|
|
|
|
AGENDA
Ordinary Council meeting Monday, 14 July 2025 |
|
|
I hereby give notice that an Ordinary meeting of Council will be held on: |
|
|
Date: |
Monday, 14 July 2025 |
|
Time: |
9:30 AM |
|
Location: |
Tauranga City Council Chambers Level 1 - 90 Devonport Road 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 |
|
Membership
|
Mayor Mahé Drysdale |
|
|
Deputy Chair |
Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular |
|
Members |
Cr Hautapu Baker Cr Glen Crowther Cr Rick Curach Cr Steve Morris Cr Marten Rozeboom Cr Kevin Schuler Cr Rod Taylor Cr Hēmi Rolleston |
|
Quorum |
Half of the members present, where the number of members (including vacancies) is even; and a majority of the members present, where the number of members (including vacancies) is odd. |
|
Meeting frequency |
Three weekly or as required |
· To ensure the effective and efficient governance of the City.
· To enable leadership of the City including advocacy and facilitation on behalf of the community.
· To review and monitor the performance of the Chief Executive.
Scope
· Oversee the work of all committees and subcommittees.
· Exercise all non-delegable and non-delegated functions and powers of the Council.
· The powers Council is legally prohibited from delegating include:
○ Power to make a rate.
○ Power to make a bylaw.
○ Power to borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance with the long-term plan.
○ Power to adopt a long-term plan, annual plan, or annual report
○ Power to appoint a chief executive.
○ Power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the Local Government Act 2002 in association with the long-term plan or developed for the purpose of the local governance statement.
○ All final decisions required to be made by resolution of the territorial authority/Council pursuant to relevant legislation (for example: the approval of the City Plan or City Plan changes as per section 34A Resource Management Act 1991).
· Council has chosen not to delegate the following:
○ Power to compulsorily acquire land under the Public Works Act 1981.
· Make those decisions which are required by legislation to be made by resolution of the local authority.
· Authorise all expenditure not delegated to officers, Committees or other subordinate decision‑making bodies of Council.
· Make appointments of members to the council-controlled organisation Boards of Directors/Trustees and representatives of Council to external organisations.
· Undertake statutory duties in regard to Council-controlled organisations, including reviewing statements of intent, with the exception of the Local Government Funding Agency where such roles are delegated to the City Delivery Committee. (Note that monitoring of all Council-controlled organisations’ performance is undertaken by the City Delivery Committee. This also includes Priority One reporting.)
· Consider all matters related to Local Water Done Well.
· Consider any matters referred from any of the Standing or Special Committees, Joint Committees, Chief Executive or General Managers.
· Review and monitor the Chief Executive’s performance.
· Develop Long Term Plans and Annual Plans including hearings, deliberations and adoption.
Procedural matters
· Delegation of Council powers to Council’s committees and other subordinate decision-making bodies.
· Adoption of Standing Orders.
· Receipt of Joint Committee minutes.
· Approval of Special Orders.
· Employment of Chief Executive.
· Other Delegations of Council’s powers, duties and responsibilities.
Regulatory matters
Administration, monitoring and enforcement of all regulatory matters that have not otherwise been delegated or that are referred to Council for determination (by a committee, subordinate decision‑making body, Chief Executive or relevant General Manager).
|
14 July 2025 |
Order of Business
5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open
6 Change to the order of business
7.1 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 10 June 2025
7.2 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 26 June 2025
8 Declaration of conflicts of interest
9 Deputations, presentations, petitions
10 Recommendations from other committees
11.1 Netball Relocation to Baypark
11.2 Community Feedback on Speedway Proposals
11.3 City Centre Street Project - Public Engagement
11.4 Council-Controlled Organisations - Final Statements of Intent 2025/28
11.5 Transport Resolutions Report No.56
11.6 Remits to Local Government New Zealand
13.1 Public Excluded Minutes of the Council meeting held on 10 June 2025
13.2 Public Excluded Minutes of the Council meeting held on 26 June 2025
13.3 Clarification on CCO Board appointment
13.4 Bay of Plenty Housing Equity Fund - Appointment of members to the Board
1 Opening karakia
2 Apologies
5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open
6 Change to the order of business
|
14 July 2025 |
7 Confirmation of minutes
7.1 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 10 June 2025
File Number: A18427947
Author: Caroline Irvin, Governance Advisor
Authoriser: Clare Sullivan, Team Leader: Governance Services
|
That the Minutes of the Council meeting held on 10 June 2025 be confirmed as a true and correct record.
|
1. Minutes of the Council meeting held on 10 June 2025
|
10 June 2025 |
|
|
|
MINUTES Ordinary Council meeting Tuesday, 10 June 2025 |
Order of Business
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 the order of business
7 Confirmation of minutes
7.1 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 28 April 2025
7.2 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 8 May 2025
7.3 Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 9 May 2025. 4
8 Declaration of conflicts of interest
9 Deputations, presentations, petitions
Nil
10 Recommendations from other committees
10.1 Recommendation from Ngā Poutiriao o Mauao Appointment of Deputy Chair - Cr Hēmi Rolleston - Te Awanui Ward Councillor
10.2 Recommendation from Waiari Kaitiaki Advisory Group - Appointment of Co-Chair Councillor Hautapu Baker
11 Business
11.1 Status update on actions from prior Council meetings
11.2 Ratepayer Assistance Scheme (RAS)
11.3 2025/26 Annual Plan & Rates Impact Update Post Deliberations. 8
11.4 Membership of the 'Leading for Delivery Sub-Committee' of the SmartGrowth Leadership Group
12 Discussion of late items
13 Public excluded session
13.1 Public Excluded Minutes of the Council meeting held on 28 April 2025
13.2 Public Excluded Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 9 May 2025
13.3 Disposal Classification 2140L Kairua Road, Tauranga
13.4 Litigation Report
13.5 Public Art Framework
13.6 Appointment of Tangata Whenua Representative to SmartGrowth Leadership Group
Confidential Attachment 2 11.1 - Status update on actions from prior Council meetings
14 Closing karakia
MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council
Ordinary Council meeting
HELD AT THE Tauranga City Council Chambers, Level 1 - 90 Devonport Road, Tauranga
ON Tuesday, 10 June 2025 AT 9.30am
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Mayor Mahé Drysdale (Chair), Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular, Cr Hautapu Baker, Cr Glen Crowther, Cr Rick Curach, Cr Steve Morris, Cr Marten Rozeboom, Cr Kevin Schuler, Cr Rod Taylor, Cr Hēmi Rolleston |
|
IN ATTENDANCE: |
Paul Davidson (Chief Financial Officer), Barbara Dempsey (General Manager: Community Services), Jeremy Boase (Acting General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance), Frazer Smith (Manager: Strategic Finance & Growth), Jim Taylor (Manager: Rating Policy & Revenue), Kathryn Sharplin (Manager: Finance), Tracey Hughes (Financial Insights and Reporting Manager), Clare Sullivan (Team Leader: Governance Services), Caroline Irvin (Governance Advisor). |
Timestamps are included beside each of the items and relate to the recording of the meeting held on 10 June 2025 at Council Website.
Cr Hēmi Rolleston opened the meeting with a karakia
2 Apologies
Nil
Nil
Nil
5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open
Nil
6 Change to the order of business
Nil
|
Resolution CO/25/18/1 Moved: Cr Hautapu Baker Seconded: Cr Rod Taylor (a) That the Minutes of the Council meeting held on 28 April 2025 be confirmed as a true and correct record. Carried |
|
Resolution CO/25/18/2 Moved: Cr Rod Taylor Seconded: Cr Marten Rozeboom a) That the Minutes of the Council meeting held on 8 May 2025 be confirmed as a true and correct record. Carried |
|
7.3 Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 9 May 2025 |
|
Resolution CO/25/18/3 Moved: Cr Kevin Schuler Seconded: Cr Marten Rozeboom a) That the Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 9 May 2025 be confirmed as a true and correct record. Carried |
8 Declaration of conflicts of interest
Nil
9 Deputations, presentations, petitions
10 Recommendations from other committees
TIMESTAMP 4:51
|
Resolution CO/25/18/4 Moved: Cr Rick Curach Seconded: Cr Kevin Schuler That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Recommendation from Ngā Poutiriao o Mauao Appointment of Deputy Chair - Cr Hēmi Rolleston - Te Awanui Ward Councillor". (b) Appoints Councillor Hēmi Rolleston as the Deputy Chair for Ngā Poutiriao o Mauao.
For: Mayor Mahé Drysdale, Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular, Cr Hautapu Baker, Cr Glen Crowther, Cr Rick Curach, Cr Steve Morris, Cr Marten Rozeboom, Cr Kevin Schuler and Cr Rod Taylor Abstained: Cr Hēmi Rolleston Carried |
TIMESTAMP 7:34
|
Resolution CO/25/18/5 Moved: Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular Seconded: Cr Hēmi Rolleston That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Recommendation from Waiāri Kaitiaki Advisory Group - Appointment of Co-Chair Councillor Hautapu Baker". (b) Appoints Councillor Hautapu Baker as Co-chair for Waiāri Kaitiaki Advisory Group.
For: Mayor Mahé Drysdale, Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular, Cr Glen Crowther, Cr Rick Curach, Cr Steve Morris, Cr Marten Rozeboom, Cr Kevin Schuler, Cr Rod Taylor and Cr Hēmi Rolleston Abstained: Cr Hautapu Baker Carried |
TIMESTAMP 8:50
|
Staff: Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer
Action · That staff add the closed action lists to Stellar for Council and the committees. · That staff provide Councillors confirmation on what information on the Sale of Marine Precinct has been released and what hasn’t. |
|
Resolution CO/25/18/6 Moved: Cr Rod Taylor Seconded: Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Status update on actions from prior Council meetings". (b) Notes that this is a recurring report, which will be provided to every second Council meeting. (c) Notes any requested improvements for future iterations of this report. (d) Notes that Attachment 2 can be transferred into the open when the report that generated the action is no longer confidential. Carried |
TIMESTAMP 22:05
|
Staff: Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer Frazer Smith, Manager: Strategic Finance & Growth Jim Taylor, Manager: Rating Policy & Revenue
|
|
Recommendation Moved: Mayor Mahé Drysdale Seconded: Cr Rod Taylor That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Ratepayer Assistance Scheme (RAS)". (b) Approve $500,000 loan funding expenditure in the 2025/26 financial year to support final development of the RAS subject to total development funding $2.5 million (including Tauranga City Council's contribution) being committed from other local authorities and/ or central government; and (c) Notes that total RAS establishment capital is estimated at ~ $30 million and that Tauranga City Council's contribution of RAS equity could be up to ~ $6 million (the maximum investment available is 20 per cent of total capital to ensure off-balance sheet treatment), subject to final approval by the Governing Body. (d) Notes that total Tauranga City Council's funding contribution to date and any further final development funding will count as establishment capital in the event it chooses to participate in the establishment of the RAS. (e) Notes that this funding will be treated as an investment as it will only be paid once sufficient support has been obtained to complete the full $2.5 million funding requirement.
|
|
A MOTION WAS PROPOSED Moved: Cr Glen Crowther Seconded: Cr Rick Curach That the Council: (b) Amend recommendation (b) as follows: · Approve up to $250,000 loan funded expenditure in the 2025/26 financial year to support final development of the RAS subject to total development funding $2.5 million (including Tauranga City Council's contribution) being committed from other local authorities and/ or central government; and
For: Cr Glen Crowther and Cr Rick Curach Against: Mayor Mahé Drysdale, Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular, Cr Hautapu Baker, Cr Steve Morris, Cr Marten Rozeboom, Cr Kevin Schuler, Cr Rod Taylor and Cr Hēmi Rolleston lost
|
|
Resolution CO/25/18/7 Moved: Mayor Mahé Drysdale Seconded: Cr Rod Taylor That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Ratepayer Assistance Scheme (RAS)". (b) Approve $500,000 loan funding expenditure in the 2025/26 financial year to support final development of the RAS subject to total development funding $2.5 million (including Tauranga City Council's contribution) being committed from other local authorities and/ or central government; and (c) Note that total RAS establishment capital is estimated at ~ $30 million and that Tauranga City Council's contribution of RAS equity could be up to ~ $6 million (the maximum investment available is 20 per cent of total capital to ensure off-balance sheet treatment), subject to final approval by the Governing Body. (d) Note that total Tauranga City Council's funding contribution to date and any further final development funding will count as establishment capital in the event it chooses to participate in the establishment of the RAS. (e) Note that this funding will be treated as an investment as it will only be paid once sufficient support has been obtained to complete the full $2.5 million funding requirement. For: Mayor Mahé Drysdale, Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular, Cr Hautapu Baker, Cr Rick Curach, Cr Steve Morris, Cr Marten Rozeboom, Cr Kevin Schuler, Cr Rod Taylor and Cr Hēmi Rolleston Against: Cr Glen Crowther Carried |
|
Attachments 1 Ratepayer Assistant Scheme - Risk Assessment 2 Local Government Ratepayer Assistance Scheme |
TIMESTAMP 1:31:11
|
11.3 2025/26 Annual Plan & Rates Impact Update Post Deliberations |
|
Staff: Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer Kathryn Sharplin (Manager: Finance) Tracey Hughes (Financial Insights and Reporting Manager) Jim Taylor, Manager: Rating Policy & Revenue
|
|
Resolution CO/25/18/8 Moved: Mayor Mahé Drysdale Seconded: Cr Hautapu Baker That the Council: (a) Receives the report "2025/26 Annual Plan & Rates Impact Update Post Deliberations". (b) Notes the rating impact by category arising from the overall rates increase after growth of 9.9%, which will be incorporated in the Annual plan and rates resolution for adoption on 26 June 2025. Carried |
TIMESTAMP 1:50:14
|
11.4 Membership of the 'Leading for Delivery Sub-Committee' of the SmartGrowth Leadership Group |
|
Staff: Jeremy Boase, Acting General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance
|
|
Resolution CO/25/18/9 Moved: Cr Hautapu Baker Seconded: Cr Kevin Schuler That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Membership of the 'Leading for Delivery Sub-Committee' of the SmartGrowth Leadership Group". (b) Confirms the appointment of Mayor Mahé Drysdale as Council’s appointed member on the subcommittee, with Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular as the alternate.
For: Cr Hautapu Baker, Cr Glen Crowther, Cr Rick Curach, Cr Steve Morris, Cr Marten Rozeboom, Cr Kevin Schuler, Cr Rod Taylor and Cr Hēmi Rolleston Abstained: Mayor Mahé Drysdale and Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular Carried |
Nil
Resolution to exclude the public
|
Resolution CO/25/18/10 Moved: Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular Seconded: Cr Rod Taylor 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:
Carried |
At 11.20 the meeting was closed to the public.
The meeting was re-opened in public at 3.08 pm.
Cr Hēmi Rolleston closed the meeting with a karakia.
The meeting closed at 3.10pm.
The minutes of this meeting were confirmed as a true and correct record at the Ordinary Council meeting held on 26 June 2025.
...........................................................
Mayor Mahé Drysdale
CHAIR
|
14 July 2025 |
7.2 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 26 June 2025
File Number: A18482646
Author: Clare Sullivan, Team Leader: Governance Services
Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance
|
That the Minutes of the Council meeting held on 26 June 2025 be confirmed as a true and correct record.
|
1. Minutes of the Council meeting held on 26 June 2025
|
26 June 2025 |
|
|
|
MINUTES Ordinary Council meeting Thursday, 26 June 2025 |
Order of Business
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 the order of business
7 Confirmation of minutes
7.1 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 13 May 2025
7.2 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 26 May 2025
8 Declaration of conflicts of interest
9 Deputations, presentations, petitions
Nil
10 Recommendations from other committees
10.1 Wastewater Management Review Committee Appointment of Chair and Deputy Chair
11 Business
11.1 Annual Plan 2025/26 - Adoption Report
11.2 Rates Resolution 2025/2026
11.3 Development Contributions Policy 2025/26 - Adoption Report
12 Discussion of late items
13 Public excluded session
13.1 Public Excluded Minutes of the Council meeting held on 13 May 2025
13.2 Public Excluded Minutes of the Council meeting held on 26 May 2025
13.3 Board Appointments for Bay Venues Limited, Tauranga Art Gallery Trust and Tourism Bay of Plenty, and the appointment of a new Deputy Chair for Tourism Bay of Plenty
14 Closing karakia
MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council
Ordinary Council meeting
HELD AT THE Tauranga City Council Chambers, Level 1 - 90 Devonport Road, Tauranga
ON Thursday, 26 June 2025 AT 9:30 Adoption of Annual Plan
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Mayor Mahé Drysdale, Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular, Cr Hautapu Baker, Cr Glen Crowther, Cr Rick Curach, Cr Steve Morris, Cr Marten Rozeboom, Cr Kevin Schuler, Cr Rod Taylor, Cr Hēmi Rolleston |
|
IN ATTENDANCE: |
Marty Grenfell (Chief Executive), Paul Davidson (Chief Financial Officer), Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance), Gareth Wallis (General Manager: City Development & Partnerships), Clare Sullivan (Team Leader: Governance Services), Anahera Dinsdale (Governance Advisor), |
Timestamps are included beside each of the items and relate to the recordings of the public part of the meeting held on 26 June 2025: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQ-gwmHM-9E
Cr Rolleston opened the meeting with a karakia and acknowledged the passing of the Member of Parliament for the Tāmaki Makaurau electorate, Takutai Moana Natasha Kemp who died suddenly. He offered condolences on behalf of the council to her whanau and colleagues.
2 Apologies
Nil
Timestamp :4
|
3.1 Murray Guy |
|
Mr Guy spoke to the Council on the ability of the public to speak at Council meetings the issue of rates affordability. |
Timestamp: 10:55
|
3.2 Mark Kenyon-Slade |
|
Mark Keynon-Slade spoke on the increasing debt position of council and impact on the ratepayers of Tauranga
|
Timestamp: 17:
|
3.3 Jan Gyenge |
|
Jan Gyenge expressed concern about process of, in her view not the Council, not considering the total amount of operating expenditure.
|
Timestamp: 24:
|
3.4 Tim Maltby |
|
Tim Maltby asked Council to consider involving members of the community on the working group to consider council budgets. |
The Mayor noted that the Development Contributions Policy attachment was circulated on Wednesday.
5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open
Nil.
6 Change to the order of business
Nil.
Timestamp: 31:
|
Resolution CO/25/19/1 Moved: Cr Steve Morris Seconded: Cr Kevin Schuler That the Minutes of the Council meeting held on 13 May 2025 be confirmed as a true and correct record. Carried |
|
Resolution CO/25/19/2 Moved: Cr Rod Taylor Seconded: Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular That the Minutes of the Council meeting held on 26 May 2025 be confirmed as a true and correct record subject to the following corrections being made: Page 50 ARGOS Gym Sports - Delete resolution (i) Page 63 Local Water Done Well - amend record of vote for clause e) (iv) to show that only Cr Rozeboom voted against the amendment Page 67 Domain Road - Amend clause b) to reflect the years of the National Land Transport Programme to 2027 – 2030 Check that rec c) is on the list for follow-up Page 72 Amendment re public art - Amend the rate of percentage of capital value to .5% Carried |
8 Declaration of conflicts of interest
Nil
9 Deputations, presentations, petitions
10 Recommendations from other committees
Timestamp: 38
|
10.1 Wastewater Management Review Committee Appointment of Chair and Deputy Chair |
|
Resolution CO/25/19/3 Moved: Cr Rod Taylor Seconded: Cr Kevin Schuler That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Wastewater Management Review Committee Appointment of Chair and Deputy Chair". (b) Appoints Mr Spencer Webster (Ngā Pōtiki) as the Chair of the Wastewater Management Review Committee. (c) Notes that Councillor Rick Curach was appointed as Deputy Chair of the Wastewater Management Review Committee. Carried |
Timestamp: 40
|
Staff Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer Kathryn Sharplin, Manager: Finance Tracey Hughes, Financila Insights & Reporting Manager
|
|
Resolution CO/25/19/4 Moved: Mayor Mahé Drysdale Seconded: Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Annual Plan 2025/26 - Adoption Report". (b) Adopts the Annual Plan 2025/26 (Attachment 1). (c) Adopts the suggested amendments to the 2025/26 User Fees and Charges Schedule in paragraph 13 in relation to the six cemetery parks and crematorium fees being retained at 2024/25 fee for 2025/26. (d) Approves borrowing of $485m for the 2025/26 financial year in line with the approved Annual Plan debt levels. (e) Authorises the Chief Executive to make any necessary minor drafting or presentation amendments to the Annual Plan 2025/26 prior to final printing. Carried |
Timestamp: 1:23
|
Staff Paul Davidson, Chief Financial Officer Jim Taylor, Manager: Rating Policy & Revenue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Resolution CO/25/19/5 Moved: Cr Steve Morris Seconded: Cr Rick Curach That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Rates Resolution 2025/2026". (b) Sets the following rates under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Funding Impact Statement in the Annual Plan for the 2025/2026 rating year, on rating units in the city for the financial year commencing on 1 July 2025 and ending on 30 June 2026. The rates and charges specified are inclusive of Goods and Services Tax at the prevailing rate. I. General Rate A general rate set under section 13(2) (b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 at: · A rate of $ 0.00262181 in the dollar of capital value on all residential rateable rating units in the city. · A rate of $ 0.00590432 in the dollar of capital value on all commercial rateable rating units in the city. · A rate of $ 0.00710511 in the dollar of capital value on all industrial rateable rating units in the city.
(“residential”, “commercial” and “industrial” are as defined in the Funding Impact Statement). II. Uniform Annual General Charge A uniform annual general charge set under section 15(1)(b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 at: · A rate of $318.00 per separately used or inhabited part of a rateable rating unit.
III. Economic Development Rate A targeted rate for economic development in the city, set under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 at:
· A rate of $ 0.00035516 in the dollar of capital value on every commercial and industrial rateable rating unit (as defined in the Funding Impact Statement). IV. Stormwater Rate A targeted rate for stormwater infrastructure investment, set under section 16(3)(a) and 16(4) (b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 at: · A rate of $ 0.00000666 in the dollar of capital value on all residential rateable rating units in the city. · A rate of $ 0.00001066 in the dollar of capital value on all commercial or industrial rateable rating units in the city. V. Resilience Rate A targeted rate for resilience infrastructure investment in Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, Transportation and Emergency Management, set under section 16(3)(a) and 16(4) (b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 at: · A rate of $ 0.00001724 in the dollar of capital value on all residential rateable rating units in the city. · A rate of $ 0.00002759 in the dollar of capital value on all commercial or industrial rateable rating units in the city. VI. Urban Growth Rates Targeted rates for debt retirement for urban growth projects, set under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, at:
Three uniform targeted rates set on every rating unit at:
· A rate of $106.31 on each rateable rating unit located within an area of “Full benefit” as defined in the Funding Impact Statement. · A rate of $70.88 on each rateable rating unit located within an area of “Wide benefit” as defined in the Funding Impact Statement. · A rate of $35.44 on each rateable rating unit located within the city outside of the areas of “Full benefit” and “Wide benefit” as defined in the Funding Impact Statement. VII. Waste Collection Rate Uniform targeted rates for the kerbside waste collection services, set under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, on all rating units in the city as a fixed amount per separately used or inhabited part (SUIP) of a rating unit that is provided with the residential waste collection service as follows:
· A rate of $210 per low waste service capacity provided per residential SUIP. · A rate of $245 per standard waste service capacity provided per residential SUIP.
· A rate of $350 per high waste service capacity provided per residential SUIP. VIII. Garden Waste Rate (optional) Uniform targeted rates for garden waste collection services, set under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, on all rating units in the city used for residential purposes and that will be provided with the garden waste collection service, at: · A rate of $110 for each garden waste bin (two weekly collection). · A rate of $80 for each garden waste bin (four weekly collection).
IX. Wastewater Rate A differential targeted rate for wastewater, set under sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 at:
· A rate of $786.60 for each water closet or urinal in a connected rating unit in the city. · A rate of $393.30 per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit for any serviceable rating units in the city.
(“separately used or inhabited part of a”, “connected” and “serviceable” rating units, are defined in the Funding Impact Statement).
A rating unit used primarily as a residence for 1 household will not be treated as having more than 1 water closet or urinal. X. Water Supply Rates
Volumetric rate
A targeted rate for metered water supply set under section 19(2)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 at
· A rate of $3.87 per cubic metre of water supplied.
Base rate
A differential targeted rate per connection on every rating unit in the city, which is provided with a metered water supply service, set under sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, calculated on the basis of the nature of the connection size as follows:
XI. Water Supply Rate (unmetered) A uniform targeted rate on every rating unit in the city which is provided with and connected to an unmetered water supply service, set under sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, at:
· A rate of $1,006 for each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit as defined in the Funding Impact Statement.
XII. Pool inspection Rate A uniform targeted rate set under sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 at
· A rate of $107.00 for each rating unit on councils register of pool fence and barrier inspections. XIII. Mainstreet Rates Targeted rates for Mainstreet organisations, set under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, at:
· A rate of $0.00043862 in the dollar of capital value for every commercial and industrial rating unit in the Tauranga Mainstreet rating area as defined in the Funding Impact Statement. · A rate of $0.00062329 in the dollar of capital value for every commercial and industrial rating unit in the Mt Maunganui Mainstreet rating area as defined in the Funding Impact Statement. · A rate of $0.00148533 in the dollar of capital value for every commercial and industrial rating unit in the Greerton Mainstreet rating area as defined in the Funding Impact Statement. · A rate of $0.00037003 in the dollar of capital value for every commercial and industrial rating unit in the Papamoa Mainstreet area as defined in the Funding Impact Statement. XIV. Special Services Rates 'The Lakes’ Targeted Rate A uniform targeted rate for additional levels of service in relation to maintenance and renewal of street gardens, street trees, footpaths, and the removal of litter from ponds provided to ‘The Lakes’ subdivision, located at Pyes Pa, set under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, at: · A rate of $117.01 per rating unit located within ‘The Lakes’ subdivision as defined in the Funding Impact Statement.
‘The Coast Papamoa’ Targeted Rate A uniform targeted rate for additional levels of service in relation to maintenance and renewal of street trees and footpaths provided to ‘The Coast Papamoa’ subdivision, located at Papamoa, set under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, at: · A rate of $38.72 per rating unit located within ‘The Coast Papamoa’ subdivision as defined in the Funding Impact Statement.
‘The Excelsa’ Targeted Rate A uniform targeted rate for additional levels of service in relation to maintenance and renewal of street gardens, street trees and up lights under trees provided to ‘The Excelsa’ subdivision, located at Papamoa, set under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, at: · A rate of $50.79 per rating unit located within ‘The Excelsa’ subdivision as defined in the Funding Impact Statement.
XV. Urban Infrastructure Pyes Pa West Urban Infrastructure Targeted Rate A uniform targeted rate for partly funding debt retirement for under recovered Development Contributions for local infrastructure, set under section 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, at: · A rate of $81.51 on each rateable rating unit located within an area in Pyes Pa West defined in the Funding Impact Statement.
· 29 August 2025 and · 27 February 2026
(d) That all metered water rates will, except as to high users, be invoiced on a quarterly basis dependant on when the water meters are read, in accordance with the table below headed “Due dates and penalty dates for rates for metered water supply”. The due dates will also be specified on the invoice. Rating units, which are considered high users of water (namely having an average consumption more than 5m3 per day) will be invoiced monthly, and these rates will be due on the first Thursday after 23 days following the date of the invoice.
(ii) a charge of 10% on so much of any of the volumetric rate under section 19 and the water supply base rate for metered connections under section 16 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 invoiced after 1 July 2025 and which is unpaid after the due date will be applied on whichever is the next consecutive date following the due date of the invoice to which the penalty applies, being:
Due dates and penalty dates for rates for metered water supply and connection
(f) Where a ratepayer makes any payment that is less than the amount now payable, the Council, will apply the payment firstly to any rates outstanding from previous rating years and then proportionately across all current year rates due. (g) Consider in the draft 2026/27 Annual Plan renaming the Urban Growth targeted rate. Carried |
Timestamp: 1:39
|
11.3 Development Contributions Policy 2025/26 - Adoption Report |
|
Staff Christine Jones, General Manager, Strategy, Growth & Governance Ben Corbett, Team Leader: Growth Funding
|
|
Resolution CO/25/19/6 Moved: Cr Marten Rozeboom Seconded: Mayor Mahé Drysdale That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Development Contributions Policy 2025/26 - Adoption Report". (b) Adopts the 2025/26 Development Contributions Policy for implementation from 1 July 2025. (c) Notes the citywide development contribution has increased by 17.2% from the operative charges. This is higher than the 15% increase shared during the public consultation process. This is an increase of $5,122 for a 3-bedroom dwelling (from $29,701 to $34,823) and $655 more than was consulted on. (d) Notes that Council is expected to make decisions in the 2025/26 year relating to the Cameron Road Stage 2 project and Queen Elizabeth Youth Centre which may impact the Te Papa Infill local development contribution and citywide development contribution charges respectively. (e) Delegates to the General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance authority to make minor typographical updates to the final 2025/26 Development Contributions Policy prior to implementation on 1 July 2025. Carried |
Nil
Resolution to exclude the public
|
Resolution CO/25/19/7 Moved: Deputy Mayor Jen Scoular Seconded: Cr Marten Rozeboom 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:
Carried |
The meeting went into public excluded at 11.30 am
The meeting resumed in public at 11.47. Cr Rolleston closed the meeting with a karakia.
The meeting closed at 11.47 am.
The minutes of this meeting were confirmed as a true and correct record at the Ordinary Council meeting held on 14 July 2025.
...........................................................
Mayor Mahé Drysdale
CHAIR
|
14 July 2025 |
8 Declaration of conflicts of interest
9 Deputations, presentations, petitions
10 Recommendations from other committees
|
14 July 2025 |
11 Business
11.1 Netball Relocation to Baypark
File Number: A18245194
Author: Alison Law, Manager: Spaces & Places
Ross Hudson, Manager: Strategic Planning and Partnerships, Spaces and Places
Authoriser: Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Community Services
Purpose of the Report
1. To seek confirmation of Council’s position on the planned relocation of Tauranga Netball Centre to Baypark, in particular the proposed commercial and tenure arrangements.
2. To seek endorsement to proceed to the detailed design and delivery phase of the project and associated site improvement works and carparking.
|
That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Netball Relocation to Baypark". (b) Agrees the following key parameters for the commercial and tenure arrangements with Tauranga Netball Centre when relocated to Baypark and delegates to the Chief Executive authority to finalise agreements within these parameters - (ii) A licence to occupy the new outdoor courts at Baypark (number of courts and hours of use) required to meet core netball activities standard hours of use with payment for this through a ‘facility charge’ set at $150 per team per annum in year one, rising to $300 per annum in year three (outdoor netball only) and to be reviewed every three years. (iii) Tauranga Netball Centre to be able to run a kitchen / canteen from the leased building and to hire the building out to other community activities to generate revenues. (iv) Tauranga Netball Centre to have first rights to book additional outdoor courts at the new facility. (c) Agrees to proceed with the detailed design and consenting phase of the Baypark programme and requests staff bring back to the City Delivery committee a refined cost and delivery programme with a focus on value for money to seek confirmation to deliver from 2025/26. |
Executive Summary
3. The masterplan developed for Baypark relocates Tauranga Netball Centre (TNC) to the western part of the site from Blake Park for the following reasons –
(a) It significantly mitigates the traffic and parking issues at Blake Park which are a regular cause of community frustration and safety concern.
(b) It enables the development of additional sports field capacity at Blake Park to better meet demand for community and high-performance rugby and cricket (and with the potential re-use of the Netball Centre building) and to enable more events.
(c) It provides Tauranga Netball Centre with an improved quality facility that can accommodate growth and enable the hosting of national netball events.
(d) It provides additional multi-use hardcourt space for sports such as basketball and pickleball and also provides a multi-functional space for non-sporting events.
4. The implementation of the programme of works to enable this to happen, also encompassing the re-positioning of Speedway on the site and site access, parking and improvement works, has been paused while Council considers its sports investment priorities, looks to ensure value for money in project delivery, and considers the commercial and tenure arrangements with TNC and the consultation on proposals for Speedway.
5. The recommendations of this report reflect recent discussions between the Mayor and TNC towards an agreement of key terms. These are considered to provide a balance between return on Council’s investment, affordability for TNC and the netball community, and fairness with other sports.
6. With the intended retention on the Queen Elizabeth Youth Centre and the opening of the Haumaru Courts on Cameron Road, Council is better placed to meet current demand for indoor courts. As such, it is proposed that the development of the new Netball Multisport centre (and associated works at Baypark) should be prioritised and proceed using existing budgets from 2025/26 once Council has confidence in a revised value for money build programme, which staff would bring to the City Delivery Committee for consideration.
7. The new Netball Multisport centre is planned to include 9 Rebound Ace courts (of which at least three are covered), 14 asphalt courts, a building of circa 800m2, a covered walkway and gathering space. In addition, development works are proposed for Baypark as a whole to enable the implementation of the site masterplan. These include access, parking, and internal connections.
8. The table below provides a summary of current cost estimations for the Netball Multisport Centre and wider site works. Note that these are concept level estimates with significant contingencies that we would expect to revise down through the next phase of design. Note also that TECT has previously made an offer of $2m towards the development of the Netball Multisport Centre. That offer would need to be reconfirmed.
|
Netball Multisport Centre |
||
|
Item |
Cost estimate ($m) |
Details |
|
Netball courts |
7.47m |
* 9 Rebound Ace |
|
Cover 3 courts |
1.73m |
Includes 25% contingency |
|
Plaza and landscaping |
0.76m |
Includes 25% contingency |
|
Netball Building |
4.01m |
Conservative estimate requires further refinement as design is undertaken. |
|
Total |
13.97m |
|
|
Baypark Site Works |
||
|
Eastern carpark and associated paving and landscaping (excludes speedway carpark / pit area) |
12.00m |
*Includes 25% contingency on physical works |
|
Central road and landscaping |
1.37m |
Includes 25% contingency |
|
New Truman Lane entry/exit - parking and bus turnaround |
4.05m |
* Build cost - allowing for signalisation - signalisation could be
delivered as part 2. |
|
Carpark (Speedway) |
6.00m |
* New pit area carpark only, excludes pit services |
|
Total |
23.42m |
|
|
Combined total (+10%) |
41.13m |
*10% contingency + risk |
9. The table below provides the current total budget allocations and also a revised cashflow based on the figures above (which we expect to revise downwards).
|
|
FY26 |
FY27 |
FY28 |
FY29 |
Total |
|
Current budget |
$3.75m |
$34.87m |
$3.66m |
|
$42.28m |
|
Revised Cashflow |
$3.19m |
$16.29m |
$13.98m |
$7.67m |
$41.13m |
|
Net |
-$0.56m |
-$18.58m |
+$10.32m |
+$7.67m |
-$1.15m |
10. Next steps would include –
(a) Finalisation of the agreements with TNC and Bay Venues
(b) Establishment of ongoing stakeholder and governance arrangements through the detailed design, build and operation phases of the Baypark development programme and site management
(c) Detailed design and value engineering, consenting and return to the City Delivery Committee prior to construction with a revised budget and programme.
Background
11. The design for the new Netball Multisport centre is currently at concept level and has been agreed with TNC and Bay Venues. Detailed design, delivery programme oversight and site management after opening will take a collaborative approach. TNC remain committed to the move on the basis that fair and affordable terms can be agreed.
12. They key terms of the proposed arrangement are as follows –
(i) An exclusive sub-lease with Bay Venues for a new 800m2 building to support netball at Baypark until 2042, with one right of renewal for 15 years, to be at a cost to Tauranga Netball Centre of $70,000 per annum in year one of the lease, rising to $100,000 per annum by year three of the lease and to be reviewed every three years.
(ii) A licence to occupy the new outdoor courts at Baypark (number of courts and hours of use) required to meet core netball activities standard hours of use with payment for this through a ‘facility charge’ set at $150 per team per annum in year one, rising to $300 per annum in year three (outdoor netball only) and to be reviewed every three years.
(iii) Tauranga Netball Centre to be able to run a kitchen / canteen from the leased building and to hire the building out to other community activities to generate revenues.
(iv) Tauranga Netball Centre to have first rights to book additional outdoor courts at the new facility.
Expected Use
13. TNC has provided information on their current ‘core use’ requirements (courts, hours, days, season). Space required to deliver these is expected to grow over time. The facility is designed to accommodate some growth, with pro-active management between TNC and Bay Venues also required to make most efficient use of the space over the week and with changing sports seasons in order to maximise the community benefit (and non-netball revenue) that can be generated.
14. TNC core use is as follows below. We have begun working through indicative schedules and dialogue with other potential users (such as basketball and pickleball) to explore complementary hours of use. It is clear there is a significant opportunity to maximise the use of the space. Schedules and bookings will be reviewed annually. There is an expectation that over time netball use of the facility may slowly begin to displace some other uses.
· Competitions – Senior Club, Premier Club, Junior Club, Juniors (Yrs 1 – 8), College (Yrs 9-13), Summer League
· Tournaments – Representatives (annually), Zone Secondary Schools (annually), AIMS (annually) and UNISS (every 5 years, 2026 next time), Junior tournaments (local teams generally in August)
· Player Development Programmes and Strength/Conditioning Sessions
· Representative Teams Trials and Training
· Workshops – Coaches and Umpires
· Training nights for clubs and school teams (usually Monday and/or Tuesday)
15. The Baypark Masterplan provides for sufficient space for up to 29 outdoor netball courts, of which 23 are proposed to be delivered by the end of FY28. (There are 19 courts at Blake Park). We propose to consider the longer-term model for netball with TNC in due course. A more optimal longer-term outcome may be to have a smaller hub on the Tauranga side of the harbour (say at Pōteriwhi) to support the main 23 court centre at Baypark. This would require consideration of the TNC operating model with them.
16. The masterplan also envisages the potential for up to six of the courts to become covered Rebound Ace courts (three more than the proposed three by FY28). Initial estimates are that it will cost up to $1.8m to achieve that. This would maximise the potential of the facility for major events and would enable more use by sports other than netball. This could be considered in the context of detailed design and value engineering phases or in due course as use is better understood.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
17. The Play, Active Recreation & Sport Action and Investment Plan outlines the value of investment in our major active reserves including Baypark. The recommendations are consistent with the adopted Baypark Masterplan and the set of integrated masterplans developed for Baypark, Blake Park and Tauranga Domain. The relocation of the TNC is considered to be the ‘key move’ that enables the maximisation of community value from those key community sport, recreation and events spaces.
Options Analysis
18. The table below summarises commercial and tenure options considered.
|
|
Option |
Pros |
Cons |
|
1 |
Proposed option – exclusive building lease to TNC; licence to occupy courts for core use; lease revenue to BVL and licence revenue based on number of teams
|
Provides good cost recovery to TCC/BVL Provides TNC with tenure security and ability to generate revenues |
Constitutes an upward step in costs for TNC with some flow through effects to netball players and their families. |
|
2 |
As with option 1 but with a reciprocal 20% revenue arrangement where BVL takes 20% of Netball building gross revenues and TNC receives 20% of non-Netball court booking gross revenues |
May incentivise collaboration between TNC and BVL |
Makes commercial arrangements more complex and adds risk to TNC |
|
3 |
As option 2 but with no reciprocal offer to TNC to receive share of revenues |
Greater revenue for BVL |
Puts TNC in a less sustainable financial position. Potential negative impact on affordability and participation levels. |
|
4 |
As option 1 but with the facility charge capped at $150 per team for five years and with no revenue deal |
Provides TNC and netball players with a more affordable outcome for longer. |
Reduces BVL revenue. |
|
5 |
Fully BVL owned and managed facility with netball booking building and courts as required |
Provides autonomy to BVL to determine best use of space and receive associated revenues. Lower upfront costs to TNC. |
Provides no guarantees on cost and availability to TNC and considered unacceptable to them from a tenure and sport management perspective.
|
Financial Considerations
19. Current concept design cost estimates and Baypark Masterplan budgets are identified above in the Executive Summary. These will be refined with a focus on value for money through the detailed design phase, before the City Delivery committee confirms a decision to proceed to construction. TECT has offered $2m towards the development of the facility. Assuming Council wishes to proceed, we would need to go back to TECT to confirm that still stands.
20. The working assumption is that revenues from the new centre would flow to Bay Venues.
Legal Implications / Risks
21. Bay Venues is the designated owner of the Baypark site via a lease from Council for the land (Bay Venues own the buildings). Therefore, a sub-lease between Bay Venues and TNC will be required to enable the netball centre. Council will facilitate the sub-lease between Bay Venues and TNC.
22. As the sub-lease would not usually be granted until the area of the lease is 100% confirmed and the date of start of use is known, Bay Venues will enter into an Agreement to Lease arrangement. Council will prepare and facilitate the signing of the Agreement to Lease and Licence to Occupy and associated facility use and overall site management arrangements.
TE AO MĀORI APPROACH
23. Baypark falls within the rohe of Ngā Pōtīki. The hapū have been and will continue to be involved in the development of the plans for the Baypark site and its consenting requirements. A cultural impact assessment will be undertaken and will be attached to the resource consent when it is lodged. Through the development of the masterplan, initial work was undertaken to identify appropriate cultural and historical narratves for the site that could be woven into the implementaion of site upgrades. This would be picked up in the detailed design phase.
CLIMATE IMPACT
24. The climate impact of the project has not been formally assessed. Materials used and construction at Baypark and at Blake Park will have a small climate impact.
Consultation / Engagement
25. The recommendations give effect to the Baypark Masterplan which has had extensive stakeholder engagement and formed part of the Long-Term Plan 2024-34 consultation. No further public consultation is considered necessary.
26. TNC have been a key stakeholder throughout and involved in design and planning discussions and will continue to be throughout the delivery of the project, along with Bay Venues and other site stakeholders.
27. There will be an engagement plan in place leading up to and during the construction of the new facility.
28. The agreement to lease will be conditional on TNC holding a Special General Meeting (SGM) and the arrangements being approved in accordance with TNCs constitution. TNC intend to hold the SGM soon after this Council meeting. TNC have advised that the signing of the agreement to lease will also be subject to TNC receiving independent legal advice.
Significance
29. 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.
30. 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.
31. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the proposal is of medium significance.
Next Steps
32. Depending on Council’s decisions, next steps would include finalisation of terms with TNC and refinement of the design and costs of the Baypark programme for a decision by the City Delivery committee to proceed to delivery.
Nil
|
14 July 2025 |
11.2 Community Feedback on Speedway Proposals
File Number: A17105058
Author: Alison Law, Manager: Spaces & Places
Ross Hudson, Manager: Strategic Planning and Partnerships, Spaces and Places
Authoriser: Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Community Services
Purpose of the Report
1. To consider feedback from the community on the proposals for Baypark Speedway and to propose next steps.
|
That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Community Feedback on Speedway Proposals". (b) Requests staff proceed with negotiations with Speedway Racing Ltd with the following key parameters - i. Sale of the North Stand to Speedway Racing Ltd for $1 with an agreement to purchase it back for $1 in 2039, with costs and liabilities (including for health and safety) for the stand passing to Speedway Racing Ltd. ii. Sub-lease of the land on which the Baypark Stadium sits to Speedway Racing Ltd until 2039, for a percentage of revenue from events held. iii. A ‘licence to occupy’ to Speedway Racing Ltd for other spaces at Baypark at times necessary to enable Speedway events.
|
Executive Summary
2. Council has been seeking community feedback on the following key elements of a proposal that would see Speedway continue at Baypark Stadium to 2039, significantly reducing costs and risks to Council, whilst improving the overall functionality of the Baypark site in line with the adopted Baypark Masterplan –
(a) Sale of the North Stand to Speedway Racing Ltd (SRL) for $1 with an agreement to purchase it back for $1 in 2039, with all costs and liabilities for the stand passing to SRL. Ownership of the North Stand will automatically revert to Council at the end of the lease term in 2039, in accordance with the Sublease, without further payment
(b) Sub-lease of the land on which the Mercury Baypark Stadium sits to SRL for a percentage gross revenue, to cover as a minimum the remaining Bay Venues operating costs associated with Speedway, until 2039.
(c) A ‘licence to occupy’ to SRL for other spaces at Baypark at times necessary to enable Speedway events, including areas of the main stand and the carpark / pit area
(d) Council investment in a new carpark to serve the Baypark site as a whole that would become a Speedway pit area on race days.
(e) SRL to make investments in pit services and improvements to vehicle movements and patron experience within the lease and licence areas.
(f) Current commercial agreements between Bay Venues and SRL and between Bay Venues and Bay of Plenty Speedway Association to be superseded.
3. Council sought community feedback on these proposals from 23rd May to 23rd June 2025. Key results of that feedback are as follows –
(a) There were 3,527 respondents to the survey of which 1,818 (52%) of whom were Tauranga residents and 1,709 were non-residents. 65% identified as male, 34% female, 1% other.
(b) Of the Tauranga residents that responded –
(i) 90% either ‘support’ or ‘strongly support’ the proposed lease to 2039.
(ii) 10% ‘strongly do not support’ or ‘do not support’ the lease to 2039.
(iii) 86% ‘support’ or ‘strongly support’ transferring ownership of the North Stand.
(iv) 14% ‘do not support’ or ‘strongly do not support’ transferring ownership of the North Stand.
(v) 1,440 had attended Speedway in the last 12 months.
4. The feedback leads us to the view that there remains a passionate and reasonably large cohort of people that continue to value Speedway at Baypark and are supportive of the proposed arrangements and that there is limited aversion from the population as a whole to that happening.
5. Council should note however that Ngā Pōtiki (who have mana whenua) have expressed some opposition to the proposals. The Ngā Pōtiki submission acknowledged the range of community views, but concluded that, due to concerns as to the best community use of the space and with regard to noise, traffic and pollution, that they were not in support. Their submission (at Attachment 3) favoured a new collaborative planning exercise to determine future uses.
6. Bay Venues board has expressed their concerns to councillors that Speedway is not necessarily the best community use of the site and their preference that further investigation should be undertaken of potential alternative uses before any conclusions are reached. They have shared the following statement,
“Bay Venues does not agree with the recommendation and strongly recommends considering alternative options for the best long-term use of the Baypark Stadium site and would like to partner with Council and the community on this. Speedway may be an acceptable continued use of the site, but without fully assessing alternative uses a broader perspective on the future of the site has not been adequately considered. We do not support a long-term arrangement with speedway, without full consideration of options for the site.”
7. Bay of Plenty Speedway Association expressed strong support for the proposals, as long as proposed terms that enable their interests as stakeholders are followed through on.
8. Attachment 1 provides a summary of the community feedback.
9. Note that a separate report to this Council meeting seeks direction to continue with the implementation of the Baypark masterplan, including the site improvements that would enable this outcome to be fully realised.
10. It is proposed that staff seek to finalise commercial and tenure arrangements with SRL and Bay Venues in advance of the coming Speedway season. A collaborative process that involves all site stakeholders will be maintained as the Baypark Masterplan is implemented.
Background
11. Baypark Stadium, which has circa 18,000 seats and stadium buildings, was purchased by Council in 2007 and comprises about 3.5ha of the Baypark site. Until the 2024-34 Long Term Plan, no funding for depreciation of the stadium had been allocated. Whilst Bay Venues makes use of the stadium buildings in the Main Stand, the seating across the Main and North Stands and the outdoor clay track and field areas are used almost exclusively for Speedway events, run by SRL through a commercial agreement with Bay Venues, which run until 2029. The Speedway events also make use of the main carpark as a pit area on race days. The stadium is only considered to be viable to host Speedway and occasional other motorsport events.
12. Patronage at Speedway events has declined to an average of circa 2,500 and the stadium is in need of major renewals. Circa $1.8m per annum has been allocated in the 2024-34 Long Term Plan for renewal of the Main Stand and stadium buildings. In the context of the Baypark Masterplan, it was considered appropriate to assess the long-term costs of keeping and maintaining the stadium in its current, or a reduced-capacity form and to consider commercial and operating options in relation to Speedway’s use of the site.
13. In 2023/24, we undertook an independently-facilitated review of the financial viability of the stadium over the period to 2039, which considered spatial layout and infrastructure options, seating capacity options and alternative commercial/operating models. The resulting Deloitte report, “Baypark Stadium Financial Review” is at Attachment 2 of this report. This exercise was undertaken working collaboratively with Bay Venues and representatives from Speedway Racing Ltd and Bay of Plenty Speedway Association.
14. Concurrently, Bay Venues commissioned a Detailed Seismic Assessment of the stadium, which informed the costs and options assessment. The stadium requires remedial action to bring its condition to at least 34% of the New Building Standard. For the Main Stand that work needs to be undertaken by 2041; for the North Stand by 2053. The Main Stand, which houses the internal parts of the stadium complex and 2,400 seats, will require circa $750k of investment to bring it up to at least 34% of the New Building Standard. Bay Venues will be able to cover those costs through its existing renewals allocations over the Long Term Plan period and beyond. The Main Stand is considered to have long-term value to the community and to the function of the Baypark site.
15. The North Stand – the arc of seating around the track, which comprises 15,600 seats and a commercial kitchen – is estimated to require a minimum of $2.9m of earthquake strengthening to bring it to at least 34% of the New Building Standard, plus $2.1m of renewals over the period to 2039. The North Stand is not considered to have wider community use beyond Speedway events and it is estimated to have essentially no residual commercial value due to its condition and required investment. It was proposed that the North Stand be sold to SRL at a peppercorn rate, with the expectation that it is maintained in a safe condition in accordance with relevant legislation.
16. On 20th May 2024, the Commission made a set of resolutions in relation to the stadium. Key decisions were that the North Stand should be sold to Speedway Racing Ltd, who would then lease land from Bay Venues until 2039 to enable Speedway to continue at the stadium until that time. In addition, as part of the implementation of the Baypark Masterplan, it was resolved that a new carpark and pit lane area would be constructed to the east of the site near the main entrance that Speedway would have a licence to occupy on race days. This would enable improved overall function of the Baypark site given the additional use envisaged by the relocation of the Netball Centre from Blake Park and the eventual expansion of the indoor arena.
17. Through the masterplan development process, some initial consideration had been given to whether Speedway was the best value long-term use of the stadium space. Alternative uses of the space could include a relocated athletics track from Tauranga Domain or other community sport or commercial recreational activities.
18. The Deloitte review considered –
(a) An investment timeframe to 2039
(b) An assumed reduced capacity stadium of 5,000 seats (the North Stand would remain as it provides a sound buffer to meet consent requirements, but parts of it would effectively be closed off).
(c) Investments required to maintain, renew and remediate the facility and to upgrade the race vehicle and customer access to the stadium
(d) Operational costs and revenues and alternative operating models with associated cost allocations between Council / Bay Venues and SRL.
19. Three operating models were considered –
(a) Status Quo - a commercial agreement where Speedway Racing Ltd receive all ticket revenues and Bay Venues Ltd receive all other revenues, with Bay Venues owning all assets and Speedway paying an annual fee (currently $165k per annum) towards the operating costs.
(b) Shared Revenue - with a new collaborative agreement between Bay Venues and Speedway entities with shared costs and revenues.
(c) Sub-lease option – a land lease covering the outside areas, with the North Stand sold to a Speedway entity; with a new carpark / pit area constructed by Council to the East of the Stadium with Speedway use rights of the pit area and Main Stand on event days.
20. The preferred option was found to be the Sub-lease option for the following reasons -
· With the North Stand sold to Speedway, this reduces capital expenditure and liability to Council / Bay Venues for an asset with limited community value.
· Reduced Bay Venues operational obligations and associated losses associated with servicing Speedway events held at the Stadium.
· Clear and separate responsibilities between Bay Venues and Speedway, with a lease that reflects affordability to Speedway and greater autonomy; and for Bay Venues revenue towards the costs of operating and maintaining the Stadium that are attributable to Speedway.
· With investment in a carpark / pit area to the East of the Stadium, additional parking (outside of Speedway event times) in the pit area and additional parking in the main carpark during Speedway events with better site management outcomes and a functional separation of Speedway from the remainder of Baypark.
Lease and Licence to Occupy
21. Council, as 100% shareholder, can instruct Bay Venues Ltd to enter into new legal arrangements. Key parameters of the proposed sub-lease and licence to occupy arrangements with SRL are as follows below.
(i) A ground sub-lease to 2039, without a lease renewal option, for the area comprising the North Stand and Speedway track area.
(ii) Sale of the North Stand and Speedway track to Speedway Racing Ltd at no cost, on an ‘as is where is’ basis; noting the need for the facility to be kept in a safe condition with any maintenance, renewal or remediation works becoming the responsibility of Speedway parties.
(iii) All costs of new and existing facilities within the lease area to fall to Speedway Racing Ltd.
(iv) Ownership of the North Stand and any associated improvements within the sub-lease area will automatically vest in Bay Venues Ltd at the end of the sub-lease term in 2039, without any further payment.
(v) A licence to occupy parts of the Main Stand and areas adjacent to the North Stand on Speedway event days.
(vi) A licence to occupy parts of the Main Carpark (current pit area) until construction of the new pit area is complete.
(vii) Ownership of the Main Stand buildings and seats to remain with Bay Venues Ltd, with costs of maintenance and renewal, including earthquake strengthening to remain with Bay Venues Ltd.
(viii) A licence to occupy until 2039, without a renewal option, a new pit and carpark area for Speedway race meetings and priority rights to use a defined parking area for Speedway participants and patrons.
(ix) Bay Venues will be able to continue to use the commercial kitchen within the North Stand without impediment (this will be excluded from the lease area, with access rights provided to the kitchen).
(xi) With the lease price to be based on an agreed percentage of gross revenue, with the intention that, as a minimum, it covers Bay Venues residual operational costs associated with facilitating Speedway.
(xii) The sub-lease and licences are interdependent and must be read and operated together to ensure the coordinated use of the Baypark site for Speedway events.
(xiii) The sub-lease provides a right of first refusal in favour of Bay of Plenty Speedway Association to continue Speedway operations in the event of early termination by SRL.
(xiv) A Baypark User Group will be established to support collaboration between Bay Venues, SRL, and other key users of the Baypark site in relation to shared use, event scheduling, and operational coordination.
(xv) Bay Venues and Council will have the right to undertake a performance review in 2034 and may elect to terminate the sub-lease prior to 2039 if agreed outcomes covering average event attendance, number of events and compliance with permitted use are not met or if there is a compelling public interest basis to do so, following consultation with stakeholders.
Strategic / Statutory Context
22. The Play, Active Recreation & Sport Action and Investment Plan outlines the value of investment in our major active reserves including Baypark. The recommendations are broadly consistent with the adopted Baypark Masterplan, albeit with minor amendments to the area to the South-East of the Stadium. Minor amendments to the masterplan are delegated to the Chief Executive to implement.
Financial Considerations
23. The table below summarises the estimated costs and asset allocations between the parties.
|
Council / Bay Venues |
Speedway |
||
|
Main Stand – renewal and earthquake strengthening |
$17m over period to 2039 (already allocated via LTP) |
North Stand – Renewal and remediation at Speedway’s discretion |
Purchase price $1. $2m for 2,600 earthquake strengthened seats $2.1m renewals |
|
Pit Area / Carpark |
$6m (Initial QS of concept) |
Pit Services |
$800k (Initial QS of concept) |
|
Stadium lights renewal |
$1.5m (already undertaken) |
|
|
|
|
|
Speedway functional upgrades (chute, big screen, workshop, fanzone above ground features) at Speedway’s discretion |
$2.1m + professional fees |
|
|
|
Lease and licence-to-occupy |
Percentage of gross revenue to at least cover BVL costs |
24. Bay Venues will need to write of the remaining book value of the North Stand at and track improvements at $2.3m and the costs of seismic assessment at circa $200k (with the assessment costs now unable to be capitalised).
25. Council has currently allocated $35.5m (inflated) to the implementation of the Baypark Masterplan over FY26 to FY28.
Legal Implications / Risks
26. Earthquake strengthening is required to the Main Stand by 2041 and North Stand by 2053. Legal, health and safety and insurance liabilities are being addressed through the sub-lease and sale documentation with the intention that primary responsibility during the lease term sits with SRL refined through the lease negotiation process to minimise any ongoing liabilities to Council. SRL will be required to maintain the North Stand in a safe and legally compliant condition throughout the lease term, at its own cost. Ownership of the North Stand and associated assets will automatically vest in Council at the end of the lease term in 2039, unless otherwise agreed. The expectation is that all assets and attendant liabilities will revert to Council in 2039 unless other contractual arrangements are made prior.
27. While SRL is responsible for the North Stand and associated improvements, the Main Stand, kitchen facilities and parts of the Baypark site will remain under the control of Bay Venues and continue to serve multiple users. This will require proactive operational coordination and clarity of responsibilities across parties.
28. The termination rights under the sub-lease provide some mitigation of commercial viability risk, including Council’s ability to end the arrangement in 2034.
29. The new agreement represents a transition away from previous commercial agreements, including the direct agreement between Bay Venues and the Bay of Plenty Speedway Association. The proposed agreement with SRL grants right of first refusal to the Association in the event of early termination and addresses ongoing collaboration matters between those parties. The establishment of a Baypark User Group to manage site coordination, the 2034 performance review point and the 2039 lease term are intended to ensure effective issue resolution and establish processes for potential future transition points.
TE AO MĀORI APPROACH
30. Ngā Pōtiki’s submission is noted above and attached. Through the development of the Baypark Masterplan, an initial cultural narrative of the site was developed with Ngā Pōtīki and the intention is that that will be woven into design components through site development works.
CLIMATE IMPACT
31. No Specific climate impact assessment has been undertaken. Speedway by its nature is a high carbon dioxide emitting activity. However, at 10-15 race meetings per annum, its climate impact is considered to be small. There will be continued vehicle movements to and from the site on race days by event patrons.
Significance
32. 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.
33. 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.
34. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the proposal is of high significance.
Next Steps
35. Next Steps would include –
(a) Finalisation of commercial and tenure arrangements
(b) Implementation of the Baypark Masterplan
(c) Ongoing collaborative arrangements with site stakeholders to ensure site changes and ongoing site management are fair and effective
1. Attachment
1 - Speedway Consultation Feedback Analysis (July 2025) - A18457764 ⇩ 
2. Attachment
2 - Baypark Stadium - Financial Review Report (Final) - A18457771 ⇩
3. Attachment 3 -
Nga Potiki Submission - A18474007 ⇩
|
14 July 2025 |
11.3 City Centre Street Project - Public Engagement
File Number: A18148898
Author: Emily McLean, Programme Lead: City Centre
Nick Chester, Principal Strategic Advisor
Shawn Geard, City Centre Infrastructure Lead
Authoriser: Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships
Purpose of the Report
1. To brief the Council on the City Centre Movement Framework and City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan.
2. To seek approval to undertake community engagement on the City Centre Movement Framework and Draft City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan.
3. To inform the Council of next steps to approve final plans on both projects by the end of 2025.
|
That the Council: (a) Receives the report "City Centre Street Project - Public Engagement". (b) Approves community engagement on: (i) the City Centre Movement Framework, and (ii) the Draft City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan. (c) Notes that final versions of both the City Centre Movement Plan and City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan will be presented to council for approval by the end of 2025. |
Executive Summary
4. Revitalisation of the city centre is a key priority for Tauranga City Council. Significant developments, both by the council and private developers are currently underway to support the revitalisation of the city centre.
5. It is critical that the city’s streets support these developments, and wider usage of the city centre more generally. Well designed and functioning streets ensure movement and public amenity usage is maximised.
6. Many of our current city centre street assets are over 30 years old and close to end-of-life, at times failing to provide for user safety and needs.
7. There are currently two projects underway to ensure streets and movement in the city centre can support this revitalisation. These are, the:
(a) City Centre Movement Framework; and
(b) City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan.
8. The city centre movement pilot was introduced to parts of Harington, Hamilton, Wharf, Spring and Willow streets during March 2024, and is planned to remain in place for at least two years as a pilot during the city centre transformation.
9. Funding was
allocated as part of the 2024-34 Long-term Plan for city centre streetscape
upgrades. A total of $80m was allocated over 10 years.
10. At a workshop on 3 April 2025, initial feedback was provided to staff by the Council and city centre stakeholders on potential next steps for both the City Centre Movement Framework, and the City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan.
11. A City Centre Movement Framework and several options for streetscape improvements have been developed, based on feedback received through the workshop. Approval is being sought to undertake wider community engagement on the options that have been prepared.
12. Following engagement, final decisions will be sought by Council before the end of 2025, to be ready for implementation from 2026 onwards.
Background
13. Creating a vibrant and well-planned city centre is a key objective sought by Tauranga City Council. The next decade will be transformational for the city centre as there are currently unprecedented levels of both public and private investment occurring.
14. Council adopted the City Centre Action and Investment Plan in August 2022, which has a focus on a city centre for people and accessibility as two of the strategic priorities.
15. Council has committed over $400m of investment in the city centre on major projects (to date), including the Civic Precinct redevelopment – Te Manawataki o Te Papa, ongoing waterfront improvements, movement projects, and public realm upgrades. This is coupled with a number of large-scale projects being undertaken by private developers (e.g. 2 Devonport Rd, Northern Quarter, Panorama Towers etc.) and other institutions such as the University of Waikato.
16. Ensuring that people can move to and through the city centre safely and accessibly is central to the overall success of this transformation. The City Centre Movement Framework and the City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan are therefore critical tools to enabling this outcome.
Movement Framework
17. The City Centre Movement Pilot was implemented March 2024 as a pilot under the Land Transport Rule: Street Layouts 2023. This enables a road controlling authority to change road layouts as a pilot for up to two years, enabling practical adjustments and enabling future designs to consider the on-the-ground experience.
18. The Movement Pilot was a trial to support elements of the Movement Framework, a key action of the City Centre Action and Investment Plan 2022, to improve the effectiveness and ease of traffic movement through the city centre. Anticipated benefits of the pilot were:
(a) safer streets by slowing down vehicles, reducing the number of intersections, and improving visibility;
(b) more space for wider footpaths, planter boxes, street art and other opportunities to make the city centre more attractive and accessible; and
(c) fewer road closures for the many building projects occurring in the city centre, because space can be provided beside the street for construction activities when needed.
19. In December 2024, the City Centre Movement Pilot was adjusted, reversing changes to Harington Street between Willow Street and The Strand to accommodate two-way travel.
20. In early 2025, approximately 400 people directly affected by the Movement Pilot were contacted for feedback resulting in 40 responses, with over 21 of these providing positive sentiment to the changes, nine providing a mixed sentiment, and five providing a negative response.
21. Two key components of the Movement Framework not included within the current Movement Pilot, are making The Strand and Grey St one-way. It is envisioned that this planned engagement will enable further development of what these options could consist of, and when a trial and their implementation would be appropriate.
22. A draft Movement Framework
overview is included in Attachment 1.
Streetscape Implementation Plan
23. Well-designed streetscapes are essential to ensuring that people can move easily through both new and existing buildings and spaces. Safe, accessible, and inviting streetscapes are of benefit to a wide range of users and ensure the city centre can function both a key business and hospitality space, but can also support events when there are larger numbers of people using streets in a variety of ways.
24. Many streets in city centre are 30 years old and are coming to the end of their useful life. Some investment is required to ensure they continue to meet the needs of users, in the same way that streets in any part of the city would. Given the high use of city centre streets, and the need to attract visitors into these spaces, in most cases, a “do minimum” approach to repairing these streets is unlikely to meet the needs and expectations of the community.
25. The upgrading of streetscapes is important for creating real connections between existing and developing parts of the city centre, and to fulfil council’s strategic outcomes.
26. Some streetscapes have been upgraded recently, including Elizabeth Street East and Durham Street in the Knowledge Precinct. These newly designed streetscapes have improved the functionality of the streets but have been undertaken in isolation from the wider city centre.
27. As new developments occur in the city centre, there will be an increasing lack of integration between buildings and the streets that surround them. Integrating streetscapes with new developments is therefore a vitally important part of the plan.
28. The development of a City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan for further streetscape upgrades will ensure that these spaces are improved to meet necessary safety and accessibility requirements, but are also developed in a holistic way that considers the needs of the city centre as a whole.
29. Funding of $80m was allocated in the 2024-34 Long-term Plan to upgrade streetscapes in the city centre. The Streetscape Implementation Plan is being developed with a “right spend, right place, right time” approach to ensure this funding is spent effectively, demonstrating clear value-for-money.
30. A workshop with councillors and community representatives was held on 3 April 2025 to explore initial thinking on both streetscape upgrades and the City Centre Movement Framework.
31. A Draft City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan has been developed, with this vision:
32. The draft plan has been developed aiming to fix several key issues:
(a) Many of our streets don’t meet the needs of today’s or tomorrow’s users – this includes basic pedestrian safety and accessibility needs.
(b) There’s no clear, unified plan – designs often don’t match up with other city developments.
(c) The streets need to reflect the needs and aspirations of the wide variety of people who will use them.
33. The draft plan has also been developed using the following investment objectives:
(a) Streetscapes encourage more people to spend productive time in the city centre.
(b) Streetscapes support the development of a city centre that is a central place for people to live, work, learn and play.
(c) Current streetscapes are improved to deliver a future-focused, multi-modal city centre.
(d) The
plan is cohesive, connected and cost-effective, ensuring that streetscapes are
improved to deliver a bold, enticing, and vibrant city centre.
34. The Draft City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan has been developed based on analysis undertaken by staff and feedback provided at the 3 April 2025 workshop. The current recommended option aims to strike a balance between required streetscape upgrades, whilst also limiting costs and providing clear value-for-money.
35. Following community engagement, the proposed option will be analysed, adjusted and tested prior to a final approval by the council by December 2025.
36. A Draft Streetscape Implementation Plan overview is included in Attachment 2.
Community engagement on next steps
37. Following the 3 April 2025 workshop, staff undertook to:
(a) develop a final Movement Framework that could be consulted on and implemented to provide community certainty.
(b) develop a Draft City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan that could be consulted on and approved by the end of 2025, ahead of implementation in 2026.
38. Staff recommend that community engagement is now undertaken on these two projects. The purpose of this engagement is to ensure community insights and perspectives are considered in order to finalise plans and move into a delivery phase.
39. Engagement is specifically focused on the Movement Framework and Draft City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan. Following the formal adoption of these pieces of work, further engagement will be undertaken as detailed planning and delivery on individual streets and spaces is delivered over the coming years.
40. It is proposed that engagement will take place in August and September, followed by analysis of feedback and reporting back to Council in October 2025. Several engagement and communication tactics will be utilised, including surveys, face-to-face meetings, street intercepts, and event engagement.
41. A draft engagement overview is included in Attachment 3.
Statutory Context
42. The Movement Pilot is implemented under the Land Transport Rule: Street Layouts 2023. This enables changes to occur as lessons are learnt, prior to the more standard permanent statutory process.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
43. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):
|
Contributes |
|
|
We are an inclusive city |
ü |
|
We value, protect and enhance the environment |
ü |
|
We are a well-planned city |
ü |
|
We can move around our city easily |
ü |
|
We are a city that supports business and education |
ü |
44. The Movement Framework and Draft City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan have broad alignment with TCC’s community outcomes and strategic priorities. This is particularly evident through the following outcomes:
(a) We are an inclusive city – streetscape improvements and completed movement frameworks make the city more inclusive and accessible to all. Barriers will be removed as a result of on-street improvements, improving the accessibility and safety of the city centre as a result.
(b) We can move around our city easily – the completed Movement Framework will provide certainty and allow people to plan trips in and around the city centre accordingly with certainty. It also provides greater clarity to city centre businesses and will reduce disruptions in the medium- to long-term.
Options Analysis
45. Staff have determined there are three potential options, which are analysed below.
46. Option 1 – Undertake community engagement with a view to approving final the Movement Framework and Streetscape Implementation Plan by the end of 2025 (recommended).
|
Advantages |
Disadvantages and risks |
|
· There is a high level of interest in the development of the city centre – community engagement ensures there is public input prior to making any final decisions. · Helps to ensure that the project will meet actual community needs. · Provides an opportunity for community to raise issues and concerns prior to any significant work being undertaken. · Provides an opportunity to include a diverse range of views and create more inclusive spaces as a result. |
Disadvantages: · Engagement has an associated cost (however this is within budget). · A large amount of community engagement on city centre issues has already been undertaken and further engagement may lead to fatigue, disengagement, or apathy. · Undertaking engagement will add time to the project overall. Risks: · May not provide a clear consensus for approving final plans. · Engagement may create unrealistic expectations of what can be achieved within existing budgets. |
47. Option 2 – Complete both plans without further engagement (i.e. go straight to approving a final document) (not recommended).
|
Advantages |
Disadvantages and risks |
|
· Faster decision making and implementation. · No associated engagement costs. · No associated engagement fatigue – significant engagement on city centre projects has already provided relevant feedback. |
Disadvantages: · Misses an opportunity for public input which may identify further risks and opportunities. · Those directly impacted may feel excluded, reducing support and increasing complaints or resistance post-implementation. · Opportunities to improve functionality or accessibility based on direct feedback might be lost. Risks: · Reputational risk of not fully engaging on the projects. · Lack of feedback on practical details (e.g. parking, pedestrian routes etc.) could lead to design flaws or unintended consequences. |
48. Option 3 – End Movement Pilot, undertake critical/necessary street upgrades in the city centre only (effective status quo with minor upgrades for safety purposes) (not recommended).
|
Advantages |
Disadvantages and risks |
|
· Minimal disruption in city centre. · Can achieve some cost savings, both from no engagement and also larger streetscape work. |
Disadvantages: · Missed opportunity for improvements – basic streetscape designs are unlikely to be inviting to visitors and will meet only the basic accessibility and safety criteria. · There is a public expectation that vehicle movement and city streetscapes will compliment ongoing developments. Without further work, there will be a mismatch between developments and the streets that surround them. · Minimal quality streetscapes can reduce foot traffic and negatively affect local businesses. · Opportunities to improve functionality or accessibility based on direct feedback might be lost. Risks: · Potential safety and accessibility concerns with basic upgrades only. · Many streets are at the end of their useful life and will require upgrades – undertaking work without any tangible benefits is likely to lead to community dissatisfaction. |
Financial Considerations
49. The Movement Framework and Streetscape Implementation Plan are both funded activities as part of the 2024-34 Long-term Plan.
50. Project costs noted in the Draft Streetscape Implementation Plan are indicative of a variety of potential investment packages. Once engagement is undertaken, a final investment case will be developed, including more detailed costing.
51. It is envisioned that the results of this investment case, including more detailed costings, will help inform decisions within the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.
TE AO MĀORI APPROACH
52. The Te Papa peninsula, and the city centre is a culturally significant site and Tauranga City Council is committed to working in partnership with Tangata Whenua on projects in the area.
53. The Movement Framework and Streetscape Implementation Plan align with the Te Ao Māori approach, particularly relating to the following principles:
(a) Rangatiratanga – Mana motuhake – self-determination, Tikanga – best practise, Tāuutuutu – reciprocity – council has worked closely with tangata whenua on all projects in the city centre, given the cultural significance of the area. This will continue as the plan is developed and implemented.
(b) Te Reo Māori – Active commitment to protect and promote this taonga, the Māori language, for future generations of all New Zealanders – streetscape upgrades provide opportunities for increased storytelling, wayfinding, and public art. Given the historical and cultural significance of the city centre to tangata whenua, ensuring a strong voice as part of this work will be critical to success.
54. Specific engagement will be undertaken with mana whenua as part of this project. Specific engagement will also occur as individual street upgrades are undertaken in the future.
CLIMATE IMPACT
55. The Movement Framework and City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan contribute to all three climate impact areas in the following ways:
(a) Adapting to a changing climate – streetscape upgrades can offset the impacts of urban heat islands through the introduction of more canopy cover and other measures. This will be a consideration in areas where possible.
(b) Reduce emissions – both the Movement Framework and Streetscape Implementation Plan can encourage people to use public transport and active forms of transport, thereby helping to reduce emissions in Tauranga. A reliable Movement Framework and safer, more accessible streetscapes will naturally encourage people to seek alternative transport options.
(c) Embrace nature and biodiversity – streetscape upgrades provide a unique opportunity to introduce a range of vegetation into the city centre where appropriate. This can have the effect of increasing biodiversity.
Consultation / Engagement
56. Community engagement has already occurred on both projects. This has been particularly evident for the Movement Framework, where community engagement has been coupled with targeted engagement with affected city centre businesses. It is understood that with topics such as outlined in this report, community engagement needs to take a continuous approach.
Significance
57. 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.
58. 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; and
(c) the capacity of the local authority to perform its role, and the financial and other costs of doing so.
59. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the decision is of medium significance.
ENGAGEMENT
60. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the decision is of medium significance, engagement is recommended as outlined in the report.
Next Steps
61. Undertake community engagement on the Movement Framework, and Draft City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan.
62. The Movement Framework and City Centre Streetscape Implementation Plan will be presented to the council for approval by December 2025.
1. Attachment
1_Movement Framework - A18452895 ⇩ 
2. Attachment
2_Streetscapes Implementation - A18452897 ⇩ 
3. Attachment
3_Community Engagement Summarised Approach - A18452896 ⇩
|
14 July 2025 |
11.4 Council-Controlled Organisations - Final Statements of Intent 2025/28
File Number: A18151002
Author: Caroline Lim, CCO Specialist
Sam Fellows, Manager: City Partnerships
Authoriser: Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships
Purpose of the Report
1. The purpose of this report is to provide the final Statements of Intent (SOI) 2025/28 for Tauranga City Council’s (TCC or Council) six council-controlled organisations (CCOs), as required by the Local Government Act (2002).
|
That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Council-Controlled Organisations - Final Statements of Intent 2025/28". (b) Receives the final SOI 2025/28 for Bay Venues Limited (Bay Venues), Tauranga Art Gallery Trust (TAGT), Tourism Bay of Plenty (TBOP), Te Manawataki o Te Papa Limited (TMOTPL), Te Manawataki o Te Papa Charitable Trust (The Charitable Trust), and Bay of Plenty Local Authority Shared Services Limited (BOPLASS) (Attachments 1 to 6). (c) Receives Attachment 7 – TBOP’s letter to Mayor Mahé Drysdale regarding its final SOI. (d) Notes that as joint shareholder of TBOP, Western Bay of Plenty District Council (WBOPDC) received TBOP’s final SOI 2025/28 at their 26 June 2025 Council meeting. |
Executive Summary
2. Council’s CCOs are required by the Local Government Act (2002) (Part 5, Section 64, Schedule 8) to prepare an SOI consisting of information about the organisation’s activities, performance measures, and financials over a three-year financial period, and is prepared and adopted by each of the CCO boards annually.
3. The draft SOIs must be provided to their shareholder, TCC, by 1 March each year for shareholder feedback, and Council has an opportunity to comment by 1 May each year on the draft SOIs before they are finalised and adopted by the CCO boards by 30 June each year.
4. Draft SOIs for Bay Venues, TAGT, TBOP, TMOTPL, the Charitable Trust and BOPLASS were received and considered by Council on 28 April 2025, and feedback was subsequently provided to the Bay Venues, TAGT, TBOP and TMOTPL Boards, Council’s substantive CCOs.
5. As Council and the Otamataha Trust jointly govern the Charitable Trust, and as Council is one of nine shareholder councils of BOPLASS, it is not expected that TCC provides a Letter of Expectations (LOE) nor feedback to their draft SOIs, unless there are areas of significant concern.
6. Council’s
meeting scheduled for 14 July 2025 is the first appropriate opportunity to
formally receive the CCOs’ final SOI 2025/28. It is noted that the Local
Government Funding Agency’s final SOI 2025/28 will be received at the
City Delivery Committee meeting scheduled for 22 July 2025.
7. Each CCO’s final SOI is provided as Attachments 1 to 6. All six SOIs have met the statutory requirements as outlined in the Local Government Act.
8. An analysis of each CCO’s final SOI was undertaken by staff. For Bay Venues, TAGT, TBOP and TMOTPL, this was done with reference to the shareholder feedback provided to assess whether Council’s suggestions were considered further.
9. After receiving and considering Council’s feedback on their draft SOI, the boards of Bay Venues, TAGT, TBOP and TMOTPL have finalised and adopted their final SOI for 2025/28.
11. Overall, the CCOs have constructively responded to shareholder feedback, with the final SOIs reflecting the key points raised during the consultation process, as well as the expectation from Council to find a minimum of 7% in opex saving.
12. Staff are satisfied that the CCOs have responded appropriately to Council’s shareholder feedback in their final SOI and that their final SOIs are aligned to Council’s LOEs provided on 20 December 2024.
13. There are no identified financial or legal risks associated with the final SOIs. These documents include financial forecasts for the 2025/26, 2026/27, and 2027/28 financial years.
15. The following background section outlines, in more detail, Council’s feedback and changes from draft to final SOI for the substantive CCOs.
Background
Highlights of changes from draft to final SOI
Bay Venues
16. Bay Venues’ final SOI is provided as Attachment 1.
18. Council’s expectation of a minimum of 7% opex savings has been met and is reflected on page 9 of Attachment 1.
19. Council’s feedback on the draft SOI, in no particular order of priority, and Bay Venues’ response in the final SOI are outlined in the following table:
|
Bay Venues’ Draft SOI – shareholder feedback: (a) Consider a greater emphasis on using tangible examples to describe how the ratepayer is receiving value for money from Bay Venues. (b) Provide specific examples of how Bay Venues has improved systems or processes to reduce operating costs, including providing information on how Bay Venues will achieve a minimum 7% operational grant saving in the upcoming financial year. (c) Include a note that Bay Venues will have regular reporting and bi-monthly meetings with the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Councilors. (d) Provide more information about the Bay Venues asset renewals project(s). (e) Consider updating information to clearly illustrate the number of responses that are received when reporting on KPIs and relevant benchmarking. (f) Consider including information about what good looks like, and how Bay Venues is measuring and working towards achieving that i.e. qualitative benchmarking. |
Bay Venues’ final SOI – changes reflect shareholder feedback: · Please refer to Attachment 1 – pages 7 to 9 – which outlines the specific responses to Council’s feedback. Note: · Final SOI on page 17 reflects the change of meeting frequency with Elected Members from quarterly to bi-monthly as per the request from Council. · Final SOI reflects a change to page 13 regarding the KPI on visitation – target reduced from 2.2 million to 2.1 million (to reflect final approved budget).
· Final SOI reflects a change to page 14 regarding the KPI on Team Engagement – target reduced from >75% to >65% (to reflect current year staff engagement results). |
TAGT
20. TAGT’s final SOI is provided as Attachment 2.
21. Staff are satisfied that the TAGT Board has responded appropriately to Council’s shareholder feedback in their final SOI and aligned to Council’s LOE.
22. Council’s expectation of a minimum of 7% opex savings has been met and is reflected on pages 12 and 19 of Attachment 2.
23. Council’s feedback on the draft SOI, in no particular order of priority, and TAGT’s response in the final SOI are outlined in the following table:
|
TAGT’s Draft SOI – shareholder feedback: (a) If TAGT is focused on being the best, consider demonstrating how this can be achieved and measured, both the current status and ongoing year-on-year improvements. (b) Consider using industry-relevant benchmarking to demonstrate progress against TAGT’s goals and illustrate how TAGT compares to galleries of a similar size, scale and offering throughout the country. (c) Consider setting stretch targets (e.g. five years) and describe how TAGT will work towards achieving them. (d) Collect more information about what visitors like and dislike, and how that information will feed into ongoing gallery improvements. |
TAGT’s final SOI – changes reflect shareholder feedback: a) Relevant sections: · The final SOI (Attachment 2) addresses this by outlining clear metrics in Section 3.3 'Looking to the future'. · TAGT will measure its ambition to be a renowned gallery through community response, including positive regional media coverage, visitor satisfaction and engagement surveys, and financial contributions. · Reputation metrics include national benchmarking, media reviews, awards, touring exhibitions, and partnerships. · Year-on-year improvements are implied through annual increases in engagement and satisfaction, and redevelopment milestones. (b) Relevant sections: · TAGT commits to benchmarking against similar galleries as part of its strategy to be recognised nationally. · This is mentioned in Section 3.3, where benchmarking is listed as a key measure of success. · The document also references a review of other galleries post-COVID to contextualise visitation expectations (Section 3.2). (c) Relevant sections: · Stretch targets are discussed in Section 3.2, with expectations of annual growth from 2026/27 following the reopening. · The final SOI outlines a major exhibition in 2027 aimed at attracting national visitation (Section 6). · The Gallery’s redevelopment and strategic partnerships are framed as enablers for achieving these targets. (d) Relevant sections: · A Visitor Experience Strategy is being implemented (Sections 3.4 and 5), with surveys and analytics to measure engagement and appreciation. · Specific feedback mechanisms include asking visitors where they’ve travelled from and satisfaction surveys (Section 3.3). · The strategy is designed to inform ongoing improvements and demonstrate value for money. Note: · Page 6 addresses establishing a baseline and from there, stretch targets can be set from 2026 onwards. · This was an approach the TAGT Board discussed with Elected Members at the Governance to Governance meeting on 17 June 2025. |
TBOP
24. TBOP’s final SOI is provided as Attachment 3.
25. Staff are satisfied that the TBOP Board has responded appropriately to Council’s shareholder feedback in their final SOI and aligned to Council’s LOE.
26. Council’s expectation of a minimum of 7% opex savings has been met and is reflected on pages 4 and 20 of Attachment 3.
27. Council’s feedback on the draft SOI, in no particular order of priority, and TBOP’s response in the final SOI, are outlined in the following table:
|
TBOP’s Draft SOI – shareholder feedback: (a) If TBOP is focused on being the best, consider demonstrating how this can be achieved and measured, both the current status, and ongoing year-on year improvements. (b) Consider including information about what good looks like and how TBOP is measuring and working towards achieving that i.e. qualitative benchmarking.
(c) Consider demonstrating the economic impact of the work TBOP does and the return on investment the Tauranga ratepayers receive for TCC’s investment. (d) Include regular reporting on the Tauranga Destination Brand project. |
TBOP’s final SOI – changes reflect shareholder feedback: · Please refer to Attachment 7 which outlines the responses to Council’s feedback. Note: · Whakatāne District Council will no longer be part of TBOP’s regional tourism organisation from 1 July 2025, which is reflected in the financial section on page 20 of Attachment 3. |
TMOTPL
28. TMOTPL’s final SOI is provided as Attachment 4.
29. Staff are satisfied that the TMOTPL Board has responded appropriately to Council’s shareholder feedback in their final SOI and aligned to Council’s LOE.
30. Council’s expectation of a minimum of 7% opex savings has been met and is reflected on page 15 of Attachment 4.
31. Council’s feedback on the draft SOI and TMOTPL’s response in the final SOI, are outlined in the following table:
|
TMOTPL’s Draft SOI – shareholder feedback: (a) Provide clearer key performance indicators and specific information on delivery in full, on time, in scope, and on budget. |
TMOTPL’s final SOI – changes reflect shareholder feedback: · Please refer to page 10 of Attachment 4. |
The Charitable Trust
32. As Council and the Otamataha Trust jointly govern the Charitable Trust, there was no LOE provided to this CCO.
33. Attachment 5 is this CCO’s final SOI 2025/28. TCC staff worked with the Otamataha Trust on the development of the new SOI 2025/28, following the CCO’s half-yearly meeting, which took place on 8 April 2025.
34. The final SOI confirms the Charitable Trust’s purpose is to:
· Own the land referred to as Site A of the civic precinct – the land bounded by Willow Street, Wharf Street, Durham Street, and Hamilton Street.
· Support and encourage the development of Site A of the civic precinct, including (but not limited to) a library, civic whare, museum and exhibition centre and the beautification of surrounding areas.
35. The final SOI notes the founding documentation of this CCO and outlines the five key deliverables supporting the Charitable Trust’s core objective of restoring mana of the whenua to hapū and iwi, and provide certainty for how the land will be used in the future for the community.
BOPLASS
36. As Council is one of nine shareholder members, there was no LOE provided to BOPLASS.
37. BOPLASS’ final SOI 2025/28 is provided as Attachment 6.
38. There are no significant changes between the draft and the final document.
39. BOPLASS’ final SOI has six key performance targets to maximise value for money, benefits, and best practice to BOPLASS councils.
40. BOPLASS has confirmed that it will continue to manage a variety of joint procurement projects, which require ongoing management for performance, renewal or replacement. These joint procurement projects will continue across the three financial years.
41. BOPLASS has also confirmed that it will continue to manage a variety of shared services. These shared services will continue across the three financial years.
42. The BOPLASS Board has appreciated the support received from Council in the past year and looks forward to another successful year.
Statutory Context
43. The SOI is one of the CCO’s key governance and planning documents.
44. Engaging with the CCOs throughout the development of the annual SOIs is one of the main ways Council can influence its CCOs while ensuring they are aligned with Council’s strategic outcomes.
45. In accordance with the SOI and the Local Government Act (2002), CCOs are required to report to Council on its financial and non-financial performance six monthly and annually.
46. Bay Venues also provides quarterly updates and the latest Quarter 3 FY2025 can be found here.
47. Council’s partnerships with its CCOs help successfully deliver community outcomes and facilitate Tauranga becoming a vibrant city that attracts businesses, people and visitors, is well planned, connected, and inclusive.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
48. The CCOs contribute to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):
|
Contributes |
|
|
We are an inclusive city |
ü |
|
We value, protect and enhance the environment |
ü |
|
We are a well-planned city |
ü |
|
We can move around our city easily |
ü |
|
We are a city that supports business and education |
ü |
49. The CCOs actively work in partnership with Council, mana whenua and our community to achieve great outcomes, value for money, and delivering more with less resources. This is reflected in their SOIs and their performance against financial and non-financial measures.
Options Analysis
50. There are no options analysis as Council is formally receiving the final SOIs.
Financial Considerations
51. Budgets for all CCOs, including Council’s contributions, are included in the final SOIs.
Legal Implications / Risks
52. There are no legal implications.
53. Each of the CCOs has met their legislative requirements outlined in Part 5, Section 64, Schedule 8 of the Local Government Act (2002).
TE AO MĀORI APPROACH
55. While the Te Ao Māori approach is important, the matters addressed in this report are of a procedural nature.
CLIMATE IMPACT
56. While climate impact is important, the matters addressed in this report are of a procedural nature.
Consultation / Engagement
57. It is not required or expected to consult on an SOI under the Local Government Act (2002).
Significance
58. 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.
59. 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.
60. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter is of low significance.
ENGAGEMENT
61. 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.
Click here to view the TCC Significance and Engagement Policy
Next Steps
62. CCOs will be informed of Council’s consideration of this report.
63. The final SOIs will be made available to the public via Council’s website.
1. Attachment
1: Bay Venues - Final Statement of Intent 2025-2028 - A18437788 ⇩ 
2. Attachment
2: TAGT - Final Statement of Intent 2025-2028 - A18435933 ⇩
3. Attachment
3: TBOP - Final Statement of Intent 2025-2028 - A18431772 ⇩
4. Attachment
4: TMOTPL - Final Statement of Intent 2025-2028 - A18456888 ⇩
5. Attachment
5: TMOTP Charitable Trust - Final Statement of Intent 2025-2028 - A17911163 ⇩
6. Attachment
6: BOPLASS - Final Statement of Intent 2025-2028 - A18437798 ⇩ 
7. Atachment 7: TBOP
- Letter re Final Statement of Intent 2025-2028 - A18431776 ⇩
|
14 July 2025 |
11.5 Transport Resolutions Report No.56
File Number: A18303348
Author: Karen Hay, Acting Manager: Safety and Sustainability
Reece Wilkinson, Parking Strategy Manager
Will Hyde, Senior Transportation Engineer
Authoriser: Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure
Purpose of the Report
|
That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Transport Resolutions Report No.56". (b) Resolves to adopt the proposed parking controls associated with the Parking Management Plan, including the expansion of the city centre paid parking zone and the introduction of time limits on certain streets and reserves surrounding the paid zone. These controls will take effect on 4 August 2025. (c) Resolves to adopt the proposed traffic and parking controls associated with general safety, operational or amenity purposes. The changes are to become effective on or after the 15th of July 2025 subject to installation of appropriate signs and road markings, where appropriate.
|
Executive Summary
2. As the city grows and changes, the demands on the road network also change. Often there can be conflict between the need to keep traffic lanes clear to enable an efficient network, the need to provide on-street parking and loading to support nearby activities, restrict parking to improve access and the need for vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists to move around the city safely.
3. Attachment A sets out changes for general access, parking, safety and operational reasons. Some of these are requests from the public or other stakeholders for numerous changes to parking controls which have been assessed to be appropriate.
4. This report formalises the restrictions associated with the parking management plan for implementation. The Council approved the Parking Management Plan at its 28th of April 2025 meeting.
5. The majority of changes relate to previously approved capital projects or historic parking controls that have already been completed, recently completed, or are nearing completion. These require an update to the bylaw to enable enforcement of the proposed controls.
6. Amendments include changes to the following attachments to the Traffic & Parking Bylaw (2023):
(a) Attachment 3.1: Shared Pedestrian / Cycle Paths & Cycle Paths (in Road Reserve)
(i) These changes relate to shared paths in close proximity to crossing facilities or providing short connections to accommodate the number of path users. Consultation was undertaken when the project was developed and implemented. These changes are retrospective.
(b) Attachment 7.2: No Stopping at Any Time
(i) A number of changes relate to capital projects that are complete, where broken yellow lines require to be resolved. The broken yellow lines are required for access and visibility reasons.
(ii) There are fifty-two amendments to the bylaw required to capture the existing broken yellow lines at bus stops. These provide clear lead-in and lead-out spaces for buses to pull out of and back into kerbside traffic. A minimum standard is applied to ensure this. These changes are retrospective, with consultation completed at the time the project was delivered.
(iii) Extending the existing broken yellow lines to improve access at the head of the cul-de-sac, as requested by a local resident. The change is retrospective.
(iv) Other retrospective changes relate to projects completed to capture the changes associated with access or visibility at various locations.
(c) Attachment 7.7 Mobility Parking
(i) Reinstating a mobility parking space on Grey Street. This was formerly a mobility parking space, which was disestablished approximately 10 years ago. Some markings still remain. The space is being used as a mobility bay in practice even if it is not legally one currently.
(ii) Other retrospective mobility parking spaces requiring a resolution.
(d) Attachment 7.9 Parking Time Restrictions
The following key changes are being implemented as part of delivery of the parking management plan.
(i) P60 Restrictions on Cameron Road and Maunganui Road previously consulted upon as part of the project. These resolutions are retrospective.
(ii) P120 Restrictions as set out in Figures 1a and 1b in Attachment A.
(iii) P240 Restrictions as agreed with spaces and places for a section of 7th Ave and for Memorial Park and as laid out in Figure 2 in Attachment A.
(e) Attachment 7.12 Pay Areas
(i) Designating parking on the site of No.483 Cameron Rd (former site of The Warehouse) as paid parking, to enable effective management of the car parks.
(ii) Expanding the city fringe paid parking area, as resolved in the Tauranga Parking Management Plan. The extent of the expanded paid parking area is shown in Figure 3 of Attachment A. This is to include a resident permit as detailed in Appendix B.
(f) Attachment 7.16 Loading Zones with Time Restriction
Formalising an existing loading zone in Pilot Bay to support boat ramp users, and establishing a new loading zone within a service lane on First Avenue to support adjacent businesses. These changes are retrospective.
Background
8. As the city grows and changes, the demands on the road network also change. Often there can be conflict between the need to keep traffic lanes clear to enable an efficient network, the need to provide on-street parking and loading to support nearby activities, and the need for vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists to move around the city safely.
9. The Tauranga Parking Strategy was adopted by Council on 15 November 2021.
10. Parking Management Plans (PMP’s) are developed to provide a focus to parking in local areas. Each local area has its own challenges and expectation from customers, the Parking Management Plans are to be designed reflecting that.
11. Parking Management Plans are required to provide an environment where different parking users are able to coexist within boundaries set by Council.
12. The Tauranga Parking Management Plan was adopted by Council on the 28th of April 2025 alongside an agreement to engage on the Mount Maunganui Parking Management Plan. The Council resolved that (Resolution CO/25/6/18) :
(a) Approves implementation of the City Centre Parking Management Plan including paid parking in the city centre fringe and time restrictions, conditional on approval of appropriate bylaw updates and the agreement of a resident parking permit.
(b) Approves paid parking within a city centre fringe zone between Arundel Street and Park Street excluding the existing city centre paid parking zone.
(c) Approves additional P120 time restrictions, including a potential paid option for an extended duration, between Eleventh Avenue and Marsh Street (inclusive), excluding areas covered by a paid parking zone.
13. Limited engagement with the local community took place in 2022. Given the Council resolution in April 2025, no further consultation or engagement is envisaged. Adjacent properties will be notified of the changes prior to implementation.
14. The Council regularly adds, removes or amends traffic and parking controls to reflect and support operational and safety needs on the road network. The proposed amendments in Attachment A are minor changes to parking restrictions across the city which have arisen through requests from the public, transportation staff, or other stakeholders; or changes resulting from approved developments.
Statutory Context
15. The amendments help to achieve the vision and strategic transport priorities of making our network safer and easier for people to get around the city.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
16. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):
|
Contributes |
|
|
We are an inclusive city |
ü |
|
We value, protect and enhance the environment |
☐ |
|
We are a well-planned city |
ü |
|
We can move around our city easily |
ü |
|
We are a city that supports business and education |
ü |
Options Analysis
19. The proposals are independent of each other, and Council may resolve to adopt some, all or none of them.
Financial Considerations
Legal Implications / Risks
21. These proposals are required in order to allow enforcement of changes deemed necessary for safety and amenity purposes. Council has an obligation to address known safety issues on the road network.
TE AO MĀORI APPROACH
22. The proposals create safety, access and/or amenity improvements for our residents and visitors, and therefore align with the principal of manaakitanga. For the major projects, consultation with hapū was undertaken as part of the project development.
CLIMATE IMPACT
23. Given this report relates to regulatory procedure, no climate impact assessment is made.
Consultation / Engagement
24. Limited consultation/engagement was undertaken in relation to the parking management plan in 2022. The Council resolved to implement the Tauranga Parking Management Plan and hence no additional consultation is envisaged.
25. Changes will be notified to adjacent properties prior to implementation of the signage.
Significance
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the decision is of medium significance.
29. For the changes which are retrospective, these are likely to have a low public interest as these were previously consulted upon or responded to requests from adjacent landowners.
Parking changes for local residents and businesses is likely to be of high interest.
ENGAGEMENT
30. 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.
Next Steps
31. The bylaw schedule will be updated in accordance with the resolution and implementation of associated line marking and signage as appropriate.
32. Adjacent business and residents to be notified of parking restriction changes, prior to implementation.
1. Appendix
A - Transport Resolutions Report 56 Proposals - A18408733 ⇩ 
2. Appendix B -
Residents Parking Permit 2025 - A18409547 ⇩ 
|
14 July 2025 |
11.6 Remits to Local Government New Zealand
File Number: A18365831
Author: Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning
Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance
Purpose of the Report
1. To consider Council’s position on five remits that will be voted on at the Local Government New Zealand annual general meeting on 16 July 2025.
|
That the Council: (a) Receives the report "Remits to Local Government New Zealand ". Voting (b) Provides the following direction to Council’s representatives at the Local Government New Zealand annual general meeting on whether the remits to that meeting should be supported or not supported.
Priorities (c) Provides the following direction to those representatives regarding the relative priority of successful remits:
OR (d) Delegates responsibility to those representatives to determine a view on the priorities of the successful remits and convey this to the annual general meeting as required.
|
Executive Summary
2. This report facilitates Council decision-making on five remits to be voted on at the upcoming Local Government New Zealand annual general meeting.
3. Staff commentary is provided on four of the five remits to assist Council in making a decision on whether to support the remit. The fifth remit was proposed by this Council and therefore support is assumed.
4. Supported remits form part of Local Government New Zealand’s future work programme.
5. There are no financial implications, legal implications, or risks directly associated with the decisions required in this report.
Background
6. Each year at the Local Government New Zealand (“LGNZ”) annual general meeting (“AGM”) member councils vote on ‘remits’. Remits allow member councils to propose policy changes or work programmes for LGNZ. If a remit is passed at the AGM, it becomes official policy for LGNZ to action.
7. The 2025 AGM will be held on 16 July in Christchurch. At the time of writing, Mayor Drysdale and Deputy Mayor Scoular will be attending on Council’s behalf. The Chief Executive will also be in attendance.
8. There are five remits to be considered at this year’s AGM. They cover:
· Security system payments for elected members
· Improving joint management agreements (a Resource Management Act tool to enable councils and iwi/hapu to work together on environmental governance)
· Alcohol licensing fees
· Aligning public and school bus services
· A review of local government arrangements to achieve better balance.
9. A full copy of each remit including the proposing council or councils, the support obtained to get the remit onto the agenda[1], and background information is included as Attachment 1 to this report.
10. Remit 5, a review of local government arrangements to achieve better balance, was proposed by this council and supported by the LGNZ Metro Sector.
11. Staff commentary on the remits is included as Attachment 2 to this report. This is included to assist Council’s consideration of whether to support each remit. No commentary is provided on Remit 5 because, as proposing council, it is assumed that Council will be in support.
12. To ensure that LGNZ’s workload is directed appropriately to meet its members’ wishes, delegates to the AGM will also vote on the relative priority of all successful remits.
Statutory Context
13. The remits, if successful and prioritised, feed directly into LGNZ’s work programme. The ambition of all five remits is to ultimately change legislation or other central government statutory tools.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
14. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):
|
Contributes |
|
|
We are an inclusive city |
☐ |
|
We value, protect and enhance the environment |
☐ |
|
We are a well-planned city |
☐ |
|
We can move around our city easily |
☐ |
|
We are a city that supports business and education |
☐ |
15. Voting on the remits themselves has no direct impact on strategic community outcomes. However, if supported and then if LGNZ’s further work leads to legislative or other change, significant impacts may occur.
Options Analysis
16. There are three layers of decision to be made by Council, each with its own options. The layers are:
(a) Whether to provide direction on each remit to the delegates, or to allow the delegates to determine Council’s position on each remit and vote accordingly while at the AGM.
(b) Whether to support or not support each individual remit (assuming that the ‘provide direction’ approach is taken above).
(c) The relative priority for LGNZ’s work programme of all remits supported at the AGM.
17. For layer 1, past elected councils have traditionally provided direction on each remit to the delegates.
Financial Considerations
18. There are no direct financial considerations associated to this report.
Legal Implications / Risks
19. There are no direct legal implications or risks associated with this report.
TE AO MĀORI APPROACH
20. There are no direct implications on council’s Te Ao Māori approach within this report or the decisions to be made. In the event that Remit 2 is supported at the LGNZ AGM and further work leads to changes in this area, there is a possibility that a joint management agreement may occur between council and tangata whenua.
21. Similarly, if Remit 5 is supported by the LGNZ AGM and leads to changes in the area of local government arrangements, there may be implications for future relationships between local government and Māori.
CLIMATE IMPACT
22. There are no direct climate impact implications associated with this report.
Consultation / Engagement
23. No specific formal engagement has occurred with stakeholders or the community on the five matters covered in the remits.
Significance
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the decision as to how Council should cast its votes at the LGNZ AGM is of low significance.
ENGAGEMENT
27. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the decision is of low significance, officers are of the opinion that no engagement is required prior to Council making a decision.
Next Steps
28. Council’s delegates will take Council’s direction to the LGNZ AGM on Wednesday 16 July.
1. LGNZ
AGM Remits_2025 - A18431462 ⇩ 
2. 2025 LGNZ remits
- staff commentary - A18432589 ⇩ 
|
14 July 2025 |
13 Public excluded session
Resolution to exclude the public
[1] To be included on the AGM agenda, a remit must be supported by a zone, a sector, or at least five councils. Supporting a remit to get onto the agenda does not bind those supporting councils to formally vote to support the remit at the AGM.
