Agenda of Planning and Strategy Committee

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Planning and Strategy Committee MEETING

6 August 2018

Order of Business

NOTE: The Planning and Strategy Committee meeting coincides with the ordinary meeting of the Community Development Committee meeting. The format for the meeting will be as follows:

- The Community Development Committee will open and adjourn immediately to resume following the Planning and Strategy Committee

- The Planning and Strategy Committee will open, conduct its business and then close.

1. Apologies

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.

3. Declarations of Interest (if any)

Members are reminded of their duty to give a general notice of any interest of items to be considered on this agenda and the need to declare these interests.

4. Public Comment

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.)

5. Submissions on the Draft Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw 2018 Page 7

6. Confirmation of Minutes Page 23

“That the minutes of the Planning and Strategy Committee meeting of 6 June 2018 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record.”

7. Summary of submissions to the Draft Palmerston North Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw 2018 Page 29

Memorandum, dated 19 July 2018 from the Policy Analyst, Lili Kato.

8. Community Funding Policy Page 35

Memorandum, dated 3 July 2018 from the Policy Analyst, Lili Kato.

9. Proposed Plan Change A: Removal of Opening Hour Rules for the Sale of Alcohol Page 71

Memorandum, dated 6 July 2018 from the Senior Policy Planner, Jono Ferguson-Pye.

10. Deliberations on Unreinforced Masonry Earthquake-Prone Building Priority Routes Page 255

Memorandum, dated 17 July 2018 from the Policy Planner, Matthew Mackay.

11. Declaring the Rosalie Terrace Road Reserve as Road Page 275

Memorandum, dated 10 July 2018 from the Property Officer, Bryce Hosking.

12. Committee Work Schedule Page 281

13. 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:

General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under Section 48(1) for passing this resolution

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), Acting Chief Infrastructure Officer (Ray McIndoe), Acting General Manager - Strategy and Planning (David Murphy), Acting General Manager - Customer (Sheryl Bryant), General Manager - Community (Debbie Duncan), Human Resources Manager (Wayne Wilson) and General Manager - Marketing and Communications (Sacha Haskell) 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.

Acting Governance and Support Team Leader (Stuart McKinnon) and Committee Administrators (Penny Odell, Rachel Corser and Courtney Kibby), 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 06 June 2018, commencing at 9.03am

Members

Present:

Councillor Duncan McCann (in the Chair) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

Non Members:

Councillors Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Lew Findlay QSM and Leonie Hapeta.

Apologies:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) (Council Business) and Councillor Vaughan Dennison (lateness)

Councillor Adrian Broad left the meeting at 9.05am during consideration of clause 35. He entered the meeting again at 9.12am after the consideration of clause 35. He was not present for clause 35.

Councillor Vaughan Dennison entered the meeting at 9.07am during consideration of clause 35. He was not present for clause 34.

34-18

Apologies

Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Committee receive the apologies.

Councillor Adrian Broad left the meeting at 9.05am

Councillor Vaughan Dennison entered the meeting at 9.07am

35-18	Public Comment
	Ms Maria Le Lievre made public comment regarding issues with a storm drain near her property in Ashhurst.
	Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. The COMMITTEE RESOLVED 1. That the public comment be received for information.
	Clause 35-18 above was carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

Councillor Adrian Broad entered the meeting at 9.12am

36-18

Unreinforced Masonry Earthquake-prone Buildings

The following people appeared before the Committee and made oral statements in support of their submissions and replied to questions from Elected Members.

Mountain Productions Limited – John Browning (4)

Mr Browning spoke to the submission and made the following additional comments:

- Relevant sections of the Act were not being followed.

- Multiple consent applications will affect Council processing.

- Small side streets were being treated the same as elite streets in the Square.

Proarch Consultants Limited – Amanda Coats (6)

Ms Coats spoke to the submission and made the following additional comments:

- The City was at risk of losing heritage buildings.

- Information on pedestrian or traffic counts were not available to the public.

- There were flow on effects to the work for example looking at strengthening but not weather tightness.

Marilyn and Bruce Bulloch (8)

Further information (handout) was circulated to Elected Members.

Ms Bulloch spoke to the submission and made no additional comments.

Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Planning and Strategy Committee receive the oral and written submissions on the Unreinforced Masonry Earthquake-prone Buildings consultation.

2. That the Committee note the Procedure for Hearing of Submissions, as described in the procedure sheet.

Clause 36-18 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

37-18

Confirmation of Minutes

Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the minutes of the Planning and Strategy Committee meeting of 7 May 2018 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Clause 37-18 above was carried 13 votes to 0, with 2 abstentions, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor Aleisha Rutherford and Bruno Petrenas.

Abstained:

Councillors Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke and Tangi Utikere.

38-18	Draft Palmerston North Dog Control Policy 2018 - Deliberations on Submissions and Adoption of Policy Memorandum, dated 22 May 2018 from the Policy Analyst, Ann-Marie Mori.
	Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS 1. That the Council adopts the draft Palmerston North Dog Control Policy 2018 as attached as Attachment 2 and as amended.
	Clause 38.1 above was carried 13 votes to 2, the voting being as follows: For: Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. Against: Councillors Adrian Broad and Vaughan Dennison.
	Moved Lorna Johnson, seconded Lew Findlay QSM. a. That Clause 19f in the Palmerston North Dog Control Policy 2018 be deleted.
	Clause 38.1.a above was carried 14 votes to 1, the voting being as follows: For: Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. Against: Councillor Karen Naylor.
	Moved Leonie Hapeta, seconded Vaughan Dennison.
	Note: On a motion that: “Exclude dogs from events in the CBD”. The motion was lost 5 votes to 10, the voting being as follows: For: Councillors Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Leonie Hapeta and Bruno Petrenas. Against: Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Lew Findlay QSM, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.
	Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. 2. That should the Council agree that the 12 month trial (included in Attachment 2) to allow dogs on-leash in the Central Business District (CBD), then the trial is subject to the following conditions: a. The ability to exclude dogs from certain events in the CBD; b. The right to exclude identified dogs from the CBD should issues arise such as failure to remove dog faeces, fighting or aggression, or excessive barking; c. That dogs are not brought into the CBD on extendable leads/leashes; d. That Council reserves the right to end the trial for any reason and will communicate this to the public in the event this occurs.
	Clause 38.2 above was carried 13 votes to 2, the voting being as follows: For: Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere. Against: Councillors Adrian Broad and Vaughan Dennison.
	Moved Leonie Hapeta, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. 3. That the Chief Executive engage with Sport Manawatu, to communicate with sporting codes in Palmerston North regarding the control of dogs on Palmerston North City Council sporting grounds.
	Clause 38.3 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.
	Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford. 4. That the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Planning and Strategy Committee be given delegated authority to approve minor amendments to the draft Palmerston North Dog Control Policy 2018 prior to publication.
	Clause 38.4 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

The meeting adjourned at 11.30am

The meeting resumed at 11.45am

39-18

Results of the after hours response to roaming dog notifications trial

Report, dated 14 May 2018 from the Head of Environmental Protection Services, Graeme Gillespie.

Moved Lew Findlay QSM, seconded Lorna Johnson.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That the level of service for the after-hours Animal Control Service be increased to enable roaming dog notifications to be responded to with a maximum of 1 hour spent on dealing with each individual notification, as from 1 July 2018.

2. Note that in terms of the cost of the increased level of service, being $12,000 pa, there is sufficient budget available in the proposed 2018/28 budgets.

Clause 39-18 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

40-18

Conference Opportunity - Environmental Defence Society's 2018 Conference

Memorandum, dated 10 May 2018 from the Committee Administrator, Rachel Corser.

Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Leonie Hapeta.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Committee approve the attendance of up to two elected members to attend, with expenses paid, the Environmental Defence Society’s 2018 Conference being held in Auckland on 1 and 2 August 2018.

2. That registrations of interest be invited from elected members wishing to attend, with expenses paid, and advise the Committee Administrator, Rachel Corser, by 12 noon Wednesday 13 June 2018.

Clause 40-18 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

41-18

Committee Work Schedule

Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Aleisha Rutherford.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Planning and Strategy Committee receive its Work Schedule dated June 2018.

Clause 41-18 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The meeting finished at 12.01pm

Confirmed 6 August 2018

Chairperson

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Planning and Strategy Committee

MEETING DATE: 6 August 2018

TITLE: Summary of submissions to the Draft Palmerston North Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw 2018

DATE: 19 July 2018

AUTHOR/S: Lili Kato, Policy Analyst, Strategy and Planning

APPROVED BY: Sheryl Bryant, General Manager – Strategy and Planning

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO COMMITTEE

1. That the summary of submissions to the draft Palmerston North Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw 2018 is received.

1. ISSUE

This memorandum presents a summary of submissions that were received by the Palmerston North City Council in response to its consultation on the draft Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw 2018 (Appendix 1).

The consultation document, including the draft Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw, was released to the public for comment on 01 May 2018. Written submissions closed on 11 June 2018 and six submissions were received by the closing date. One submitter has indicated that they wish to speak to their submission.

2. BACKGROUND

The draft Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw facilitates the orderly and efficient management of cemeteries and crematorium under Council’s control.

Appendix 1 includes a table that groups the issues raised by submitters under themes. There is also a summary of comments from two meetings held with funeral directors.

3. NEXT STEPS

Deliberations on submissions are scheduled to be held during the Planning and Strategy Committee meeting on 03 September 2018. At that meeting, an officer report will be presented outlining recommendations in respect of the draft Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw 2018. It is anticipated that the Committee will make recommendations to the Council in respect of the draft Bylaw, for adoption by the Council on 24 September 2018.

4. Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual <Enter clause>	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?	No
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?	No

The recommendations contribute to Goal 3: A connected and safe community
The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Connected Community Strategy
The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Community Services and Facilities Plan The action is: Provide cemeteries (at Kelvin Grove, Terrace End, Ashhurst and Bunnythorpe) and a crematorium (at Kelvin Grove)
Contribution to strategic direction	This report provides Council with some views held submitters on the draft Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw, which will facilitate the orderly and efficient management of cemeteries and crematorium under Council’s control.

Attachments

Summary of submissions to the draft Cemeteries and Crematorium Bylaw 2018 ⇩

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Planning and Strategy Committee

MEETING DATE: 6 August 2018

TITLE: Community Funding Policy

DATE: 3 July 2018

AUTHOR/S: Lili Kato, Policy Analyst, Strategy and Planning

APPROVED BY: Sheryl Bryant, General Manager – Strategy and Planning

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That the Community Funding Policy (2018), as attached to the report dated 3 July 2018 and titled “Community Funding Policy”, be adopted.

2. That the Community Funding Policy 2012 be rescinded.

1. ISSUE

The Connected Community Strategy was developed to achieve Goal 3: A connected and safe community, and the Community Support Plan shows how the Council will contribute to achieving this goal. The purpose of the Community Support Plan is to build community capacity to take ownership and encourage community leadership of solutions, including better co-ordination between community organisations and groups (Priority 3, Connected Community Strategy). One of the specific actions under the Community Support plan to support the purpose is to – ‘Review the Community Funding Policy’.

2. BACKGROUND

Purpose:

The purpose of the community funding policy is to provide a clear framework for financial support to the development of the City’s voluntary and community sector, while also ensuring that the Council’s resources are targeted at meeting its strategic outcomes.

On 25 June 2018 Council resolved to – ‘……that the Community Small Grants Fund and Fee for Service Guidelines be reviewed to ensure clarity, and compatibility between the funds and inclusion of a wide range of community applicants to deliver against council’s strategic direction’.

Process:

The current community funding policy (see attached) was last reviewed in 2015, and is due to be reviewed to give effect to the new strategic direction adopted by Council in June 2018.

A desk review was conducted on the current policy, as well as discussions with relevant staff members, and a workshop with councillors. Other local government policies relating to grants and community funding were examined and compared to Council’s current policy.

The purpose of the review was to align the Community Funding Policy with the recently adopted strategic direction and 10 year plan.

Issues:

The following issues were raised as part of the policy review:

1) Alignment with Strategic Direction

The current policy does not clearly state its link to Council’s strategic direction, and this is also the case with each of the individual grant programmes. Only the fee for service contracts make a general reference to Council’s strategic priorities. Currently the fee for service contracts are based on the environmental, social and cultural well-being outcomes which are agreed to by Council every three years – these are currently known as the outcomes for community funding 2016/2019 (see attached). Under Councils new strategic direction (adopted in June 2018) the priorities shift considerably from the existing outcomes and therefore need to be updated as they form the basis for all community funding decisions.

2) Fee for Service Contracts vs Grants

The name ‘fee for service contracts’ in the current policy does not accurately reflect the nature of these arrangements, or the description the current policy provides. The name seems to suggest a kind of procurement arrangement where Council is paying a fee for the provision of services by the other party. However, in reality, this arrangement is managed like a grant, in that unlike a procurement of services Council does not set the specifications of the service it wants delivered. Instead the initiatives Council supports through grants are conceived and delivered by the community, for the community. The name ‘fee for service’ does not capture the rich relationship that Council has with these organisations, and reduces the arrangement to a commercial transaction, rather than one that is about working together towards better outcomes for Palmerston North.

3) Transparency of Grant Programmes

The current policy does not include all the grant programmes or other support that Council has made available for community organisations. There are some grant programmes, such as the Development Contribution Fees Grant, where publicly available information is scarce. This presents transparency issues for Council, and does not provide an equal opportunity to community organisations to contest grants that may be relevant to their work.

4) Eligibility Criteria

Standard eligibility criteria that apply to all grant types do not exist under the current policy. Eligibility criteria are released when each individual grant round opens, however efficiencies could be gained by including general eligibility criteria which are shared across most grants programmes and provide transparency in the process.

5) Coordinating Agencies

The current policy includes a description of coordinating agencies and the value they bring to the sector, however there has been confusion from organisations in terms of what kinds of organisations would fit the criteria to fulfil this role. There are also some organisations that obviously fall straight into this category and therefore it is questionable whether Council should utilise resources in assessing organisations through a contestable process when the outcome is clear. For example, Sport Manawatū is currently engaged under a fee for service contract to deliver many outcomes on behalf of Palmerston North City Council. There are no other organisations in Palmerston North with the level of capacity in the sector that Sport Manawatū has.

Proposed Policy

The proposed policy (see attached) has attempted to resolve most of the issues raised in the review. The proposed policy will replace the current policy in its entirety and the following part of this report describes the new elements of the proposed policy.

1) Strategic Context

The proposed policy explicitly states the links that this policy has to Council’s strategic direction, by referencing Council’s vision and the relevant strategy and plan. This is to provide understanding of how this policy relates to what Council said it would do.

2) Principles

The principles in the current policy remain the same, however the description of each has been reworded. ‘Proportionality’ is proposed as an additional principle. It is noted that a barrier for some organisations in applying for funding is the amount of administrative work required of applicants when compared with the amount of funding requested and the capacity of the organisation. Therefore, the proportionality principle provides for a balance to be struck to provide all organisations with an equal opportunity to access Council funds.

3) Rules for Community Grants

The purpose of this section is to make it clear that the scope of the policy is limited to Council grants. The provisions include eligibility criteria in terms of applicants and what council funding can be spent on, and the factors that Council considers when assessing and prioritising applications. This section also makes it clear that those organisations in social innovation and social enterprise are eligible to apply for Council grants. However, to be classed as a social enterprise an organisation needs to demonstrate three elements:

- A social, cultural or environmental mission;

- A substantial portion of its income derived from trade; and

- The majority of its profits/surplus is reinvested in the fulfilment of its mission.

4) Types of Community Grant Programmes

This section of the policy outlines the types of grant programmes that are covered by this policy. The fee for service contracts are renamed ‘Strategic Priority Grants’. The outcomes of community funding which form the funding decisions on these grants have been updated to reflect Council’s strategic direction, as per the Council resolution on 25 June 2018 – ‘That the relevant priorities from the five strategies form the basis for the funding decisions made under the Community Funding Policy’. The funding priorities for the strategic priority grants are as follows:

To deliver community outcomes that contribute to the priorities identified in the Creative and Liveable Strategy (to achieve Goal 2: A creative and exciting city), the Connected Community Strategy (to achieve Goal 3: A connected and safe community), and the Eco City Strategy (to achieve Goal 4: An eco city):

Goal 2: A creative and exciting city

- Priority 1: Create a City that has great places for all people, and particularly families

- Priority 2: Celebrate the City’s history and diversity and build on the strength of being a city of many cultures and languages

- Priority 3: Develop the City into an arts powerhouse with a national reputation for creativity and the arts

- Priority 4: Develop a national and international reputation as an exciting city with plenty to do at night and on weekends

- Priority 5: Have the most active community in New Zealand

Goal 3: A connected and safe community

- Priority 1: Develop, provide and advocate for services and facilities that create a connected, welcoming and inclusive community

- Priority 2: Ensure the City has a healthy community where everyone has access to healthy, safe and affordable housing and neighbourhoods

- Priority 3: Build community capacity to take ownership and encourage community leadership of solutions, including better coordination between community organisations and groups

- Priority 4: Become a City where people feel safe and are safe

Goal 4: An Eco City

- Priority 1: Respect and enhance the mauri of the Manawatū River

- Priority 2: Work with the community to reduce carbon emissions

- Priority 3: Regenerate native biodiversity

- Priority 6: Educate the community, in particular property owners, on the benefits of investing in sustainable building design and green buildings.

In earlier discussions, Councillors expressed concern that the population groups previously named in the policy (youth and children, aged and so on) could miss out on funding opportunities under the proposed policy. The proposed funding priorities for this grant programme actually broaden the scope for funding decisions and allow organisations more freedom to articulate the outcomes they are working towards that would meet Council’s funding priorities under this grant. Decision making on these funds will ensure that a balance across the priority areas is achieved.

This section of the policy also makes it clear that Council will look to fund strategic organisations who play a coordinating role in their respective sectors. It also clearly states the expectations Council has for these organisations. For one organisation, Sport Manawatū, the relationship has moved beyond a coordinating function to becoming a very vital provider on behalf of Council. This relationship has now been confirmed as part of Council’s strategic direction through the Active Community Plan. Sport Manawatū will, therefore, now be contracted directly to reflect its role as a partner in delivering Council’s vision for the future.

The Development Contribution Fees Grant provides assistance to community organisations that are undertaking a development of their facilities and triggers the payment of a compulsory development contribution fee under the Development Contribution Policy. This grant has been brought into the scope of the policy to increase transparency. This grant differs to others under the scope of this policy as allocation decisions are made by the Finance Committee. Bringing this grant under the policy gives it a decision-making framework and also allows more transparency in the way it is administered.

5) Support Not Covered by the Policy

This section covers grants and other forms of community assistance that fall outside the scope of this policy. The Community Groups Training Fund sits outside the scope of this policy because it is not a grant that is provided to community groups, but rather a fund administered by Council to provide needs based training programmes for community groups. The Natural and Cultural Heritage Incentive Fund also sits outside this programme as it does not operate like a traditional grant programme. Funding under this programme targets property owners who are undergoing maintenance, repair, restoration on listed heritage buildings/objects/sites. There is also assistance for notable trees, and heritage research, education and promotion initiatives. The Sports Event Partnership Fund is also not within the policy’s scope as this fund has an economic growth focus as well as community spirit. Administration matters relating to this fund are managed through Council’s contract with Sport Manawatū who administer the fund on Council’s behalf.

3. NEXT STEPS

If this policy is adopted then it will guide the administration of all the community funding under this policy.

The policy will flow through to the guidelines associated with the relevant community funds, which will be reviewed accordingly.

Dialogue between Council and Sport Manawatū will take place to look at the best way to progress Council’s intention to work in partnership towards Council’s vision for the future.

This review has highlighted work to look at support that sits outside of the policy (such as rental subsidies). The next review of this policy will consider increasing its scope to include some of the funding currently outside the policy.

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?	No
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?	No

The recommendations contribute to Goal 3: A connected and safe community
The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Connected Community Strategy
The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Community Support Plan The action is: Review the Community Funding Policy
Contribution to strategic direction	Adopting the proposed community funding policy will fulfil the requirements of this action in the Community Support Plan. It will enable community funding to be administered in accordance with the Council’s strategic priorities.

Attachments

1.	Current Community Funding Policy ⇩
2.	Current Outcomes for Community Funding 2016/2019 ⇩
3.	Proposed Community Funding Policy 2018 ⇩

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Planning and Strategy Committee

MEETING DATE: 6 August 2018

TITLE: Proposed Plan Change A: Removal of Opening Hour Rules for the Sale of Alcohol

DATE: 6 July 2018

AUTHOR/S: Jono Ferguson-Pye, Senior Policy Planner, Strategy and Planning

APPROVED BY: Sheryl Bryant, General Manager – Strategy and Planning

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That Proposed Plan Change A: Removal of Opening Hour Rules for the Sale of Alcohol be approved for public notification under Clause 5, Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

2. That the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Planning and Strategy Committee be authorised to make minor amendments to Proposed Plan Change A: Removal of Opening Hour Rules for the Sale of Alcohol.

1. ISSUE

On 21 December 2017 Council resolution 211-17 instructed the Chief Executive to prepare a District Plan change to remove references to hours of trade for activities involving the sale of alcohol.

The purpose of Proposed Plan Change A (PCA) is the removal from the District Plan of opening hour rules for activities selling alcohol in the:

- Inner Business Zone

- Outer Business Zone

- Fringe Business Zone

- Local Business Zone

- Industrial Zone

2. BACKGROUND

In 2017 the Council began the development of a Local Alcohol Policy (LAP). Section 93 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (SSAA) provides instruction on how local authorities are to deal with conflicts between hours of operation set out in a LAP and hours of operation rules in District Plans.

Through the development of the draft LAP the Council discovered the provisions of the District Plan would cause difficulties in developing the LAP. These difficulties were highlighted through submissions received on the draft LAP in late 2017. For these reasons the Council made the decision to halt development of the LAP until conflict caused by the District Plan opening hour rules for the sale of alcohol could be resolved.

3. NEXT STEPS

If the Committee approves the recommendations the next step will be for the Council to publicly notify PCA for submissions.

4. Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? Clause 182 of the Delegations Manual	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

The recommendations contribute to Goal 3: A connected and safe community
The recommended option contributes to the outcomes of the Connected Community Strategy
The recommended option contributes to the achievement of action/actions in the Safe Community Plan The action is: Develop a Local Alcohol Policy (by end of 2020/2021).
Contribution to strategic direction	The recommendation to allow public notification of Plan Change A will remove the barrier the Council currently faces in developing a Local Alcohol Policy for the City.

Attachments

1.	Section 32 Report PC:A ⇩
2.	Section 11: Business Zones Amendments ⇩
3.	Section 12: Industrial Zone Amendments ⇩
4.	Technical Report: Development of Local Alcohol Policy ⇩

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Planning and Strategy Committee

MEETING DATE: 6 August 2018

TITLE: Deliberations on Unreinforced Masonry Earthquake-Prone Building Priority Routes

DATE: 17 July 2018

AUTHOR/S: Matthew Mackay, Policy Planner, Strategy and Planning

APPROVED BY: Sheryl Bryant, General Manager – Strategy and Planning

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That the amended list of Priority Routes, attached as Appendix 1 to the Report titled “Deliberations on Unreinforced Masonry Earthquake-Prone Building Priority Routes” dated 17 July 2018, is adopted pursuant to Section 133AF(2)(a) of the Building Act.

1. ISSUE

1.1 The Council has undertaken consultation on a list of priority roads, footpaths and thoroughfares (Priority Routes) as required by Section 133AF(2)(a) of the Building Act. Of the 12 submissions Council received, six are generally supportive, two are neutral and four are in opposition. Two submitters spoke to their submissions at the June Planning & Strategy Committee meeting.

1.2 Council must now decide whether to adopt the list of Priority Routes, and what amendments should be included in response to the issues raised by submitters.

1.3 The impact of this decision affects every unreinforced masonry (URM) building located on an identified route. These buildings will be categorised as a priority building if there is a risk of masonry falling onto the identified route. Owners of these priority buildings must strengthen or demolish the relevant part of the building within 7.5 years instead of the standard 15 years.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 The system for identifying and managing earthquake-prone buildings changed on 1 July 2017 when the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 (the Amendment Act) came into force. Many of the changes were to establish a consistent approach across the country. Nevertheless, individual communities in medium or high seismic risk areas were empowered to make a local decision about the approach to certain priority buildings:

Section 133AF(2)(a)) states that Council must use the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 to identify any part of a public road, footpath, or other thoroughfare in an area of medium or high seismic risk—

(i) onto which parts of an unreinforced masonry building could fall in an earthquake; and

(ii) that has sufficient vehicle or pedestrian traffic to warrant prioritising the identification and remediation of those parts of unreinforced masonry buildings;

and

Section 133AF(2)(b)) states that Council may, in its discretion, use the special consultative procedure to identify buildings that could impede a strategic transport route.

2.2 On 5th March 2018 the Planning and Strategy Committee approved consultation on the proposed list of Priority Routes. Consultation was timed to coincide with the consultation on the Draft 2018 10 Year Plan.

2.3 Following advice from emergency services, and in recognition of the grid layout of Palmerston North streets, the Committee recommended not to identify routes that could impede a strategic transport route (Section 133AF(2)(b)).

2.4 A decision on the list of Priority Routes will ensure Council meets the statutory deadline. The Council must complete identification of priority earthquake-prone buildings by December 2019.

3. Analysis of submissions

3.1 The summary of submissions and issues raised by each submitter is attached in Appendix B -Table 1. This is organised by issue as there are a number of common themes across submissions, namely:

· Council methodology to identifying Priority Routes;

· The impact of Priority Route status;

· Inclusion/exclusion of specific streets;

· Related issues that are out of scope.

3.2 In light of the matters raised in submissions it is recommended that the list of Priority Routes is further refined. In summary, Council took a macro approach to developing the proposed list of Priority Routes; the city centre has the highest concentration of people and likely URM buildings. Submitters have requested a refinement of this approach as the relative risks vary across the city centre.

3.3 The list of Priority Routes was refined by considering the following factors:

· Available data on pedestrian and vehicle movement;

· City Centre Place / Movement street categorization;

· Where higher concentrations of URM buildings are likely.

3.4 The revised list of Priority Routes is attached in Appendix A.

4. OTHER MATTERS

4.1 Responding to submissions has highlighted one potential issue. While Coleman Mall was shown on the map as a Priority Route, it was omitted from the text list. While this situation is not ideal, it is not considered a fatal flaw as Coleman Mall was clearly identified as a priority route on the map and this was used extensively for consultation.

5. NEXT STEPS

5.1 Once the list of Priority Routes has been finalised, this information will be shared with building owners and the public via the standard communication channels. Council has hosted a number of successful meetings for building owners and engineers over the last year. Another is scheduled for September where updated information will be communicated.

5.2 Council officers have been preparing for the new earthquake-prone building system, and letters will soon start being sent out to building owners. Council has 1.5 years remaining to complete the profiling of priority buildings.

5.3 Once an owner receives a letter from Council, they will have 12 months to confirm the status of their building. At that point Council will officially issue an earthquake-prone building notice. Any building that is classified as a priority building will have 7.5 years to remedy issues. This timeframe only applies to parts of the building that could fall onto an identified Priority Route.

6. Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual	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

The recommendations contribute to Goal 3: A connected and safe community

The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Connected Community Strategy

The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Safe Community Plan

· Achieve compliance with relevant legislation, bylaws, and policies through provision of information, education and enforcement (…building compliance…).

The recommendations also contribute to the City Development Strategy (Heritage Management Plan):

· Proactively work with owners and investors of earthquake-prone buildings through the upgrade process;

· Invest in updated heritage, design and structural investigations on strategic heritage buildings;

· Promote the success stories where heritage buildings have been upgraded and share information about building upgrades;

· Develop a dedicated earthquake-prone heritage building support plan, including the provision of a fund to support seismic strengthening of heritage buildings, and character building facades and parapets in the central city.

Contribution to strategic direction

The identification of Priority Routes is a regulatory requirement of the Building Act 2017 and primarily relates to safety. Any decision about Priority Routes should factor in Councils wider strategic direction including the contribution to heritage and City Centre goals.

Attachments

1.	Recommended Final List of Priority Routes - Map ⇩
2.	Recommended Final List of Priority Routes - Map ⇩
3.	Summary of Submissions and Priority Route Reassessment ⇩

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Planning and Strategy Committee

MEETING DATE: 6 August 2018

TITLE: Declaring the Rosalie Terrace Road Reserve as Road

DATE: 10 July 2018

AUTHOR/S: Bryce Hosking, Property Officer, Infrastructure

APPROED BY: Ray Swadel, Acting Chief Infrastructure Officer, Infrastructure

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That Council resolves that pursuant to Section 111 of the Reserves Act 1977, the land described as Lot 13 Deposited Plan 459294 contained in Certificate of Title 599741 and held by the Palmerston North City Council for the purpose of road reserve, be declared as road.

1. ISSUE

1.1 The last portion of Rosalie Terrace that connects to James Line is vested as a Local Purpose Road Reserve. (See Attached)

1.2 A Council Resolution is needed to vest the title of this parcel of land as Road under Section 111 of the Reserves Act 1977. That is to say uplift its current Local Purpose Road Reserve status.

1.3 Once declared as Road, a physical road can then be formed on the parcel and made available for free public access.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 The greater block of land in Rosalie Terrace was submitted for subdivision consent in 2013. As part of this consent being approved, a parcel of land was acquired by Council and vested with LINZ as a Local Purpose Road Reserve with the legal identity of Lot 13 DP 459294.

2.2 At that time, for the immediate future it was to sit undeveloped, it was vested as a Local Purpose Road Reserve rather than being vested as Road.

2.3 Development has continued to progress, and it is now time to covert this parcel of land to Road so it can be physically formed into a road and connect to James Line.

2.4 There is a Right of Way easement in place on the land which for a neighbouring property. This will no longer be needed once it is a formed road, so this will be lifted as part of this process.

2.5 Section 111 of the Reserves Act 1977 allows for a Local Purpose Road Reserve to be declared as Road through Council Resolution and lodged with LINZ. Once this has occurred it can be physically formed as a road.

3. NEXT STEPS

3.1 Lodge all relevant documentation, including Council Resolution, with LINZ as per requirements under section 111 of the Reserves Act, to have the parcel of land declared as Road.

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

The recommendations contribute to Goal 1: An innovative and growing city
The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the City Development Strategy
The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Strategic Transport Plan The action is: Provide transport infrastructure for growth.
Contribution to strategic direction	Roading connection.

Attachments

Rosalie Terrace Survey Plan ⇩

Duncan McCann (Chairperson)
Aleisha Rutherford (Deputy Chairperson)
Grant Smith (The Mayor)
Brent Barrett	Lorna Johnson
Susan Baty	Karen Naylor
Rachel Bowen	Bruno Petrenas
Jim Jefferies	Tangi Utikere

1.	Maurice Lumley
2.	Cameron Jenkins
3.	Neville James
4.	Jenny Olsson
5.	MidCentral Health