AGENDA
Planning and Strategy Committee
Duncan McCann (Chairperson) |
|
Aleisha Rutherford (Deputy Chairperson) |
|
Grant Smith (The Mayor) |
|
Brent Barrett |
Leonie Hapeta |
Susan Baty |
Jim Jefferies |
Rachel Bowen |
Lorna Johnson |
Adrian Broad |
Karen Naylor |
Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke |
Bruno Petrenas |
Vaughan Dennison |
Tangi Utikere |
Lew Findlay QSM |
|
PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
Planning and Strategy Committee MEETING
6 November 2017
Order of Business
2. Notification of Additional Items
Pursuant to Sections 46A(7) and 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, to receive the Chairperson’s explanation that specified item(s), which do not appear on the Agenda of this meeting and/or the meeting to be held with the public excluded, will be discussed.
Any additions in accordance with Section 46A(7) must be approved by resolution with an explanation as to why they cannot be delayed until a future meeting.
Any additions in accordance with Section 46A(7A) may be received or referred to a subsequent meeting for further discussion. No resolution, decision or recommendation can be made in respect of a minor item.
To receive comments from members of the public on matters specified on this Agenda or, if time permits, on other Committee matters.
(NOTE: If the Committee wishes to consider or discuss any issue raised that is not specified on the Agenda, other than to receive the comment made or refer it to the Chief Executive, then a resolution will need to be made in accordance with clause 2 above.)
4. Confirmation of Minutes Page 7
“That the minutes of the Planning and Strategy Committee meeting of 2 October 2017 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record.”
5. Wastewater BPO Project Vision and Objectives Page 13
Memorandum, dated 24 October 2017 from the Water & Waste Services Manager, Robert van Bentum and the Special Projects Manager, Phil Walker.
6. Amendment to Administration Manuals - Water Supply, Stormwater Drainage, Wastewater Bylaws Page 17
Memorandum, dated 9 October 2017 from the Policy Analyst, Peter Ridge.
7. Amendments to Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2016 - approval for consultation Page 99
Report, dated 9 October 2017 from the Policy Analyst, Peter Ridge.
8. Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw Review - Section 155 Determination Report Page 161
Memorandum, dated 17 October 2017 from the Policy Analyst, Lili Kato.
9. Draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2018 - approval for consultation Page 175
Report, dated 17 October 2017 from the Policy Analyst, Peter Ridge.
10. Committee Work Schedule Page 239
11. Exclusion of Public
|
To be moved: “That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting listed in the table below. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under Section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
This resolution is made in reliance on Section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by Section 6 or Section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public as stated in the above table. Also that the persons listed below be permitted to remain after the public has been excluded for the reasons stated. Chief Executive (Heather Shotter), Chief Financial Officer (Grant Elliott), General Manager, City Enterprises (Ray McIndoe), General Manager, City Future (Sheryl Bryant), General Manager, City Networks (Ray Swadel), General Manager, Customer Services (Peter Eathorne), General Manager, Libraries and Community Services (Debbie Duncan), Human Resources Manager (Wayne Wilson) and Communications and Marketing Manager (or their representative (name)) because of their knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with advice on matters both from an organisation-wide context (being members of the Council’s Management Team) and also from their specific role within the Council. Legal Counsel (John Annabell), because of his knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with legal and procedural advice. Governance and Support Team Leader (Kyle Whitfield) and Committee Administrators (Penny Odell, Carly Chang and Rachel Corser), because of their knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with procedural advice and record the proceedings of the meeting. [Add Council Officers], because of their knowledge and ability to assist the meeting in speaking to their report and answering questions, noting that such officer will be present at the meeting only for the item that relate to their respective report. [Add Third Parties], because of their knowledge and ability to assist the meeting in speaking to their report/s [or other matters as specified] and answering questions, noting that such person/s will be present at the meeting only for the items that relate to their respective report/s [or matters as specified].
|
PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
Palmerston North City Council
Minutes of the Planning and Strategy Committee Meeting Part I Public, held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, Civic Administration Building, 32 The Square, Palmerston North on 02 October 2017, commencing at 9.00am.
Members Present: |
Councillor Duncan McCann (in the Chair), The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. |
Apologies: |
Councillor Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke. |
Councillor Vaughan Dennison entered the meeting at 9.46am during consideration of clause 66. He was not present for clauses 63 to 65 inclusive.
63-17 |
Apologies |
|
Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. The COMMITTEE RESOLVED 1. That the Committee receive the apologies. |
|
Clause 63-17 above was carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. |
64-17 |
Public Comment |
|
Danny Auger from SPCA made public comment regarding the Draft Palmerston North Animals and Bees Bylaw. |
|
Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. The COMMITTEE RESOLVED 1. That the public comment be received for information. |
|
Clause 64-17 above was carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. |
65-17 |
Confirmation of Minutes |
|
Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Lorna Johnson. The COMMITTEE RESOLVED 1. That the minutes of the Planning and Strategy Committee meeting of 4 September 2017 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record. |
|
Clause 65-17 above was carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. |
66-17 |
City Centre Streetscape - Square East Safety Audit Memorandum, dated 14 September 2017 from the Roading Manager, Jon Schwass and the City Planning Manager, David Murphy. |
|
Moved Grant Smith, seconded Jim Jefferies. Councillor Vaughan Dennison entered the meeting at 9.46am. The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS 1. That the Road Safety Audit of the Square East section of the City Centre Streetscape Plan be received. 2. That the findings of the Road Safety Audit inform the basis of the final design and targeted consultation on the Square East section of the City Centre Streetscape. 3. That the Square East section of the City Centre Streetscape Plan be designed to accommodate 60 degree parking in the interim but be easily converted to the original concept of 90 degree parking at a later date when through traffic volumes decrease. |
|
Clause 66-17 above was carried 14 votes to 0, with 1 abstention, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. Abstained: Councillor Vaughan Dennison. |
67-17 |
Pedestrian Facilities and Safety (NZTA) - September 2017 Memorandum, dated 18 September 2017 from the Senior Transportation Engineer, Glenn Connelly. |
|
Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Adrian Broad. The COMMITTEE RESOLVED 1. That the progress and actions regarding pedestrian safety and crossing facilities outlined in the report titled “Pedestrian Facilities and Safety (NZTA) – September 2017” and dated 18 September 2017 from the Senior Transportation Engineer, Glenn Connelly, be noted. |
|
Clause 67-17 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. |
68-17 |
Draft Palmerston North Animals and Bees Bylaw - Approval for Consultation Report, dated 15 September 2017 from the Policy Analyst, Ann-Marie Mori. In discussion it was noted that the desexing and microchipping issue around cats needed to be included in the draft bylaw, and how roosters should not be allowed in the urban area with the exception of the Palmerston North villages. |
|
Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS 1. That the Council determines the form of the draft Animals and Bees Bylaw 2017 and Administration Manual (contained in Appendix 1) is, subject to the outcome of public consultation, considered to be the most appropriate form of bylaw. 2. That the Council confirms that it has considered the draft Animals and Bees Bylaw 2017 and determines that it does not give any rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. 3. That the Consultation Document (including the draft Animals and Bees Bylaw 2017 and Administration Manual) (attached as Appendix 1) incorporating any amendments recommended by the Committee be approved for consultation. 4. That delegated authority is given to the Chairperson and the Deputy Chairperson of the Planning and Strategy Committee for the approval of any minor amendments to the Consultation Document. |
|
Clauses 68.1 to 68.4 inclusive above were carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. |
|
Moved Lorna Johnson, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. 5. Subject to confirmation through the 10 Year Plan, develop a public campaign (with input from key stakeholders) to: a. Promote desexing and microchipping of all cats; b. Educate cat owners and pet stores on best practice animal care, including improved information delivered through Council’s website. 6. That the following clause is added to ‘Part 4 – Cats’ of the draft Animals and Bees Bylaw: “8.7 Every person who keeps cats must ensure: a. Cats are microchipped and registered with a recognized microchip registry. b. Cats over 4 months old are desexed (unless kept for breeding purposes and are registered with New Zealand Cat Fancy Ltd.).” 7. That clause 3.1 of the draft Animals and Bees Bylaw be amended to read: “3.1 This Bylaw comes into force on 2 July 2018, except for clause 8.7, which comes into force on 1 July 2019.” |
|
Clauses 68.5 to 68.7 inclusive above were carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. |
|
Moved Susan Baty, seconded Rachel Bowen. 8. That roosters not be allowed in the urban area but excluding Palmerston North villages under clause 12 of the Poultry. |
|
Clause 68.8 above was carried 10 votes to 5, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Jim Jefferies, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor and Bruno Petrenas. Against: Councillors Adrian Broad, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. |
69-17 |
Committee Work Schedule |
|
Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. The COMMITTEE RESOLVED 1. That the Planning and Strategy Committee receive its Work Schedule dated October 2017. |
|
Clause 69-17 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. |
The meeting finished at 11.07am.
Confirmed 6 November 2017
Chairperson
PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
TO: Planning and Strategy Committee
MEETING DATE: 6 November 2017
TITLE: Wastewater BPO Project Vision and Objectives
DATE: 24 October 2017
AUTHOR/S: Robert van Bentum, Water & Waste Services Manager, City Networks
Phil Walker, Special Projects Manager, City Networks
1. That the Wastewater BPO Vision and Objectives as set out in clauses 3.1 and 3.2 respectively of this report, be adopted as endorsed by the Wastewater BPO Project Steering Group.
|
1. ISSUE
1.1 Following the start of the Wastewater BPO Project, the establishment of the Wastewater BPO Project Steering Group (PSG) and the adoption and submission of the Project Statement of Intent to Horizons Regional Council, Officers have been working through the initial establishment phase of the project.
1.2 Key achievements during the early phase of the project have included:
· appointment of the Consultants MWH Stantec as Technical Advisers to the project
· regular monthly meetings of the Project Steering Group
· initiation of a number of initial work packages including a contextual review, generic options cost assessment, preparation of framework documents for objective setting and development of a consultation and engagement framework
· commissioning of a generic cost assessment to guide Council decision making in respect of the 2018-28 LTP
1.3 A key task during the initial set-up phase of the project has been the development of a project vision and objectives for the project. Along with a name and recognisable identity for the project, the vision and objectives articulates the aspirations of Council for the Wastewater Project.
1.4 The project vision and objectives are key aspects for effective engagement with the community and key stakeholders. Accordingly these will be important elements of the communication plan being developed.
1.5 The project objectives are a key part of the Wastewater Best Practicable Options Assessment as they set out the outcomes against which each of the alternatives will be assessed. For each objective separate sub-objectives and criteria will be developed to enable project participants to score each alternative or option in terms of the extent to which it meets the outcomes sought by the objective.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 The project vision and objectives were developed with the support of the Technical Advisers to the project who prepared draft discussion material for Council and facilitated two workshop sessions, as listed below, to discuss and refine the draft material.
· Workshop #1 - Monday – 28 August 2017 – 3.30 to 4.30 pm
· Workshop #2 - Monday – 11 September 2017 – 4.00 to 4.45 pm
2.2 Following the second workshop a revised draft of the vision and objectives was prepared by the consultants, reviewed and amended by Officers and circulated to all Councillors and PSG members. Several minor wording amendment suggestions were received but no major changes were proposed.
2.3 Following circulation of the vision and objectives, the draft version was tabled for comment and adoption at the October 2017 meeting of the PSG. No further amendments were proposed and it was agreed that the vision and objectives be submitted to Council for their adoption.
3. Project Vision and objectives
3.1 The draft project vision is:
“Management of the City’s wastewater which enables growth, protects and enhances the environment and contributes to improving the health and mauri of the Manawatū River.”
3.2 The draft project objectives are:
To implement a best practicable option wastewater management solution that:
1. Protects public health and reduces public health risks.
2. Minimises adverse environmental effects related to the discharge of treated wastewater on air, land and water;
3. Is sustainable, enduring, and resilient;
4. Contributes to improving the health and mauri of the Manawatū River;
5. Takes an integrated approach to the management of the Manawatū River Catchment including understanding cumulative effects;
6. Is affordable and cost effective;
7. Minimises whole of life carbon emissions and optimises resource recovery;
8. Facilitates long term growth and economic development
9. Is developed in partnership with Rangitāne o Manawatū and
10. Is developed with the active engagement of the community and key stakeholders
3.3 During the development of the objectives, a number of requirements for robust assessment of alternatives were highlighted. These requirements, while not objectives, were considered important and have been included within the Project Charter. The requirements highlight the need for decision making processes followed during the project to be:
a. Evidence based;
b. Efficient and timely;
c. Undertaken to meet the requirements of the current resource consent (in terms of the scope of the BPO review); and
d. Consistent with the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management, the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity and the One Plan.
3.4 Additionally through the objectives setting process, Councillors highlighted a desire that PNCC work positively with Horizons Regional Council through the consent process as Council develops the best practicable option for the management of the City’s wastewater.
4. NEXT STEPS
4.1 Following adoption of the vision and objectives, the Project Charter will be updated to include these elements as well as the requirements captured in clauses 3.3 and 3.4.
4.2 Even though the Committee is being asked to adopt the vision and objectives in their current form, there will continue to be an opportunity to revise the objectives particularly prior to any ranking or scoring of the alternatives or long list of options.
5. Compliance and administration
Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual <Enter clause> |
No |
Are the decisions significant? |
No |
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water? |
No |
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan? |
No |
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure? |
No |
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions? |
Yes |
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans? |
No |
Nil
Robert van Bentum Water & Waste Services Manager |
Phil Walker Special Projects Manager |
|
PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
TO: Planning and Strategy Committee
MEETING DATE: 6 November 2017
TITLE: Amendment to Administration Manuals - Water Supply, Stormwater Drainage, Wastewater Bylaws
DATE: 9 October 2017
AUTHOR/S: Peter Ridge, Policy Analyst, City Future
1. That the Council determines that no consultation is necessary because the proposed changes are very minor and do not significantly affect any particular group of stakeholders. 2. That the Council amend the Water Supply Bylaw 2015 Administration Manual, Stormwater Drainage Bylaw 2015 Administration Manual, and the Wastewater Bylaw 2017 Administration Manual, as shown in attachments 1-3.
|
1. ISSUE
The Water and Waste Team have revised the Service Connection Form (SC1) used whenever an applicant requests a water, wastewater, or stormwater drainage connection. This form is included in the Administration Manuals for the applicable bylaws. The bylaws require that any amendments to the Administration Manual are made by the Council by resolution. This memorandum outlines the proposed changes and recommends that the Council resolve to amend the Administration Manuals accordingly.
2. BACKGROUND
The Water Supply and Stormwater Drainage bylaws were adopted in 2015, while the Wastewater Bylaw was adopted in 2017. The Water Supply and Stormwater Drainage Bylaws are not due to be reviewed until 2020, while the Wastewater Bylaw is not due to be reviewed until 2022.
3. Proposed amendment
The only amendment proposed is to replace the existing Service Connection application form (SC1) with the revised form shown in the revised Administration Manuals, provided as attachments 1 - 3. The Water and Waste Team have been reviewing many of their processes, and identified a number of changes to the Service Connection Form. These are all minor changes, but will improve the usability of the form whilst enabling better information to be collected from applicants. Of particular note is the new backflow assessment section which will enable the application process to better determine the needs for backflow prevention, which is a critical element of protecting the water supply distribution network from contamination. The addition of a notes section will also make it clearer for applicants why the Council requires the information.
No other changes to the Administration Manuals are proposed. The new form is shown incorporated into each of the three Administration Manuals as follows:
· Attachment 1 – Water Supply Bylaw Administration Manual: new form shown as appendix 1.
· Attachment 2 – Stormwater Drainage Bylaw Administration Manual: new form shown as appendix 1.
· Attachment 3 – Wastewater Bylaw Administration Manual: new form shown as appendix 2.
4. Analysis
In each of the three bylaws, the relevant “Delegations” clause notes that before amending the Administration Manual, the Council must consult appropriately with any person that it considers may be affected by the proposed amendments and give those persons a reasonably opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed amendments before they come into effect.
The advice from officers is that consultation in this instance is not necessary before the Council makes the change. The scope of the proposed amendment is limited to updating an application form, and does not affect any applicant’s existing rights. Therefore, consultation is not considered necessary or useful in this situation.
5. NEXT STEPS
If the Committee agrees to recommend to the Council that the Administration Manuals are amended, and the Council confirms that recommendation, then the amended Administration Manuals will be published to the Council’s website.
6. Compliance and administration
Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual <Enter clause> |
No |
Are the decisions significant? |
No |
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water? |
No |
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan? |
No |
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure? |
Yes |
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions? |
Yes |
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans? |
No |
1. |
Palmerston North Water Supply Bylaw 2015 Administration Manual ⇩ |
|
2. |
Palmerston North Stormwater Drainage Bylaw 2015 Administration Manual ⇩ |
|
3. |
Palmerston North Wastewater Bylaw 2017 Administration Manual ⇩ |
|
Peter Ridge Policy Analyst |
|
|
PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
TO: Planning and Strategy Committee
MEETING DATE: 6 November 2017
TITLE: Amendments to Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2016 - approval for consultation
DATE: 9 October 2017
AUTHOR/S: Peter Ridge, Policy Analyst, City Future
Summary of options analysis for proposed amendments to the waste management and minimisation bylaw and administration manual
Problem or Opportunity |
A number of improvements and refinements to the Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw and Administration Manual have been identified. In order to make these changes, community consultation is required. |
OPTION 1: |
To consult on the proposed amendments to the Bylaw and Administration Manual |
Community Views |
No community views have been sought yet. |
Benefits |
Feedback from the community on the proposed amendments. |
Risks |
There are no particular risks. |
Financial |
There are no particular financial impacts. |
OPTION 2: |
To not consult on the proposed amendments to the Bylaw and Administration Manual |
Community Views |
No community views have been sought yet. |
Benefits |
There are no particular benefits. |
Risks |
There may be risks to staff health and safety if the processes around collecting contaminated recycling containers are not revised. |
Financial |
There are no particular financial impacts. |
Contribution of Recommended Option to Council’s Strategic Direction |
The Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw, including the proposed amendments discussed in this report, contributes to the draft Eco-City Strategy, specifically through the draft Waste Plan’s objectives to ensure the city’s solid waste is adequately and affordably managed, and to maximise the proportion of waste diverted from landfill (e.g. through recycling, composting). |
Rationale for the recommendations
1. Overview of the problem or opportunity
1.1 Since the adoption of the Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2016 officers have identified a number of improvements and refinements to both the Bylaw and the Administration Manual. A number of amendments are being recommended that will make enforcement of the Bylaw simpler and are expected to improve levels of compliance and reduce the costs arising from contaminated recycling collections.
2. Background and previous council decisions
2.1 The Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw was adopted in September 2016. Since that time, officers have been implementing the new bylaw and revising processes and systems to give effect to the new Bylaw. As a result of that work, a number of improvements and refinements have been identified which warrant amendment to the Bylaw. Amending the Bylaw requires community consultation.
3. Description of options
3.1 There are effectively two options – to consult on the proposed amendments, or to not consult.
3.2 The first option – to consult on the proposed amendments – will allow the Council to seek community feedback on the suggested changes. Several of the changes are minor, and those that are not minor are not specific to any particular group or stakeholder. Accordingly, the consultation is proposed to be city-wide, with the public generally.
3.3 The suggested changes that would be consulted on include the following:
· Adding clause 19.3 to the Bylaw, to allow staff to refuse collection of a container that contains or is believed to contain offensive material. This also requires the addition of a new defined term – “offensive material.”
· Add new point 18 to the Standard Conditions for Council Kerbside Collection in the Administration Manual, to give Council discretion to not empty contaminated containers, with guidance on the criteria for exercising that discretion.
· Insert revised flowcharts in the Administration Manual – “Rubbish Bags” and “Wheelie Bin” (correct minor typos); “Three Strikes (simplified process with regards to contaminated recycling containers).
· Minor amendments to correct typos, and to reflect changes in practice since the Bylaw was adopted (e.g. removing Bunnythorpe Transfer Station from table of locations for depositing Approved Diverted Materials, remove batteries from the Prohibited Diverted Materials list/add to the table of Approved Diverted Materials for Ferguson Street Recycling Centre).
· Revising the wording of the terms and conditions for events waste management and minimisation to promote 100% usage of compostable materials for food packaging at events held on Council land or with Council funding.
· Updating the maps showing the Council Kerbside Collection areas and days of collection.
3.4 The second option – to not consult – would leave the Bylaw unchanged. The Council is required by the Local Government Act 2002 to consult before amending a Bylaw, so the proposed changes could not be made without consultation. Some of the very minor changes proposed to the Administration Manual could be made by resolution without consultation, however the substantive changes would still require consultation.
4. Analysis of options
4.1 The changes that are being proposed for consultation are mostly minor and reflect changes that have arisen as a result of implementing the new Bylaw. However, they will bring overall improvements to the delivery of the waste management and minimisation services covered by the Bylaw. For instance, as a result of a trial batteries will now be accepted as a diverted material at the Ferguson Street Recycling Centre.
4.2 Other changes are the result of refining processes following the adoption of the Bylaw in September 2016. In particular, the process for dealing with contaminated recycling collection containers was evaluated and a number of barriers were identified. The current process did not provide for immediate refusal to collect a recycling container where that container held offensive material. Ordinarily, a container would be collected if this was the first offence. However, in some instances, the level of contamination was such that it posed a risk to the health and safety of staff collecting and sorting those containers. Consequently, it is proposed to add clause 19.3 to the Bylaw to reserve to Council the right to refuse collection where the container contains offensive material. This broad power of discretion is tempered by the addition of point 18 in the Standard Conditions for the Kerbside Collection Service in the Administration Manual. It provides guidance for staff to determine the severity of contamination to justify non-collection of the container.
4.3 Supporting this change to the recorded process, a simplified “three strikes” flowchart is proposed. The new process now simply refers to “strike” notices, rather than identifying them as first, second or third strike notices. A single strike notice will not result in a suspension of service. However, three or more strike notices will result in a suspension of service from four to eight weeks. Under this new process, repeated contamination of the recycling container will result in an escalated term of suspension. The new process also changes the way that officers undertake education for contaminated recycling containers. Rather than requiring a visit from an officer in person, the new process simply notes that a Council officer will make attempts to contact the property occupier to discuss the correct use of the service. This gives officers greater flexibility over methods of contacting the property occupier, allows limited staff resources to be used more effectively, and also addresses concerns for staff safety in dealing with sometimes aggressive property occupants.
4.4 The first option – to consult on the proposed amendments – has the advantage of allowing the Council to receive feedback from the community on the proposed changes. Community consultation often reveals additional issues that may not have been considered, or may suggest alternative approaches or refinements to the Council’s proposal.
4.5 The second option – to not consult on the proposed amendments – would leave the current Bylaw unaltered. This would require no further work from officers on this process.
5. Conclusion
5.1 The recommended option is option one – consult on the proposed changes to the Bylaw. This will enable the community to provide feedback on those changes.
6. Next actions
6.1 If the recommendations are accepted, then officers will start the consultation process, as outlined in section 7 below.
7. Outline of community engagement process
7.1 The Special Consultative Procedure is not required to be used in this instance. However, the proposed community engagement exercise will follow a similar process. A written document (the Consultation Document) will be published to the Council’s website and will be available in hard copy at the Customer Services Centre and the central and branch libraries. The period for written submissions will run from 18 November to 20 December 2017. Hearings for oral submissions will be scheduled for February 2018, with deliberations on those submissions to follow in April.
7.2 The consultation process will be promoted through a mix of traditional and online media. A story will appear in the Square Circular, along with a press release outlining the scope of changes proposed. Posts will appear on Facebook and on Twitter promoting the opportunity to make a submission. An online submission form will be available on the Council website.
7.3 Most of the proposed changes do not have a greater impact on any one group more than any other, and therefore this consultation process will be directed to the community in general. The changes to the terms and conditions for events waste management and minimisation are likely to be of interest to event organisers, and so they will be contacted directly and invited to make a submission.
Compliance and administration
Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual Clause 168 |
Yes |
Are the decisions significant? |
No |
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water? |
No |
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan? |
No |
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure? |
No |
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions? |
Yes |
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans? |
No |
1. |
Consultation Document Amendments to Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2016 - November 2017 ⇩ |
|
Peter Ridge Policy Analyst |
|
|
PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
TO: Planning and Strategy Committee
MEETING DATE: 6 November 2017
TITLE: Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw Review - Section 155 Determination Report
DATE: 17 October 2017
AUTHOR/S: Lili Kato, Policy Analyst, City Future
1. That pursuant to section 155(1) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Council determines that a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the issues relating to managing cemeteries and crematoria in Council’s control, including protecting the solemn nature of cemeteries, protecting the private interests of those with exclusive rights to burials, and creating a balance between pragmatic management and meeting the needs of the community; 2. That pursuant to section 155(2) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Council determines that the standalone form of bylaw is the most appropriate form of bylaw; 3. That pursuant to section 155(2) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Council agrees that it is not anticipated that a revised bylaw would give rise to implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990; 4. That the Chief Executive is instructed to draft a bylaw that addresses the issues relating to managing cemeteries and crematoria in Council’s control, including protecting the solemn nature of cemeteries, protecting the private interests of those with exclusive rights to burials, and creating a balance between pragmatic management and meeting the needs of the community.
|
1. ISSUE
On 26 September 2016 Council resolved:
“That the review of the Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw scheduled for 2018 be brought forward to 2017”.
2. BACKGROUND
The process for reviewing bylaws that are created under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) is set out in section 160. It requires that an assessment is carried out under section 155 of the LGA to establish whether the bylaw is the best way to deal with the perceived problems.
The details of this assessment are contained in the attached report which concludes:
a) That a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems relating to the management of Council controlled cemeteries and crematoria in Palmerston North;
b) That a stand-alone form of bylaw is the most appropriate form;
c) At this early stage of the process it is not anticipated that a revised bylaw would give rise to implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.
3. NEXT STEPS
Pre-consultation will take place throughout November and December 2017, and a draft bylaw for consultation will be submitted to Council on 5 March 2018.
4. Compliance and administration
Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual <Enter clause> |
No |
Are the decisions significant? |
No |
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water? |
No |
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan? |
No |
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure? |
No |
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions? |
Yes |
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans? |
No |
1. |
Section 155 Determination Report - Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw ⇩ |
|
Lili Kato Policy Analyst |
|
|
PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
TO: Planning and Strategy Committee
MEETING DATE: 6 November 2017
TITLE: Draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2018 - approval for consultation
DATE: 17 October 2017
AUTHOR/S: Peter Ridge, Policy Analyst, City Future
Summary of options analysis for Draft Traffic and parking bylaw 2018 –approval for consultation
Problem or Opportunity |
The current Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2011 is due for review. If the Bylaw is not replaced before 29 June 2018, it will be automatically revoked. Therefore, the Council is proposing to adopt this new Traffic and Parking Bylaw and is consulting with the community. |
OPTION 1: |
Consult on the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw as presented in the Consultation Document (attachment 1) |
Community Views |
No community views have been sought as yet. If the Committee approves the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw for consultation, then community views will be sought through the consultation process. |
Benefits |
Engaging with the community provides an opportunity for those with a particular interest to give feedback to the Council on the draft Bylaw. Consultation can lead to improvements to the Council’s proposal. |
Risks |
If the consultation cannot be concluded in the time provided, then the current Bylaw may be automatically revoked before a new bylaw is adopted. |
Financial |
There are no particular financial impacts. The costs of consultation can be met within current budgets. |
OPTION 2: |
Do not consult on the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw |
Community Views |
No community views have been sought as yet. If the Committee does not approve the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw for consultation, then community views on the proposed Bylaw will not be known. |
Benefits |
There are no particular benefits to this option. |
Risks |
If the Committee does not approve the draft Bylaw for consultation, then the current Bylaw is unlikely to be able to be replaced before it is automatically revoked on 29 June 2018. This would render the Council unable to enforce most of its traffic or parking restrictions. |
Financial |
If the current bylaw is automatically revoked on 29 June 2018 without a replacement Bylaw, and Council is unable to enforce its traffic and parking restrictions, this could have tangible financial impacts, for instance through loss of revenue from enforcement of parking breaches. |
Contribution of Recommended Option to Council’s Strategic Direction |
The draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw contributes to the draft City Development Strategy, specifically through the draft Strategic Transport Plan’s objectives to provide infrastructure to enable growth and a transport system that links people and opportunities, provides amenity, safety, interconnectivity, accessibility, resilience and reliability. In particular, the draft Bylaw ensures that traffic and parking resources are used efficiently for the benefit of different road users. |
Rationale for the recommendations
1. Overview of the problem or opportunity
1.1 The current Traffic and Parking Bylaw was adopted on 29 June 2011, and was required to be reviewed within five years. If it is not replaced within two years of the last date by which it should have been reviewed then it is automatically revoked. This means that the current Bylaw will be automatically revoked on 29 June 2018 unless it is replaced before then.
1.2 The draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2018 is proposed to replace the current Bylaw. The replacement process offers an opportunity to refine and improve the current Bylaw. The draft Bylaw attached to this report, therefore, is substantially revised and streamlined, and in keeping with other recently reviewed Bylaws includes an Administration Manual to record the administrative and technical elements that would otherwise be included in the Bylaw.
2. Background and previous council decisions
2.1 The current Traffic and Parking Bylaw was adopted by the Council on 29 June 2011. It was amended in 2013 as part of an “omnibus” process following the boundary change with Manawatū District Council. However, a full review of the current Bylaw was not undertaken within the required five-year review period.
2.2 The Planning and Policy Committee (as it was then known) received a pre-review report on 7 September 2015 that assessed the scope of the bylaw review process. The current Bylaw was made under both the Local Government Act 2002 and the Land Transport Act 1998, but the 2015 pre-review report noted that it would be more correct for the Bylaw to be made solely under section 22AB of the Land Transport Act 1998. This section provides specific bylaw-making powers relating to traffic and parking matters, whereas the Local Government Act 2002 does not provide any specific powers to regulate traffic or parking matters. Consequently, the Council is not required to make determinations under section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002. Additionally, the review requirements of that Act do not apply either. This means that once a new Traffic and Parking Bylaw is adopted, the Council will be able to determine when it should next review the Bylaw.
3. Description of options
3.1 The first option is to consult on the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw. This option gives the community an opportunity to provide feedback to the Council on the draft Bylaw, and suggest changes or improvements.
3.1.1 The draft Bylaw proposed for consultation substantially revises the current Bylaw. In general terms, the Bylaw has been rewritten to more closely align with the enabling provisions of section 22AB of the Land Transport Act 1998. The Bylaw retains the same overall structure, with Part 2 relating to parking restrictions, and Part 3 addressing general traffic management matters including one-way roads, heavy vehicle restrictions, stock droving, and turning restrictions. New sections added include a clause relating to parking trials (clause 7), engine braking (clause 14) and access to unformed legal roads (clause 15).
3.1.2 Another notable change is the creation of an Administration Manual for the proposed Bylaw. This aligns with all recently reviewed Bylaws, and provides a way to transparently record the specific restrictions, terms and conditions that apply under the Bylaw. The draft Administration Manual includes in Part 2 the terms and conditions for parking which were previously included in the Bylaw. It also adds the conditions for vehicles parked for the purposes of sale, which are currently included in the Signs and Use of Public Places Bylaw. It is considered that these conditions are more appropriately a parking issue, than a public place issue, and therefore belong in the Traffic and Parking Bylaw Administration Manual.
3.2 The second option is to not consult on the draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw. This would end the current process, and the current bylaw would be automatically revoked on 29 June 2018 unless a new bylaw was adopted before then.
4. Analysis of options
4.1 Consulting on the draft Bylaw (option one) will give the community an opportunity to provide feedback to the Council. This is the preferred option because consultation is an effective way of improving the proposed Bylaw, drawing on the knowledge and experience of the community to suggest ways of making the Bylaw more effective. There are also a number of new elements in the draft Bylaw on which it would be useful to have the views of the community. The new clause on parking trials, for instance, is intended to clarify the process by which the Council may institute new parking trials. These trials can be an effective way of identifying better arrangements for parking restrictions.
4.2 It is notable that the draft Bylaw more clearly defines a system for creating and revising traffic and parking restrictions. The current Bylaw includes details of some restrictions, but not all, and can be confusing as to whether the restrictions are approved by the Council directly or by officers acting under delegated authority. The proposed Bylaw attempts to clarify this by stipulating in clause 16.4 that an authorised delegate (i.e. a Council officer with delegated authority) may “establish any restriction, limitation, or condition under this Bylaw.” Furthermore, the definition of “Council” for the purposes of this Bylaw includes an authorised delegate. This recognises that many of the restrictions that are imposed under this Bylaw are particularly technical or operational in nature (for instance, the setting of no stopping lines, marked parking areas, loading zones) and would not be appropriate for Council meetings to be determining on a regular basis.
4.3 While Council could choose to not approve the draft Bylaw for consultation (option two), this carries substantial risk that the current Bylaw would be automatically revoked if a new Bylaw was not adopted before 29 June 2018. The Council may choose this option if it is not satisfied with the details of the proposed draft Bylaw. In that event, officers may be able to re-draft the proposed Bylaw to have regard to specific areas of concern that Council may have. However, the time remaining before the current Bylaw is automatically revoked may make it difficult to complete the drafting and consultation process in time. An alternative may be to simply consult on adopting the current Bylaw without change (i.e. “rolling over” the current Bylaw). While this approach would not be preferred, it would allow the current traffic and parking restrictions and conditions to be continued for as long as is necessary to complete a re-drafting of the new Bylaw.
5. Conclusion
5.1 Option one (consulting on the draft Bylaw) is the recommended course of action. The revisions that the draft Bylaw proposes are intended to make the Bylaw clearer and more transparent about the traffic and parking restrictions it creates, and consultation on the proposed Bylaw will give the community the opportunity to provide feedback on how well the Bylaw delivers on that goal.
6. Next actions
6.1 If the Committee approves the draft Bylaw for consultation, then officers will begin public consultation as described in the next section.
7. Outline of community engagement process
7.1 While section 22AD of the Land Transport Act 1998 states that a Bylaw made under that Act must follow the same consultation process as for a Bylaw made under the Local Government Act 2002, the special consultative procedure is not required to be used. However, the proposed community engagement exercise will follow a similar process.
7.2 A written document (the Consultation Document) will be published to the Council’s website and will be available in hard copy at the Customer Services Centre and the central and branch libraries. The period for written submissions will run from 18 November to 20 December 2017. Hearings for oral submissions will be scheduled for February 2018, with deliberations on those submissions to follow in April.
7.3 The consultation process will be promoted through a mix of traditional and online media. A story will appear in the Square Circular, along with a press release outlining the scope of changes proposed. Posts will appear on social media promoting the opportunity to make a submission. An online submission form will be available on the Council website.
7.4 In addition to consulting with the public generally, there are a number of specific stakeholders who are likely to have an interest in this draft Bylaw who will be contacted directly and invited to make a submission. These stakeholders include:
· NZ Police
· New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA)
· Automobile Association (AA)
· Road Transport Association
· CCS Disability Action Group
· Enable NZ
Compliance and administration
Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual. Clause 168 |
Yes |
Are the decisions significant? |
No |
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water? |
No |
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan? |
No |
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure? |
No |
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions? |
Yes |
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans? |
No |
1. |
Consultation Document Draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2018 ⇩ |
|
Peter Ridge Policy Analyst |
|
|
PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
TO: Planning and Strategy Committee
MEETING DATE: 6 November 2017
TITLE: Committee Work Schedule
RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Planning and Strategy Committee 1. That the Planning and Strategy Committee receive its Work Schedule dated November 2017.
|
1. |
Committee Work Schedule - November 2017 ⇩ |
|