase in any changes carefully to ensure they do not impact the vibrancy of the city was a theme that ran through submissions.

4.       There was more support from submitters for proposals to prohibit the use of artificial grass on berms and for street dining to be smoke and vape free. However, businesses did raise concerns about the impact on their business, and opposition to further regulation. Some submitters thought that a time limited smoke and vape free policy may by better. Having a different approach to different times of the day may address some of the concerns around the safety of patrons leaving premises to smoke or vape at night. 


 

Background

5.       Currently the council has four street related policies from the early 2000s[9] that primarily deal with the leasing, licencing, or use of street spaces. On 7 August 2023, the committee agreed to update and consolidate these policies into one street use policy with further policy decisions being made at the 18 September committee meeting.

6.       The committee agreed to include in the updated policy:

·    new policy principles

·    eligibility criteria for a temporary reduction in street dining fees 

·    zoned dining charges for street dining and balcony dining (at 75 percent of the street dining rate)

·    prohibiting the use of artificial grass on berms

·    smoke-free and vape-free requirements for new licences or leases for street dining

·    changes to compliance requirements affecting application fees, bonds, and rules for verandas and design features

·    a reference to street dining aesthetics and design guidelines in the policy

·    information on vehicle crossing relocations in the policy.

 

7.       From 4 October 2023 to 4 November 2023, we consulted with the community on the updated draft policy, focussing submissions on the changes for street and balcony dining, smoke and vape free requirements and prohibiting artificial grass on berms.

8.       The consultation was advertised on the council website, social media, public notice, and through the Tauranga Toolbox[10]. Hardcopies of the consultation material were also available at Customer Services at He Puna Manawa and all our libraries, as well as the Mount Hub. Members from the policy team were available to answer question from submitters during the consultation process. The consultation was carried out in line with the Local Government Act 2002 and the council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

9.       We received 321 written submission and four submitters spoke to the committee about their submission at the hearings (a summary of submissions is provided in Attachment Two).

Strategic / Statutory Context

10.     The City Vision adopted by Council and developed in conjunction with the community outlines our collective vision for the city. ‘Tauranga, together we can’ captures the vision for a collaborative approach to realising a city that ‘prioritises nature’, ‘lifts each other up’, and ‘fuels possibility’.

11.     The vision and strategic framework inform the council’s plans and policies, which guide the implementation of these higher-level strategies in council’s day-to-day activities. It is therefore important that council’s approach to street use is aligned with the council’s strategic direction. More specifically, the policies for how streets can be used by businesses and the community should deliver public benefits through easy movement and accessibility and provide inclusive, diverse, and vibrant spaces.

Options Analysis

Street dining charges

12.     The original rationale for charging for street dining in certain parts of the central city was due to the investment in road upgrades. When streets in the central city were upgraded, the local businesses agreed that this would result in a charge to occupy the location.

13.     At present businesses on The Strand and Wharf Street pay approximately $100-$160 per square metre per annum to use the street, depending on their location. These fees are currently subject to an 80 percent reduction, until 1 June 2024, due to the disruption during the city centre redevelopment. Elsewhere in the city, such as in Mount Maunganui, businesses still benefit from the use of highly valuable council land but are not required to pay.

14.     Figure One: Total current revenue from street dining licences to occupy the street

 

Businesses in Wharf Street, the Strand, Red Square

Businesses in the rest of Tauranga

Without temporary fee reduction

Approximately $90,000 total p.a. or $3,000 per business

$0

With temporary fee reduction (80% reduction in place until 1 July 2024)

Approximately $18,000 total p.a. or approximately $700 per business

$0

 

15.     Other councils have a range of different ways of charging for street dining from allowing it for free, small charges or market-based fees as outlined in Figure Two below.

16.     Figure Two: Street dining charges

Region

Permit fee

Variable charge

Auckland

$401 one-off

Inner-city zones $154 p/sqm Inner-city suburbs $93 p/sqm

other areas $21 p/sqm

Wellington

First permit $190

Annual renewals $95

None

Hamilton

$90 one-off

Per table fee $27 annually

Palmerston North

None

None

Queenstown

$640 one-off

$200 p/sqm premium to $70 p/sqm standard

 

17.     With the significant growth in the city and the development of multiple retail and hospitality centres, the draft policy proposed phasing in more consistent charging for street and balcony dining across the city centre and Mount Maunganui. The proposed option grouped popular areas into zones with a set fee per square metre in that zone, with that fee set within council’s users fees and charges based on the average commercial value of the zone.

18.     Views on charging were mixed with 48 percent of submitters disagreeing or strongly disagreeing compared with 42 percent agreeing or strongly agreeing with the proposal.

19.     Key reasons given for disagreeing with the proposal included views that:

·    street dining should be encouraged due to the vibrancy it brings to the city

·    commercial charges would impact the viability of businesses noting the effects of covid, roadworks and cost of living have reduced their ability to absorb costs

·    charges would flow through as costs to customers

·    preference to not impose rules or regulation

·    not enough clarity on what the fee would be

·    the use of the pavement or airspace had little impact on residents and should be freely provided, particularly so for balcony dining

·    commercial rates should be sufficient contribution.

20.     Key reasons given for agreeing with the proposal included views that:

·    those using public space for financial benefit should be charged

·    street dining can be an inconvenience for other street users

·    the funds raised could be reinvested in public spaces

·    street dining is encroaching too much into the pedestrian’s way.

Table One: Options for street dining charges[11]

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Financial impacts

Option One

(Status Quo)

·    Commercial value rental charge where the street has been upgraded

·    one-off application fee

·    Rest of the city free

·    Asset bond if fixtures are in pavement

·    Helps recoup the costs of the initial council investment in pedestrianising The Strand, Wharf Street and Red Square

·    There is a return for ratepayers on use of land in selected places

·    Charges relate to benefits businesses receive from council upgrades

·    Incentivises the provision of street dining in areas where no fees are charged

·    Market value includes the underlying value of the land (not just the council funded improvements), but businesses not on the Strand or Willow Street are not charged for the unimproved land value so are treated differently

·    Inequitable costs continue for city businesses already struggling with disruption

·    Due to disruption, businesses are not in a position to repay investments

Receive approx. $90,000 from licence fees annually.  However only $18,000 per annum received currently whilst 80% reduction is in place due to disruption

 

Option Two:

(As consulted on)

·    Rate per sqm rental charge depending on zone, based on the average commercial value in the zone phased in over time

·    One-off application fee

·    Asset bond if fixtures are in pavement

Recommended

·    Return for ratepayer on use of land

·    Provides consistency across popular areas within the city and with other commercial users of council land (eg, mobile shops, events) who are required to pay for the use of public land

·    Zone charging is easier to administer than charges based on individual valuations

·    Highly transparent for businesses

·    Requiring permits would provide a mechanism to enforce other conditions such as accessibility and appearance

·    Street space may be less utilised which may impact on vibrancy, safety, and community

·    Does not recognise different values within zones

·    Increased costs for hospitality businesses which may result in increased costs to customers or impact their viability

·    Requires one-off administrative resource to issue licences to occupy in new areas

Likely to result in an increase in ordinary revenue over time due to additional businesses being required to pay fees

Some individual businesses in prime sites within a zone may pay less than in Option One. 

Option Three:

·    No rental charge for street dining

·    No application fee

·    Request mainstreet associations to report on progress to improve accessibility and look of street dining in their areas

·    Asset bond if fixtures are in pavement

·    Reflects the community benefit of street dining and may increase take up of street dining adding to the vibrancy of the city

·    Avoids administrative costs to issue the licence agreement

·    Helps incentivise street and balcony dining

·    No costs for hospitality businesses

·    Consistent approach across the city

·    Allows businesses flexibility to address accessibility and attractiveness concerns

·    No return for ratepayers on use of land and loss of existing revenue

·    Does not provide revenue to reinvest in public spaces

·    Inconsistent with other commercial users of council land (eg, mobile shops, events) who are required to pay for the use of public land

Reduction in current revenue by $18,000 annually, (or $90,000 if disregarding the temporary reduction in fees)

Option Four:

·    No rental charge for street dining

·    Annual application fee

·    Asset bond if fixtures are in pavement

·    Reflects the community benefit of street dining and may increase take up of street dining adding to the vibrancy of the city

·    Lower cost helps to incentivise street and balcony dining

·    Allows other conditions to be included in licence agreements such as accessibility requirements

·    Consistent approach across the city

·    Likely to result in high administrative costs relative to the return on spaces

·    Limited return for ratepayers on use of land and likely loss of existing revenue

Assuming the charge only covers the cost of issuing the permit, there would be a reduction in current revenue by $18,000 annually, (or $90,000 if disregarding the temporary reduction in fees)

 

Balcony dining

21.     A few submitters noted feedback on the proposal to charge for balcony dining. With all noting that this charge seemed unnecessary given the balcony did not impinge on the use of the street. Hospitality New Zealand and Downtown Tauranga opposed the change noting that any charge for balconies would not be absorbed by the property owner but instead passed on to the tenant. They particularly opposed the charge applying to existing balcony leases.


 

Table Two: Balcony dining options

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option One: Status Quo,

·    Balcony dining rental charge free unless more than 50 percent of dining capacity

·    Application fee

·    No asset bond

·    Increases the appeal of creating some balcony dining 

·    Incentivises balcony spaces which are less obstructive to the pedestrian way

·    Could create inconsistency with other street dining fees in future

·    Difficult to monitor the table limit requirement

Option Two:

(As consulted on)

·    Rental charge for balcony dining at 75 percent of relevant street dining charge

·    Application fee

·    Asset bond

Recommended

·    More consistent with other approaches to council land where commercial benefit from council land is charged with discount to reflect that balcony dining is less intrusive than street dining

·    Charges would align with street dining charges and increase as the value of the space increases over time

·    Provides a partial return to ratepayers on council asset (airspace)

·    Property owners may already be charging tenants for using these spaces and additional costs may be passed on to tenants and through to diners

·    Does not reflect full commercial value of balcony dining

·    Percentage charge may be perceived as arbitrary

·    Costs may be passed on to tenants, and through to diners

 

Option Three:

·    Free rental charge for balcony dining

·    Application fee

·    Asset bond

·    Increases the appeal of creating some balcony dining 

·    Incentivises balcony spaces which are less obstructive to the pedestrian way

·    Would reduce risk of costs being passed on to tenants, and through to diners

·    Would likely be a subsidy for property owners who may still charge tenants for the use of the balcony

 

Phasing in street and balcony dining charges when appropriate

22.     If the recommended Option Two Is agreed to by the committee in Table 1 and/or Table 2, there will need to be a process to transition businesses to the new licencing and charging approach. Changes to fees can be increased incrementally on an annual basis depending on the context at the time. The fees will be set through user fees and charges and subject to public consultation on the proposed amount.

23.     The proposed key principles guiding the transitional approach (provided in the 18 September committee meeting report) were:

·    flexibility to respond to the economic context at the time

·    phased increases

·    linking timing to community amenity value add.

24.     There was a lot of support for the phasing in of any charge, with many submitters noting the difficult business conditions in the CBD and cost of living challenges. Some mentioned the need to allow time for businesses to recover and become more profitable first before introducing the charges. Some submitters noted that if additional fees were charged, this would need to be recouped through increased prices which then would make eating out even less appealing given the cost of living pressures at present.

25.     We have clarified in the policy that until any new fees are set through the user fees and charges, that a case-by-case fee assessment[12] will apply to any new licences or licence renewals in the areas of the city required to have a licence to occupy at present.

Smoke and vape free public dining spaces

26.     Most submitters agreed or strongly agreed with making street dining smoke and vape free (75 percent). Some submitters (19 percent) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the proposal. Some submitters noted there was a different tolerance depending on the time of day and that smoking and vaping may be more tolerated in the nightlife context, these submitters supported daytime restrictions only. Because licences to occupy are reviewed annually, a change would be transitioned in as licences came up for review, or as new licences were applied for.

27.     Some submitters noted a need for greater clarity in the policy as what would be expected from businesses in terms of implementing a smoke and vape free policy. As part of the consultation, we were looking for feedback on what would need to be considered as part of implementing the policy. Key concerns raised by businesses were if council were to revoke a licence if patrons smoked or vaped, however they noted even an educational approach still took time for staff to implement.

28.     Wellington City Council, who adopted a smoke-free policy for street dining in 2022, expects businesses to display smokefree messaging and not provide ashtrays for smoking dining. Street dining design guidance for businesses is being developed which could include information on any smoke and vape free signage options available to businesses.

29.     Key reasons given for supporting the proposal included:

·    a preference for dining in smoke and vape free places

·    concern about the impacts of second-hand smoke or vaping on health, particularly for children and those with health conditions.

30.     Key reasons given for disagreeing with the proposal included:

·    reduction in dining by those who smoke or vape (as on-street dining areas are often the only possible location for patrons to smoke or vape)

·    difficult to implement

·    preference to not impose rules or regulation

·    concerns if licences were removed if patrons smoked or vaped

·    displacing smokers or vapers to less appropriate areas (for example without ashtrays or outside the perimeter of the premises).


 

31.     Table Three: Smoke-free and/or vape-free requirements for street dining on council land

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option One: Do not include smoke-free and/or vape-free requirement for new licences or leases for street dining but provide information to businesses on available smokefree signage through the street dining design guidance

·    Ensures smokers and vapers are not moved to less safe locations, or locations without appropriate waste options

·    Ensures equity between existing lease and licence holders and new applicants in the short-term

·    Does not increase regulation on businesses

·    Provides a connection to source smoke and vape free signage for those businesses that want to be smoke or vape free

·    Does not support smoke-free Aotearoa 2025 community goals and attitudes

·    Does not provide a more pleasant street environment

Option Two:

(As consulted on)

Include smoke-free and/or vape-free requirement for new licences or leases for street dining

Clarifying that this would involve displaying smoke and vape free signage and removing ashtrays

Recommended

·    Supports smoke-free Aotearoa 2025 community goals and attitudes towards smoking

·    Provides a more pleasant street environment

·    Supported by most submitters and feedback suggests it would enhance the dining experience for non-smokers

·    Requires resource to monitor

·    May result in unintended consequences such as moving smokers and vapers to less safe locations, or locations without appropriate waste options

·    Would create different requirements on new businesses and existing lease and licence holders in the short-term

Option Three: Include smoke-free and/or vape-free requirement for new licences or leases for street dining for the period from 5am – 8pm

Clarifying that this would involve displaying smoke and vape free signage and removing ashtrays during this time period

 

·    Reduces the visibility of smoking and vaping when children are most likely to be in public spaces

·    Reduces safety related concerns should smokers or vapers need to leave premises at night

·    Likely to cover the main period when people will be dining outside which would enhance the dining experience for non-smokers

·    Requires resources to enforce during the day

·    Does not fully support smoke-free community goals and attitudes

·    May impact commercially on new businesses creating unfairness between existing lease and licence holders and new applicants in the short-term

 


 

Prohibiting artificial grass on berms

32.     Most submitters agreed or strongly agreed with banning artificial grass from berms (57 percent). Some submitters (24 percent) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the proposal.

33.     Key reasons given for supporting the proposal included:

·    the environmental benefits

·    helping stormwater management.

34.     Key reasons given for disagreeing with the proposal included:

·    not considering the issue a problem

·    a preference to not impose rules on berm use, particularly if the council is not willing to maintain the berm for residents

·    a preference for the look of low maintenance aspects of artificial grass, particularly for holiday homes.

35.     Clarifying the council position in the policy means that future requests for artificial grass on berms will be declined, and property owners given information on alternative options to maintain berms (such as gardening assistance through the Ministry of Social Development or low maintenance planting options)[13].

36.     Table Four: Artificial grass

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option One: Do not include position on artificial grass in the policy

·    Allows discretion for staff to consider requests for artificial grass on a case-by-case basis

·    Community is often unaware that artificial grass is not generally allowed

·    Does not raise awareness in the community of the reasons for not allowing artificial grass

Option Two:

(As consulted on)

Include position in the policy that clarifies that artificial grass will not be permitted for berms.

Recommended

·    Provides clarity for all staff, contractors and the community that artificial grass is not allowed on berms

·    Provides an opportunity to raise awareness in the community of the reasons for not allowing artificial grass

·    Most submitters supported a ban on artificial grass

·    Reduces discretion for staff to consider requests for artificial grass on a case-by-case basis

 


 

Other matters

37.     Some submitters mentioned signs and merchandise displays in the street in their submissions. One submitter was concerned that they may be charged for their merchandise display. We have added a section to the policy to clarify that signs and merchandise displays in accordance with the Street Use and Public Places Bylaw are permitted.

Financial Considerations

38.     The street dining changes financial impacts are set out in Table One. Changes to charge for balcony dining may result in a small increase in revenue over time as new leases are requested. However, given the small number of balconies constructed to date this revenue is not expected to be significant. 

39.     The transitional arrangements for street dining are expected to result in an increase in revenue for street and balcony dining once fully implemented. The charge for each zone will be set through the user fees and charges process and exact revenue would depend on the set charge and the number of businesses wanting to have street dining. 

Legal Implications / Risks

40.     To implement changes to charge street dining zones and balcony dining zones would require a resolution of Council, under the Street Use and Public Places Bylaw.

Significance

41.     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.

42.     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 issue.

(c)   the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.

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

ENGAGEMENT

44.     Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the issue is of medium significance, and the fact that community consultation has just occurred, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to the committee making decisions.

Next Steps

45.     Following the adoption of the draft Street Use Policy we will update the website with the final policy and notify stakeholders and businesses of the change. The policy will take effect on 1 March 2023.

46.     Changes to charging for street dining and balcony dining, would be considered at the next update to the council users fees and charges in 2024 for inclusion in the 2025 Annual Plan. The proposed fees would be phased in, as set out in paragraph 23 of this paper.

Attachments

1.       Draft Street Use Policy - A15312888 (Separate Attachments 1)  

2.       Summary of submissions - A15313958 (Separate Attachments 1)   


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.10       Deliberations Report for Traffic and Parking Bylaw

File Number:           A15182935

Author:                    Vicky Grant-Ussher, Policy Analyst

Authoriser:             Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

 

Purpose of the Report

1.      To provide analysis of the submissions received on the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw and seek approval to recommend to Council the adoption of the draft bylaw.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Deliberations Report for Traffic and Parking Bylaw".

(b)     Notes that work is underway to address mobility parking concerns in the city centre

(c)     Agrees to the following updates to the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2012:

(i)      clarifying that secondary vehicle crossings require written council approval

(ii)     introducing a registered parking category to better monitor time-limited parking

(iii)     incorporating drafting changes to the bylaw to clarify that council may issue approval through electronic permits

(iv)    removing redundant provisions now covered under relevant legislation to reflect legislative updates since the last review, correcting an omission and editorial changes to improve clarity.

(d)     Recommends to Council:

(i)      the adoption of the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2023 (Attachment One), pursuant to section 145 of the Local Government Act and section 22AB of the Land Transport Act to be bought into force on 20 December 2023

(ii)     to resolve that, in accordance with section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002, the proposed draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw is the most appropriate and proportionate way of addressing the perceived problem and does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

(iii)     to delegate to the General Manager Infrastructure, the authority to make any minor edits or presentation amendments to the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2023 to correct any identified errors or typographical edits, before the bylaw comes into force.

 

 

Executive Summary

2.       The Traffic and Parking Bylaw (the bylaw) is due for review under the Local Government Act 2002. An analysis of the bylaw[14] showed the bylaw enables a responsive approach to traffic and parking issues in Tauranga. Several changes are recommended to:

·        futureproof the bylaw by refreshing legislative references

·        better monitor free time-limited parking through requiring people to register for free time-limited parking

·        clarify that secondary vehicle crossings require council permission.

3.       Feedback from 317 submissions showed support for clarifications for secondary vehicle crossings. A verbal submitter wanted the council to consider how the bylaw could better support the monitoring of the use of mobility parking. Most submitters did not support the proposal for registration of free time-limited parking. Concerns related to the difficulty of registering, the potential for fines, the view that change is not required and concerns about the privacy of information collected.

4.       Given the bylaw will be in force for ten years, we still recommend continuing with the proposal to include registered parking as a potential monitoring tool. However, any use of registered parking, which may be brought in by a Council resolution, would need to be carefully considered and implemented to address potential issues.

5.       On 16 October 2023, the Council agreed to changes to the bylaw to allow electronic permits for residents’ parking to support the roll out of parking management changes in the city centre in 2024. The draft bylaw has been updated to incorporate this change.

Background

6.       The bylaw sets the requirements for control of traffic and parking in respect of roads, parking places and transport stations owned or controlled by Tauranga City Council. The bylaw is one of several legal instruments that supports the council in its role as a road controlling authority.

7.       The bylaw is made under both the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Land Transport Act 1998 (LTA). The LGA provides a bylaw making power to address nuisances, protect, promote, or maintain public health and safety and/or minimise the potential for offensive behaviour in public places. The LTA provides a bylaw making power to regulate road-related matters and, unlike the LGA, allows for enforcement through infringement fines in addition to prosecution.

8.       The bylaw allows Council to set provisions by resolution. For example, the bylaw gives Council the power to specify which roads are one way only, but the specific roads would be decided by Council resolution. This allows council to change specific decisions quickly without the need for a full bylaw review.

9.       We spoke to council regulatory staff, transportation staff, asset services staff, legal staff, utility companies and parking experts in other councils as part of reviewing the effectiveness of the current bylaw.

Strategic / Statutory Context

10.     Tauranga City Council is committed to sustainability as a core way of how we work. Traffic and parking management can help influence and enable more sustainable transport choices, for example through regulating what types of vehicles and activities can use roads and carparks. Council adopted a Parking Strategy in 2021 and is in the process of developing more detailed parking management plans for Tauranga, with a finalised plan for the city centre already adopted and a plan for Mount Maunganui under development. Traffic and parking management also contributes to achieving the community outcome Tauranga Ara Rau, a city we can move around easily.

 

11.     The bylaw helps give effect to these strategies and plans through setting traffic and parking rules and enabling their enforcement. The bylaw enables many traffic and parking rules to be implemented, as needed, by Council resolution.


 

Options Analysis

Vehicle crossings

12.     A vehicle crossing is the section of driveway from the front of the property boundary to the roadway. As the landowner of the road corridor, the council requires property owners to apply for a secondary vehicle crossing. Because road berms are public land and primarily for public use, the council will assess secondary vehicle crossing requests to ensure they are warranted and will not negatively impact the streetscape or pedestrian way. Currently, we receive around 10-20 applications for secondary crossings at residential properties and 40-60 for industrial or commercial properties.

13.     The policy position on secondary vehicle crossings was previously outlined in a vehicle crossing policy. However, this policy was rescinded on adoption of the Infrastructure Development Code, as many of the matters it contained are now included in the code, except for secondary vehicle crossings. As this is not stated formally in any policy or bylaw, many community members are not aware of this requirement, creating unnecessary confusion.

14.     The draft bylaw proposed to clarify that secondary vehicle crossings require written council permission. Most submitters supported this approach (59 percent agreeing or strongly agreeing) with only a minority disagreeing (20 percent disagreed or strongly disagreed).

Figure One: Secondary vehicle crossing responses

15.     Key reasons given for supporting the change include:

·    the impacts second driveways can have on on-street parking spaces

·    the need to consider situations on a case-by-case basis to ensure the right outcome

·    the impacts secondary crossings may have on safety of pedestrians and other road users.

16.     Key reasons given for opposing the change include:

·    increased compliance and potential costs

·    a view that property owners should have the choice of what to do with the berm in front of their property

·    the ability of secondary driveways to reduce demand for on-street parking.


 

Table One: Clarifying the need for secondary vehicle crossings to have written council permission

 

Option

Advantages

Disadvantage

Option One: Status Quo - no statement in bylaw on secondary vehicle crossing.

·    None.

·    Is unclear for the community what the council position is on secondary crossings.

·    Options for enforcement are more complex.

Option Two: Amend the bylaw to clarify that any secondary vehicle crossing requires written council permission.

 

Recommended

·    Clarifies council’s position on secondary crossings.

·    Supported by majority of submitters (59 percent).

·    Provides a clear enforcement avenue should people install unpermitted vehicle crossings.

·    None.

 

Monitoring Parking and Mobility

17.     At the hearings on 13 November 2023, a submitter noted concerns with the availability of mobility parking in the City Centre. The parking team are working on a City Centre Accessibility Assessment to look for ways to improve mobility across the city centre. This work includes how to manage availability of mobility parking through the city centre redevelopment and the suitability of mobility parks.

18.     The submitter specifically requested the council consider how the bylaw could better support the electronic monitoring of the use of mobility parking spaces. The submitter noted Queenstown as an example, noting their use of CCTV footage to enforce their bylaw.

19.     We have reviewed the draft bylaw, and we believe the draft bylaw is fit for purpose to support future enforcement options for mobility parking. The draft bylaw itself includes a power for the Council by resolution to require users of mobility parks to display an approved permit or be approved by the council to use the space. This drafting allows for the visual monitoring of permits through CCTV but would also enable council to approve the use of mobility parking by electronic permit holders should these become available in future.

20.     For the avoidance of doubt, we have included some additional drafting clarifications to clause 3.6 of the bylaw, to specify that an electronic permit is acceptable as evidence of council approval.

Registered Parking

21.     Different categories of parking are used to promote different outcomes across the city. For example, paid parking uses price to manage demand, whereas time-limited free parking is used to create a turnover of parking spaces. Parking Management Plans are used to determine the mix of parking places required in specific areas to meet the objectives of the Parking Strategy. The bylaw is used to formalise these parking rules and enable the enforcement of breaches of the rules through infringement fines.

22.     At present time-limited parking is monitored manually. Regulation monitoring staff must undertake ongoing visual checks of parking spaces to ensure people comply with the time limit. We proposed adding to the bylaw an ability to require people to enter their plate number to access free parking. This would support the use of parking enforcement technology to monitor time limits. It would also enable options such as supporting incremental parking charging where an initial period is free, but then a charge would apply after a certain period.

23.     Submitters had mixed views on this proposal, but most did not agree (46 percent disagreed or strongly disagreed) compared with 42 percent who agreed or strongly agreed with the proposal.

Figure Two: Registered Parking responses

24.     Key reasons for agreeing with the proposed change include:

·    improving the availability of carparks

·    avoiding the need to use paid parking in areas

·    reducing the cost of enforcement.

25.     Key reasons given for opposing the change include:

·    extra difficulty for people when parking, concerns particularly around parents or those with mobility issues, and the availability of parking machines

·    having no issue with the current method of monitoring time-limited parks

·    concern about increase in fines and belief that the change is related to revenue gathering

·    concerns that it would impact employment for parking wardens

·    concerns around information collection.

26.     It was noted at the 6 July 2023 Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee that any requirement for registration of free parking would need to be supported by a range of measures including a significant communications exercise, comprehensive on-street signage, and technology and infrastructure. Feedback from the consultation reinforced that the introduction and implementation of this requirement would need to be considered carefully. Given the bylaw is in force for 10 years we recommend continuing with the proposal to include registered parking in the bylaw as a potential monitoring tool.

Table Three: Registered parking provisions in the bylaw

 

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option One: Status Quo - do not include an ability to require people to register at a parking machine in the bylaw.

·    Does not require people to register at a machine for time-limited parking.

·    Difficult to monitor the use of any time-limited free parking provisions because of reliance on visual checking by regulation monitoring staff.

·    May limit the use of time-limited free parking provisions due to monitoring issues.

Option Two: Amend the bylaw to include a new ability to determine by resolution, areas in which people are required to register for parking.

Recommended

·    The use of time-limited free parking can be easily monitored.

·    Helps ensure parking spaces are used as intended to achieve parking outcomes.

·    Potential for confusion if people are not aware they need to register – (this can be minimised by an effective communication programme).

·    Would require people to register at a machine for time limited parking.

 

Legislative refresh

27.     Since the bylaw review in 2012, several legislative instruments have been updated which means that some matters no longer need to be covered in the bylaw. We recommend removing the redundant provisions and refreshing wording to better align with the updated legislation. Redundant provisions are marked in the bylaw with a strike-out (Attachment One), with many relating to removing sign, marking and speed limit provisions now covered by Land Transport Rules.  

28.     In reviewing the bylaw, we also identified an omission in clause 27.4 of the bylaw which aims to stop people moving between free time restricted carparks with a 50m distance of each other. The clause as read currently would apply to all carparks across the city, not just timed carparks. To correct this omission the drafting of the bylaw has been updated to clarify this restriction only applies to time restricted car parks.

Table Four: Updating bylaw provisions to account for legislative changes

 

Option

Advantages

Disadvantage

Option One: Status Quo – no update of provisions.

·    None.

·    Retains redundant provisions.

·    Applies reparking provisions more widely than intended.

Option Two: Amend bylaw to update redundant provisions to account for legislative changes and correct the omission in clause 27.4 of the bylaw

Recommended

·    Removes redundant provisions from the bylaw.

·    Ensures clause 27.4 only restricts reparking in time-limited parks within a 50m distance as intended.

·    None

 


 

Other matters

29.     Feedback received through the consultation related to parking concerns outside of the proposed changes to the bylaw including:

·    concerns that paid parking would be introduced in Mount Maunganui

·    concerns relating to paid parking in the city centre

·    improvements for other modes of transport such as busing, cycling or walking to reduce the need for carparks

·    desire for more on street carparking to be created.

30.     This feedback has been provided to the Parking Manager for their information.

Financial Considerations

31.     There are no financial implications from the changes to the proposed bylaw. However, the use of registered parking would require resources to support implementation as discussed in paragraph 26. The use of registered parking may reduce manual monitoring costs.

Legal Implications / Risks

32.     The bylaw is outside of the ten-year statutory review period. Under the LGA, if a revised bylaw is not adopted by October 2024 (two years after the ten-year limit is reached) the current bylaw will expire. Until reviewed (or October 2024 whichever is the earlier) the current bylaw remains operable and enforceable.

33.     In reviewing the bylaw, staff conducted the review as required by Section 155 of the LGA (Attachment Two) and confirmed the bylaw is still required to ensure the safety and efficiency of the transport system and that the draft bylaw is the most appropriate form of the bylaw.

34.     The proposed changes to the bylaw are considered reasonable and proportionate to the issues raised and therefore in alignment with the Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Significance

35.     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.

36.     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 issue

(c)   the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.

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

ENGAGEMENT

38.     Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the issue is of medium significance, and the fact that community consultation has just occurred, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to Council making a decision.

39.     The drafting changes to clarify that council approval may be an electronic permit and to correct the drafting of the clause on reparking are considered of low significance. This is because these are a clarification and correction only. The proposed change is also in keeping with themes of the consultation in which we noted we were futureproofing the bylaw to enabling the electronic monitoring and enforcement of other bylaw provisions. Given this assessment staff consider there is no requirement to consult further.

Next Steps

40.     If the committee approve the recommended changes to the bylaw, we will provide the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw to the 11 December Council meeting for adoption and the bylaw will come into force on 20 December 2023.

41.     In accordance with the LGA Council will give public notice of the bylaw and when it will take effect. In accordance with the LTA we will provide a copy of the bylaw to the Minister of Transport within a week of approval of the bylaw.

Attachments

1.       Draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw - A15318526 (Separate Attachments 1)  

2.       Section 155 analysis of Traffic and Parking Bylaw - A15318531 (Separate Attachments 1)   

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.11       Deliberations Report - Gambling Venues Policy

File Number:           A15187064

Author:                    Jennifer Ross, Policy Analyst

Nigel McGlone, Manager: Environmental Regulation

Authoriser:             Sarah Omundsen, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

 

Purpose of the Report

1.      To provide analysis of the submissions received on the draft Gambling Venues Policy and recommend adoption of the final policy.

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report "Deliberations Report - Gambling Venues Policy".

(b)     Agrees to amend the Gambling Venues Policy to:

(i)      allow gambling venues to relocate to alternative premises for any reason as long as the alternative premises are in a commercial or industrial zone identified in the Tauranga City Plan, that is more than 100 metres from residential zones with a deprivation index of 9 or 10, measured on the NZ Index of Deprivation – section 5.4

(ii)     add a requirement to include the proximity of relocated venues to sensitive locations such as schools, marae and places of worship when considering the granting of a consent to relocate a venue - section 5.4

(iii)     remove the out-of-date city maps (currently in Schedule 1) and refer to online maps on the council website instead – section 5.4

(iv)    make minor clarifications and updates to text.

(c)     Adopts the updated Gambling Venues Policy (Attachment One).

(d)     Delegates to the General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance the authority to make minor editorial or presentation changes to the draft policy for correction or clarity.

 

 

Executive Summary

2.       On 18 September 2023, the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee (committee) approved a proposed change to the relocation criteria in the council’s Gambling Venues Policy (policy) to allow existing gambling venues to move away from areas where people live, into areas likely to cause less community harm, along with some other minor amendments to update the policy, for community consultation.

3.       250 submissions were received from 4 October to 4 November 2023 and on Monday 13 November five of the submitters were heard by the committee.

4.       A majority of submitters supported the proposed change with 75 percent agreeing or strongly agreeing with it. Fourteen percent of submitters did not support changing the current restrictive criteria for relocating gambling venues.

Background

5.       Tauranga City Council’s Gambling Venues Policy aims to maintain the community benefit of gambling venues while limiting gambling harm. This is achieved by restricting the number and location of gambling venues in the city and when and where they may relocate.

6.       On 27 March 2023, the committee requested a review of the relocation criteria in the policy as gambling venues were only able to relocate in circumstances where it was not possible to continue operating in their existing premises. This review also provided an opportunity to refresh the policy, updating references to current data, legislation, and organisations.

7.       Formal public consultation on the proposed change took place from 4 October to 4 November, and the public were specifically asked whether they agreed or not with the proposal to:

(a)     allow venues to relocate to alternative premises for any reason, even if they could continue to operate in their current premises, and

(b)     to restrict venues wishing to relocate to premises in a commercial or industrial zone identified in the Tauranga City Plan, that is more than 100 metres from residential zones of high-deprivation, as measured on the NZDep 2018 or subsequent indexes (current rules specify the NZDep 2013 index which has been superseded).

8.       All submitters supported minimising gambling harm, but they had different views on how to achieve that.

9.       At the hearings on 13 November the committee requested further information on some points raised by submitters (see Attachment Two for details). This included information on making the use of the NZDep Index zones consistent between this policy and the Local Alcohol Policy (refering to the index ratings of 9 and 10).

Strategic / Statutory Context

10.     The City Vision adopted by Council and developed in conjunction with the community outlines our collective vision for the city. ‘Tauranga, together we can’ captures the vision for a collaborative approach to realising a city that ‘prioritises nature’, ‘lifts each other up’, and ‘fuels possibility’.

11.     The vision and strategic framework inform the council’s plans and policies, which guide the implementation of these higher-level strategies in council’s day-to-day activities. It is important that council’s approach to the relocation of gambling venues is aligned with the council’s strategic direction. More specifically, the Gambling Venues Policy should deliver an approach to managing the number and locations of gambling venues that seeks to achieve a city that is inclusive, safe, resilient and healthy, and is well planned with successful and thriving communities. This will involve balancing the competing needs in our community for the community benefit of gambling venues and the grants they provide, while limiting gambling harm.

Options Analysis

12.     Most submitters supported the proposed change (83 agreeing and 103 strongly agreeing) with only a minority disagreeing (10 disagreed and 26 strongly disagreed).

13.     Key reasons for supporting the proposed change:

·    venue location can be used as a harm minimisation tool

·    our city has changed since gambling venues were established and some places are no longer suitable for them

·    opportunity to locate gambling venues in more suitable buildings

·    consistent with the stated intention of the Māori Party’s Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill that, in 2013, inserted the relocation policy requirement into the Gambling Act 2003

·    gambling venues are not often closing, so it could take a long time under the current policy to remove gambling harm from areas they would no longer be permitted to locate to. Allowing relocation to different areas may be a faster method to remove gambling venues from areas they are likely to do more harm in.

14.     Key reasons for opposing the proposed change:

·    preference for greater restrictions to reduce the number of gambling venues to zero

·    moving venues is unlikely to have a substantive impact on gambling harm

·    reduces the efficacy of the sinking lid on gambling venues

·    new locations for gambling venues could bring gambling harm to different communities.

15.     Submitters also questioned whether relocations could be considered on a case-by-case basis to address the risk of venues clustering or being located in proximity to more sensitive locations, for example, schools, kura, places of worship and marae. Section 101 of the Gambling Act 2003 supports this consideration and includes the location of community facilities as a relevant matter that may be considered by councils.


 

16.     Table One: Relocation Criteria Options

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option One: Status quo, venues can relocate only under limited circumstances.

·    Retains an effective sinking lid to reduce the number of gambling venues and gambling harm associated with gaming machines in our city over time.

·    Still provides for existing venues to relocate and clubs to merge if the required circumstances are met.

·    As relocation remains limited, it is more difficult for venues to move away from areas of high deprivation.

·    Over time the number of gambling venues may decrease and reduce the amount of funding available to community organisations and projects (though has not been the case in the four years since these relocation criteria were introduced).

Option Two:

Amend the relocation criteria to allow gambling venues to relocate to alternative premises for any reason as long as the alternative premises are in a commercial or industrial zone identified in the Tauranga City Plan, that is more than 100 metres from residential zones of high-deprivation

 

 

·    Supported by the majority of submitters (75%).

·    Increases the ability for existing venues to relocate, allowing them to move if they want to, out of areas of high deprivation, potentially reducing gambling harm.

·    Gambling venues could be relocated to new growth areas of the city.

·    Provides opportunities for people who wish to gamble on gaming machines to continue to do so, although these opportunities may still decrease over time as no new venue consents will be granted.

·    May reduce the closing of gaming venues and support the continuation of funding available to community organisations and projects

·    Reduces the effectiveness of the sinking lid policy that seeks to reduce gambling harm from gaming machines.

·    Venues could become clustered together within the permitted areas and associated social problems may arise.

 

Option Three:

Amend the relocation criteria to allow gambling venues to relocate to alternative premises for any reason as long as the alternative premises are in a commercial or industrial zone identified in the Tauranga City Plan, that is more than 100 metres from residential zones of high-deprivation AND include criteria to consider the proximity of the proposed premises to other gambling venues and sensitive locations.

 

recommended

·    Similar to the option supported by the majority of submitters (75%).

·    Increases the ability for existing venues to relocate, allowing them to move if they want to, out of areas of high deprivation, potentially reducing gambling harm.

·    Gambling venues could be relocated to new growth areas of the city.

·    Provides opportunities for people who wish to gamble on gaming machines to continue to do so, although these opportunities may still decrease over time as no new venue consents will be granted.

·    May reduce the closing of gaming venues and support the continuation of funding available to community organisations and projects.

·    Addresses concerns raised by submitters about forming clusters of gambling venues and proximity to other sensitive community facilities.

·    Applications can still be processed in the 30 working days required by the Gambling Act 2003.

·    Reduces the effectiveness of the sinking lid policy that seeks to reduce gambling harm from gaming machines.

 

·    Requires some additional time and resources to analyse the proximity of proposed premises to sensitive locations.

Option Four:

Amend the relocation criteria to not allow any relocation of venues.

·    Increases the effectiveness of the sinking lid policy, reduces gambling venues and gambling harm associated with gaming machines in our city over a shorter time.

·    Responds to concerns of the submitters who would like to see an end to gaming machine gambling in our city.

·    Gambling venues remain in current locations, including those venues close to areas of high social deprivation.

·    Over time the number of gambling venues will decrease, reducing the amount of funding available to community organisations and projects.

Option Five:

Amend the policy to provide consent to the relocation of venues by resolution on a case-by-case basis.

 

 

·    Provides opportunity for each proposed location to be considered in its specific context.

·    Responds to concerns from submitters about blanket criteria.

 

·    Extended timeframes for processing and decision making on each relocation of a venue.

·    Does not provide advanced guidance on locations that are likely to be considered suitable for relocated venues.

·    Requires additional time and resources to analyse and report on options for each application to relocate a venue.

·    May not be possible to process applications within the 30 working days required by the Gambling Act 2003.

 

 

Financial Considerations

17.     There are no financial implications from the proposed changes to the policy.

Legal Implications / Risks

18.     There is potential risk of a perceived conflict of interest with this amendment to the policy. This change will be favourable for the gaming machine owners, who act as grants organisations in our community when they distribute the proceeds from gambling. At times, council works directly with the grants organisations and brings them together to look at opportunities for them to fund projects in our communities, including council projects. While the contributions from the gaming organisations are small, members of the public may be concerned that funding is prioritised over protecting our communities from gambling harm. This risk has been, and will continue to be, managed through council’s regular and transparent finance and communications processes.

19.     The policy is required to be reviewed every three years. If the policy is not reviewed within the three-year time frame, the policy continues to be enforceable for a further two years. This review is in addition to the reviews required under the Gambling Act 2003 so the next review date will be a further three years following this review.

Significance

20.     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.

21.     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 proposal.

(c)   the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.

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

ENGAGEMENT

23.     Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the proposal is of medium significance, and that public consultation following the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 has already taken place, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to Council making a decision to adopt the revised Gambling Venues Policy.

Next Steps

24.     Depending on the decisions made by the committee, a revised Gambling Venues Policy could be adopted, or direction could be given to work on developing amendments to the policy.

25.     In accordance with the Gambling Act 2003, council will provide a copy of the adopted policy to the Secretary for Internal Affairs as soon as reasonably practicable after adoption.

26.     As required by the Gambling Act 2003, the next full review of the policy is planned for 2026.

Attachments

1.       Draft Gambling Venues Policy 2023 - A15342782 (Separate Attachments 1)  

2.       Addressing Points Raised in the Hearings Meeting - A15320594 (Separate Attachments 1)   

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

9.12       LGOIMA and Privacy Report Q1 for 2023/2024 year

File Number:           A15298590

Author:                    Darelle Howard, Administrator: Democracy Services

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

 

Purpose of the Report

1.       The purpose of this report is to update the Committee on Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) and Privacy requests for the first quarter of 2023/24

 

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a)     Receives the report “LGOIMA and Privacy Report Q1 for 2023/2024 year.

 

 

Executive Summary

2.       These reports are provided to the Committee to provide assurance on statutory compliance for LGOIMA and Privacy requests.

 

Attachments

1.       Q1 Report LGOIMA and Privacy requests - A15343485  

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 



   


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

10          Discussion of late items


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

11          Public excluded session

Resolution to exclude the public

Recommendations

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

11.1 - Corporate Risk Register - Quarterly Update

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)(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

11.2 - Internal Audit & Assurance - Quarterly Update

s6(b) - The making available of the information would be likely to endanger the safety of any person

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)(d) - The withholding of the information is necessary to avoid prejudice to measures protecting the health or safety of members of the public

s7(2)(g) - The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege

s7(2)(j) - The withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage

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

11.3 - Litigation Report

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)(g) - The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege

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

 

 

 

 

 

 


Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting Agenda

4 December 2023

 

12          Closing karakia



[1] https://infocouncil.tauranga.govt.nz/Open/2023/02/CO_20230227_AGN_2501_AT_WEB.htm

[2] BOPRC workshop paper is available at https://www.boprc.govt.nz/your-council/meetings-and-agendas/agendas-and-minutes

[3] Our Direction, adopted by Council on 12 December 2022, refer PDF, page 41, available at: https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/our-future/our-direction

[4] Vision for Tauranga: https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/our-future/our-direction/vision-for-tauranga

[5] Our Direction online: https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/our-future/our-direction 

[6] Council strategies and plans: https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/council/council-documents/strategies-and-plans

[7] Each year’s Annual Report provides the second six-monthly report on non-financial performance measures, so only one separate report is provided each financial year.

[8] At section 93B

[9] The lease of airspace above roads policy 2000, lease of subsoil below roads policy 2002, licences for occupation of road reserves and unformed road policy 1997 and the occupation of road berms for public parking and for planting on berms in front of private residences policy 2000.

[10] A council communication aimed at those working in the building industry.

[11] Note that street dining without any fixtures or fittings in the pavement would not attract an asset bond. If council approved fixtures were to be installed the bond would be set at a level that enabled the removal of the fixture and restoration of the pavement.

[12] based on market value but subject to any temporary fee reduction agreed by the council.

[13] Where council permission has been obtained for existing artificial grass berms these will be allowed to remain. Existing artificial grass berms without permission would be dealt with through the existing encroachment removal process and assessed against the priority rating and funding for encroachment removal.

[14] The Traffic and Parking Bylaw is available on the Tauranga City Council website at: https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/Portals/0/data/council/bylaws/files/traffic-and-parking-2012.pdf.