Strategy, Planning and Development Committee Agenda

Strategy, Planning and Development CommitteeAgenda

Date: Thursday, 16 July, 2020Time: 9:00 am

Location: Council ChamberForum North, Rust AvenueWhangarei

Elected Members: Cr Shelley Deeming (Chairperson)Her Worship the Mayor Sheryl MaiCr Gavin BenneyCr Vince CocurulloCr Nicholas ConnopCr Ken CouperCr Tricia CutforthCr Jayne GolightlyCr Phil HalseCr Greg InnesCr Greg MartinCr Anna MurphyCr Carol PetersCr Simon Reid

For any queries regarding this meeting please contactthe Whangarei District Council on (09) 430-4200.

Pages

1. Declarations of Interest

2. Apologies

3. Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Strategy, Planning andDevelopment Committee Meeting

3.1 Minutes Strategy, Planning and Development Committee 18June 2020

7

4. Decision Reports

4.1 New Road Name Application - Herman 11

4.2 New Road Naming Application - Westpoint Landholdings Ltd 17

4.3 Local Government Funding Agency - 2020-21 Statement ofIntent

25

4.4 Statement of Proposal for review of Dangerous affected andInsanitary Buildings Policy

45

5. Information Reports

5.1 Camping in Public Places End of Season Report 2019 2020 91

5.2 Operational Report - Corporate Group - July 2020 119

5.3 Operational Report - Strategy, Planning and DevelopmentJuly 2020

137

6. Public Excluded Business

7. Closure of Meeting

Recommendations contained in the agenda are not the decisionsof the meeting.

Please refer to minutes for resolutions.

Strategy, Planning and Development Committee – Terms of Reference

Membership Chairperson Councillor Shelley Deeming

Members Her Worship the Mayor Sheryl Mai Councillors Gavin Benney, Vince Cocurullo, Nicholas Connop, Ken Couper, Tricia Cutforth, Jayne Golightly, Phil Halse, Greg Innes, Greg Martin, Anna Murphy, Carol Peters, Simon Reid

Meetings Monthly

Quorum 7

Purpose

To oversee planning, monitoring and enforcement activities, and guide the economic and physical development and growth of Whangarei District.

Key responsibilities

• Regulatory and compliance

o Environmental healtho General bylaw administrationo Animal (dog and stock control)o Hazardous substances and new organism controlo Parking enforcement (vehicles registrations and warrant of fitness)o Noise controlo Food Acto Land use consentso Building Act

• Building Controlo Property Information and Land Information Memorandao Consents and inspections

• Resource Consentso Subdivision, land use and development controlo Development contributions

• District Plano Plan changeso District Plan administration

• Strategic Planningo Place based strategies (city centre), functional strategies (climate change)o Growth planning

3

o Urban designo Reporting strategic trends and analysis

• Economic Developmento District marketing and promotionso Developer engagement

• Commercial Property

• Marinas

• Airport

• Forestry

• Reporting on service delivery, including operational financial performance.

• Reporting on capital projects.

• Operational reporting for the Strategy and Democracy, Planning and Development,and Corporate groups within Council.

• Procurement – general procurement relating to the areas of business of thiscommittee, within delegations.

• Shared Services – investigate opportunities for Shared Services forrecommendation to council.

• Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) – monitoring the financial and non-financialperformance of CCOs whose functions would otherwise fall under the scope of thiscommittee. Includes trading CCOs (CCTOs) and those CCOs exempted under theLGA. Responsibilities include:

o advising on the content of annual Statement of Expectations to CCOso agreement of the Statement of Intento monitoring against the Statement of Intento for exempted CCOs, monitoring and reporting as agreed between Council

and the organisation

CCOs accountable to this committee:

o Whangarei District Airport – CCOo Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) - CCO

Delegations

(i) All powers necessary to perform the committee’s responsibilities, including, butnot limited to:

a) approval of expenditure of less than $5 million plus GST.

b) approval of a submission to an external body

c) establishment of working parties or steering groups.

4

d) adoption of strategies and policies relating to the key responsibilities of this committee (except for those that cannot be delegated by Council under Clause 32(1)(f) of Schedule 7 of the LGA).

e) power to establish subcommittees and to delegate their powers to that subcommittee.

f) the power to adopt the Special Consultative Procedure provided for in Section 83 to 88 of the LGA in respect of matters under its jurisdiction (this allows for setting of fees and bylaw making processes up to but not including adoption).

g) the power to delegate any of its powers to any joint committee established for any relevant purpose under clause 32, Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002.

5

1

Item 3.1

Strategy, Planning and Development Committee Meeting Minutes

Date:

Time:

Location:

Thursday, 18 June, 2020

9:00 a.m.

Council Chamber

Forum North, Rust Avenue

Whangarei

In Attendance Cr Shelley Deeming (Chairperson)

Her Worship the Mayor Sheryl Mai

Cr Gavin Benney

Cr Vince Cocurullo

Cr Nicholas Connop

Cr Ken Couper

Cr Tricia Cutforth

Cr Jayne Golightly

Cr Phil Halse

Cr Greg Innes

Cr Greg Martin

Cr Anna Murphy

Cr Carol Peters

Cr Simon Reid

Also present: Mike Chubb (Airport Manager)

Scribe C Brindle (Senior Democracy Adviser)

___________________________________________________________________

1. Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest.

2. Apologies

There were no apologies.

3. Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Strategy, Planning and

Development Committee Meeting

3.1 Minutes Strategy, Planning and Development Committee meeting

held 19 March 2020

Moved By Cr Vince Cocurullo

Seconded By Cr Nicholas Connop

That the minutes of the Strategy, Planning and Development

Committee meeting held on Thursday 19 March 2020 having been

7

2

circulated, be taken as read and now confirmed and adopted as a true

and correct record of proceedings of that meeting.

Carried

4. Decision Reports

4.1 New Road and Private Accessway Names - Barrett Homes -

SL1900001

Moved By Cr Tricia Cutforth

Seconded By Cr Greg Martin

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee:

1. Approve new public road #1 (Lot 201) off Corks Rd to be named

Tiaki Rise.

2. Approve new public road #2 (cul-de-sac) to be named Kekewai

Place.

3. Approve new public road #3 (Stage 3) off Vinegar Hill Rd to be

named Parera Crescent.

4. Approve a private accessway “ROW C” to be named Tupeia Lane.

Carried

4.2 New Private Accessway Name - TMB Developments - SL1800010


Seconded By Her Worship the Mayor Sheryl Mai

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee:

1. Rescind the following resolution adopted on 30 April 2020:

“That Council approve the private accessway ‘G’ as John Bunion

Way.”

2. Approve the name of the private accessway ‘G’ as Pennyroyal

Place.

Carried

4.3 Whangarei District Airport - Statement of Intent 2020/2021


Seconded By Cr Greg Martin

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee under

delegation adopt the Statement of Intent 2020/2021 for the Whangarei

District Airport.

8

3

Carried

5. Information Reports

5.1 Operational Report - Corporate Group - June 2020

Moved By Cr Greg Innes

Seconded By Cr Vince Cocurullo

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee notes the

Corporate Group Operational report for June 2020.

Carried

5.2 Operational Report - Strategy, Planning and Development - June

2020

Moved By Cr Greg Innes

Seconded By Cr Tricia Cutforth

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee notes the

Operational report for June 2020

Carried

6. Public Excluded Business

There was no business conducted in public excluded.

7. Closure of Meeting

The meeting concluded at 10.21am.

Confirmed this 16th day of July 2020

Councillor Shelley Deeming (Chairperson)

9

4.1 New Road Naming Application – Herman

Meeting: Strategy, Planning and Development Committee

Date of meeting: 16 July 2020

Reporting officer: Ricardo Zucchetto – Post Approvals Officer-RMA Consents

1 Purpose

To name a private accessway in the Whangarei District to assign unique addresses for properties to be readily locatable by emergency services and service delivery providers.

2 Recommendation:

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee 1. Approve the name of the private accessway off Millington Road as Bob Herman Lane.

3 Background

A road naming application has been received to satisfy conditions of a subdivision for Herman to name a private accessway off Millington Road, Whangarei.

The Road Naming Policy states that “roads should not be named after any commercial organisation or any living or recently deceased person” (Section 5.6.8) but may be used if “the family name of the former owner of a farm or property may be used if a historical context is established” (Section 7.1.2). Robert Herman is the grandfather of the developer who suggested the name. The explanation and linkage to the land and wider community of Robert Herman is outlined in the road naming application (refer attachment).

4 Consultation

No consultation is required as the developer owns the land.

5 Significance and engagement

The decisions or matters of this Agenda do not trigger the significance criteria outlined in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, and the public will be informed via Agenda publication on the website.

6 Attachments

Herman – SD1900076 – Road Naming Application

Herman – SD1900076 – Location Map

11

PROPOSED ROW NAMES FOR DARLIGEN TRUST SUBDIVISION - SD1900076 (REF 17086)

First choice : Bob Herman Lane

In 1913, aboard the ship “Roon”, several members of the Herman family migrated to New Zealand

from Darligen, Switzerland. After initially living in the King Country, Franz and Marie Herman

eventually settled in Waipu around 1921. They had eight children of which Robert (“Bob”) Herman

was the youngest. Bob was born in Waipu in 1929. As a young man Bob was a bushman and followed

several of his brothers into sawmilling, the timber industry, and in 1947 started the Herman Timber

Coy Ltd.

Bob was part of the 14th Squadron of the Royal New Zealand Airforce (service no. NZ72407 AWMM)

and in the early 1950’s the squadron was re-equipped with de Havilland Vampire jets and based in

Cyprus as part of the Middle East Air Force where they undertook mobility exercises and goodwill

visits around the middle east in post war peace exercises.

Upon returning home and in the late 1950’s Bob and his wife Anne settled in the Maunu area where

their three children were born and still reside.

Later on Herman Timber Coy Ltd was joined by Norm Managh and Managh Herman Timber Co Ltd was

formed. During the height of their business they owned a large mill at Kauri, and a town yard in

Commerce Street (where Benchmark was subsequently located). The company employed over 200

people, and provided support to their employees and their families and created in some instances life

long friendships for Bob.

The company provided sponsorship for many school hockey, netball, rugby and soccer teams, and

their employees’ children, and also participated in the Ranfurly Shield parade and several Christmas

parades within Whangarei, with their bright orange coloured log trucks stacked with logs and people

sitting atop !

When Bob retired in the late 1980’s he ventured into horticulture (Darligen Orchards) and had three

orchards – two in Maunu and one in Glenbervie. He went into shares with two other partners and

constructed the Golden Mile Packhouse on Austin Road. This created further employment and Bob

obtained contracts and ran the picking gangs for the pack house.

His orchard at Millington Road was initially 12 hectares, which contained a few hectares of beautiful

native bush. More interested in conservation in his later years, Bob placed a conservation covenant

over this area of bush, and over a period of years disestablished the orchard and bought the land back

to grazing level. Part of the land was subdivided and one of his sons obtained 2 hectares on a right of

way which is now known as Darligen Lane.

Bob passed away in 2010 aged 81. He is survived by his wife and three children.

Naming this right-of-way Bob Herman Lane is respectful way of recognizing Bob’s contribution to the

community, his connection to Maunu and Whangarei, and the unassuming way in which he conducted

business.

Second choice : Herman Lane

As above.

Third choice : Bushmans Lane

as above.

14

Herman – SD1900076 – Location Map New private access off Millington Road

Scale: 1:2000

Original Sheet Size A4 Print Date:26/05/2020 9:23 AM

Projection: NZGD2000 / New Zealand Transverse Mercator 2000

Cadastral Information derived from Land Information New Zealand. CROWN COPYRIGHT RESERVED Information shown is the currently assumed knowledge as at date printed. If Information is vital, confirm with Whangarei District Council, Customer Services .

Private Access to be named: - Bob Herman Lane - Herman Lane - Bushmans Lane

15

4.2 New Road Naming Application – Westpoint Landholdings Ltd



Reporting officer: Ricardo Zucchetto – Post Approvals Officer-RMA Consents

1 Purpose

To name two private accessways in the Whangarei District to assign unique addresses for properties to be readily locatable by emergency services and service delivery providers.

2 Recommendation/s:

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee: 1. Approve the name of the private access (ROW B) off Kioreroa Road as Radiata Grove 2. Approve the name of the private access (ROW N) off Kioreroa Road as Reservoir Rise

3 Background

A road naming application has been received to assist in the future development of a multi-tenanted commercial site for Westpoint Landholdings Ltd to name two private accessways off Kioreroa Road, Whangarei. The proposed names are in accordance with Council’s Road Naming Policy.

4 Consultation

Consultation has been undertaken between the developer and an affected property owner (Alter-Natives) who leases one of the future sites. The tenant agrees with the proposed names and order preference for ROW “N”.

No further consultation was required as the developer owns and operates the remaining sites.


The decisions or matters of this Agenda do not trigger the significance criteria outlined in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, and the public will be informed via Agenda publication on the website.

6 Attachments

Westpoint Landholdings Ltd – SD1900135 – Application

Westpoint Landholdings Ltd – SD1900135 – Location Map

17

Private Bag 9023 | Whangarei 0148 | New Zealand T: 09 430 4200 | 0800 WDC INFO | 0800 932 463 | F: 09 438 7632

W: www.wdc.govt.nz | E: [email protected]

14/33552

Application for Road Naming Thank you for making an application to name a proposed road.

Points to remember when making an application

Please print clearly to ensure the form is easy to read.

We will respond in writing to every application received. Please ensure that you provide appropriate contact details so that our response gets back to you.

Your application will not be returned to you once it is lodged with Council. Please keep a copy for your reference.

Important Considerations

Please refer to the Road Naming Policy and Road Naming Index prior to making your application. These

documents will be helpful when proposing road names. Both documents can be found on the Council website at www.wdc.govt.nz

How to get this application to us

Mail to: Attn: Administration Team Leader – Resource Consents Whangarei District Council Private Bag 9023 WHANGAREI 0148

Fax to: 09 438 7632

Email to: [email protected]

Applicant Details

First name(s)

Last name

Postal address

Best day-time phone number Mobile

Email

Resource Consent Details

Resource Consent application number

Agent Details

Name of Agent Agent ref

Agent postal address

Best day-time phone number Mobile

Email

Scott

Davies-Colley

32 Logyard Road

Port Nikau, Whangarei

027 255 9209 027 255 9209

[email protected] - Please communicate by Email

SD1900135 P125790

N.A - Refer above

19

http://www.wdc.govt.nz/

mailto:[email protected]



14/33552

Proposed Road Name Details

Please indicate whether the road is Public or Private ( box)

Public Private

Proposed road name 1

Reason


Reason


Reason

Please supply a scheme plan map in Black and White with Road or ROW clearly marked when submitting your application.

Radiata Grove

Pinetree Lane

Poplar Lane

This road upon leaving Kioreroa Rd enters into a Radiata Pine plantation also known as a grove. The

Radiata pine grove is a significant identifying feature of this area as it is the only substantial pine

plantation within the confines of the urban Whangarei area. The Radiata Pine has strong associations

with this area not only in the form of the plantation but the adjacent Sawmill which mills Radiata Pine

and old port of Whangarei which was where the northland Radiata Pine was exported from

This road upon leaving Kioreroa Rd enters into a Radiata Pine plantation also known as a grove. The

Radiata pine grove is a significant identifying feature of this area as it is the only substantial pine

plantation within the confines of the urban Whangarei area. The Radiata Pine has strong associations

with this area not only in the form of the plantation but the adjacent Sawmill which mills Radiata Pine

and old port of Whangarei which was where the northland Radiata Pine was exported from

Along the edge of the road as it leaves Kioreroa Rd there is a row of Poplar trees. These trees are

identifiable as they contrast the primary pine forest with their unique shape and green color. These

trees are also deciduous so loose their leaves in winter an identifying contrast to the evergreen pine

forest.

ROW B as per appended plan

20



14/33552

Proposed Road Name Details

Please indicate whether the road is Public or Private ( box)

Public Private


Reason


Reason


Reason

Please supply a scheme plan map in Black and White with Road or ROW clearlymarked when submitting your application.

Clayhill Rise

Reservoir Rise

Windyridge Rise

This right of way climbs its way up the ridge-line along the clay formed landscape. This typical soil type

is the inspiration behind the Clayhill name. With the road rising from its junction from Kioreroa Rd it is

the definition of a rise.

This road leads up from Kioreroa Rd to a water Reservoir up on the hill inspiring this proposed name. With the road rising from its junction from Kioreroa Rd it is the definition of a rise.

This right of way climbs its way up an exposed ridge-line inspiring this name proposal. With the road rising from its junction from Kioreroa Rd it is the definition of a rise.

ROW N as per appended plan

21

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

''l''

22

Westpoint Landholdings Ltd – SD1900135 – Location Map New private accesses off Kioreroa Road

Scale: 1:4650

Original Sheet Size A4 Print Date:12/06/2020 1:24 PM

Projection: NZGD2000 / New Zealand Transverse Mercator 2000

Cadastral Information derived from Land Information New Zealand. CROWN COPYRIGHT RESERVED

Information shown is the currently assumed knowledge as at date printed. If Information is vital, confirm with Whangarei District Council, Customer Services .

Private access “N” to be named: - Reservoir Rise - Windyridge Rise - Clayhill Rise

Private access “B” to be named: - Radiata Grove - Pinetree Lane - Poplar Lane

23

4.3 Local Government Funding Agency – 2020-21 Statement of Intent



Reporting officer: Alan Adcock (General Manager – Corporate/CFO); and Joanne Tasker (CCO Project Co-ordinator)

1 Purpose

To agree to the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) 2020-21 Statement of Intent in accordance with Section 65(2) of the Local Government Act 2002.

2 Recommendation

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee agrees to the Local Government Funding Agency 2020-21 Statement of Intent.

3 Background

Section 64 of the Local Government Act 2002 advises that Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) must have a Statement of Intent (SOI). The purpose of a SOI is to state publicly the activities and intentions of the CCO, to provide an opportunity for Council to influence the direction of the organisation, and to provide a basis for accountability.

Council must either agree with the SOI or ask for modifications as outlined in section 65(2).

The Draft SOI for the LGFA was presented to this Committee at its meeting on 19 March 2020.

4 Discussion

The final SOI for the LGFA, of which Council has a shareholding, is included as Attachment One. It meets the obligations of Section 64 and Schedule 8 in the Local Government Act 2002.

The LGFA covering letter to shareholders is included as Attachment Two. The letter sets out the changes made to the 2020-21 SOI after presentation of the draft to this Committee in March 2020.

25


The decisions or matters of this agenda do not trigger the significance criteria outlined in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, and the public will be informed via agenda publication on the website.

6 COVID-19 Statement

The impacts of COVID-19 on this Statement of Intent have been considered. Impacts were considered by LGFA in its preparation and no further impacts for Council are anticipated.

7 Attachments

1. LGFA 2020-21 Statement of Intent 2. LGFA letter to Stakeholders dated 30 June 2020

26

Statement of Intent 2020/21

1. Introduction This Statement of Intent (SOI) sets out the intentions and expectations of New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency Limited (LGFA). The LGFA is enabled under the Local Government Borrowing Act 2011 and is a council-controlled organisation (CCO) for the purposes of the Local Government Act 2002. The SOI is prepared in accordance with section 64(1) of the Local Government Act 2002.

2. Nature and scope of activities LGFA will raise debt funding either domestically and/or offshore in either NZ dollars or foreign currency and provide debt funding to New Zealand local authorities and CCOs and may undertake any other activities considered by the Board of LGFA to be reasonably related or incidentally to, or in connection with, that business. The LGFA will only lend to Councils and CCOs that enter into all the relevant arrangements with it (such Councils being “Participating Local Authorities” and such Councils and CCOs being “Participating Borrowers”) and comply with the LGFA’s lending policies. In lending to Participating Borrowers, LGFA will:

• Operate in a manner to ensure LGFA is successful and sustainable in the long-term;

• Educate and inform Participating Local Authorities on matters within the scope of LGFA’s operations;

• Provide excellent service to Participating Borrowers;

• Ensure excellent communication exists and be professional in its dealings with all its stakeholders; and

• Ensure its products and services are delivered in a cost-effective manner.

27

LGFA Statement of Intent 2020/21. Page 2

3. Objectives Principal Objectives In accordance with the Local Government Act 2002, in carrying on its business, the principal objectives of LGFA will be to:

• Achieve the shareholder-agreed objectives and performance targets specified in this Statement of Intent;

• Be a good employer;

• Demonstrate social, economic, environmental and cultural responsibility;

• Maintain strong and sound corporate governance;

• Set and model high standards of ethical behaviour; and

• Operate in accordance with sound business practice. Primary Objectives LGFA will optimise the debt funding terms and conditions for Participating Borrowers. Among other things, this includes:

• Providing interest cost savings relative to alternative sources of financing;

• Offering flexible short and long-term lending products that meet Participating Borrowers’ borrowing requirements;

• Delivering operational best practice and efficiency for its lending services;

• Ensuring certainty of access to debt markets, subject always to operating in accordance with sound business practice.

LGFA will ensure its asset book remains at a high standard by ensuring it understands each Participating Borrower’s financial position, as well as general issues confronting the Local Government sector. Amongst other things, LGFA will:

• Proactively monitor and review each Participating Borrower’s financial position, including its financial headroom under LGFA policies;

• Analyse finances at the Council group level where appropriate and report to shareholders;

• Endeavour to visit each Participating Borrower annually, including meeting with elected officials as required, or if requested; and

• Take a proactive role to enhance the financial strength and depth of the local government debt market and work with key central government and local government stakeholders on sector and individual council issues.

28


Additional objectives LGFA has the following seven measurable and achievable additional objectives which complement the primary objective. Performance against these objectives is reported annually. LGFA will: 1. Maintain LGFA’s credit rating equal to the New Zealand Government sovereign rating where

both entities are rated by the same Rating Agency. 2. Provide at least 85% of aggregate long-term debt funding to the Local Government sector. 3. Achieve the financial forecasts outlined in section 4 for net interest income and operating

expenses, including provision for a shareholder dividend payment in accordance with approved dividend policy.

4. Meet or exceed the Performance Targets outlined in section 5. 5. Comply with the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015. 6. Comply with the Shareholder Foundation Polices and the Board-approved Treasury Policy at all

times. 7. Assist the local government sector with their COVID -19 response.

29


4. Financial forecasts LGFA’s financial forecasts for the three years to 30 June 2023 are:

Note that there is some forecast uncertainty around the timing of Net Interest Income, Profit and Loss, Total Assets, LG Loans, Bonds and Borrower Notes depending upon council decisions regarding the amount and timing of refinancing of their May 2021, April 2022 and April 2023 loans. LGFA will work with council borrowers to reduce this uncertainty. The above table assumes gross issuance of LGFA bonds per year of $2.53 billion (2020/21), $2.10 billion (2021/22) and $2.15 billion (2022/23), however the issuance volume will be determined by LGFA at the relevant time by reference to factors including refinancing of existing borrowing by councils and (if applicable) council-controlled organisations, new borrowing by councils and (if applicable) council-controlled organisations and LGFA’s own borrowing requirements for liquidity purposes. No decision has been made as to final issuance volume at this point and will depend upon market conditions.

FINANCIAL YEAR ($M) SOI 2020/21 FINAL

Comprehensive income Jun-21 Jun-22 Jun-23

Interest income 162.7 184.7 251.7

Interest expense 143.9 164.5 222.7

Net Interest income 18.8 20.2 29.0

Approved Issuer Levy 1.2 0.7 1.0

Issuance & onlending costs 2.7 2.7 2.7

Operating overhead 4.1 4.1 4.3

Issuance and operating expenses 8.0 7.5 8.0

P&L 10.9 12.7 21.0

Financial position ($m) Jun-21 Jun-22 Jun-23

Capital 25.0 25.0 25.0

Retained earnings 69.9 81.8 101.9

Total equity 94.9 106.8 126.9

Shareholder funds + borrower notes /

Total assets2.3% 2.4% 2.6%

Dividend provision 0.9 0.8 0.9

Total assets (nominal) 12,728.1 13,712.8 14,355.1

Total LG loans - short term (nominal) 400.0 400.0 400.0

Total LG loans (nominal) 11,264.1 11,859.8 12,280.9

Total bills (nominal) 400.0 400.0 400.0

Total bonds (nominal) ex treasury stock 11,941.0 12,886.0 13,486.0

Total borrower notes (nominal) 199.5 227.1 252.6

30


5. Performance targets LGFA has the following performance targets:

• LGFA’s net interest income for the period to:

• 30 June 2021 will be greater than $18.8 million.



• LGFA’s annual issuance and operating expenses (excluding AIL) for the period to:

• 30 June 2021 will be less than $6.8 million.



• Total lending to Participating Borrowers1 at:

• 30 June 2021 will be at least $11,664 million.

• 30 June 2022 will be at least $12,260 million.

• 30 June 2023 will be at least $12,681 million

• Conduct an annual survey of Participating Borrowers who borrow from LGFA and achieve at least an 85% satisfaction score as to the value added by LGFA to the borrowing activities

• Meet all lending requests from Participating Borrowers, where those requests meet LGFA operational and covenant requirements.

• Achieve 85% market share of all council borrowing in New Zealand

• Review each Participating Borrower’s financial position, its headroom under LGFA policies and arrange to meet each Participating Borrower at least annually.

• No breaches of Treasury Policy, any regulatory or legislative requirements including the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015.

• Successfully refinance of existing loans to councils and LGFA bond maturities as they fall due.

• Maintain a credit rating equal to the New Zealand Government rating where both entities are rated by the same credit rating agency.

1 Subject to the forecasting uncertainty noted previously

31


6. Dividend policy LGFA will seek to maximise benefits to Participating Local Authorities as Borrowers rather than Shareholders. Consequently, it is intended to pay a limited dividend to Shareholders. The Board’s policy is to pay a dividend that provides an annual rate of return to Shareholders equal to LGFA fixed rate bond cost of funds plus 2.00% over the medium term. At all times payment of any dividend will be discretionary and subject to the Board’s legal obligations and views on appropriate capital structure.

7. Governance Board The Board is responsible for the strategic direction and control of LGFA’s activities. The Board guides and monitors the business and affairs of LGFA, in accordance with the Companies Act 1993, the Local Government Act 2002, the Local Government Borrowing Act 2011, the Company’s Constitution, the Shareholders' Agreement for LGFA and this SOI. The Board comprises six directors with five being independent directors and one being a non-independent director. The Board’s approach to governance is to adopt best practice2 with respect to:

• The operation of the Board.

• The performance of the Board.

• Managing the relationship with the Company’s Chief Executive.

• Being accountable to all Shareholders. All directors are required to comply with a formal Charter. The Board will meet on a regular basis and no fewer than 6 times each year. Shareholders' Council The Shareholders' Council is made up of between five and ten appointees of the Shareholders (including an appointee from the Crown). The role of the Shareholders' Council is to:

• Review the performance of LGFA and the Board, and report to Shareholders on that performance on a periodic basis.

• Make recommendations to Shareholders as to the appointment, removal, replacement and remuneration of directors.

• Make recommendations to Shareholders as to any changes to policies, or the SOI, requiring their approval.

2 Best practice as per NZX and Institute of Directors guidelines

32


• Ensure all Shareholders are fully informed on LGFA matters and to coordinate Shareholders on governance decisions.

8. Information to be provided to Shareholders The Board aims to ensure that Shareholders are informed of all major developments affecting LGFA’s state of affairs, while at the same time recognising both LGFA’s obligations under NZX Listing Rules and that commercial sensitivity may preclude certain information from being made public. Annual Report The LGFA’s balance date is 30 June. By 30 September each year, the Company will produce an Annual Report complying with Sections 67, 68 and 69 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Companies Act 1993 and Financial Reporting Act 2013. The Annual Report will contain the information necessary to enable an informed assessment of the operations of the company, and will include the following information:

• Directors’ Report.

• Financial Statements incorporating a Statement of Financial Performance, Statement of Movements in Equity, Statement of Financial Position, Statement of Cashflows, Statement of Accounting Policies and Notes to the Accounts.

• Comparison of the LGFA’s performance regarding the objectives and performance targets set out in the SOI, with an explanation of any material variances.

• Auditor’s Report on the financial statements and the performance targets.

• Any other information that the directors consider appropriate. Half Yearly Report By 28 February each year, the Company will produce a Half Yearly Report complying with Section 66 of the Local Government Act 2002. The Half Yearly Report will include the following information:

• Directors’ commentary on operations for the relevant six-month period.

• Comparison of LGFA’s performance regarding the objectives and performance targets set out in the SOI, with an explanation of any material variances.

• Un-audited half-yearly Financial Statements incorporating a Statement of Financial Performance, Statement of Movements in Equity, Statement of Financial Position and Statement of Cashflows.

Quarterly Report By 31 January, 30 April, 31 July, and 31 October each year, the Company will produce a Quarterly Report. The Quarterly Report will include the following information:

• Commentary on operations for the relevant quarter, including a summary of borrowing margins charged to Participating Borrower’s (in credit rating bands).

33


• Comparison of LGFA’s performance regarding the objectives and performance targets set out in the SOI, with an explanation of any material variances.

• Analysis of the weighted average maturity of LGFA bonds outstanding.

• In the December Quarterly Report only, commentary on the Net Debt/Total Revenue percentage for each Participating Local Authority that has borrowed from LGFA (as at the end of the preceding financial year).

• To the extent known by LGFA, details of all events of review in respect of any Participating Borrower that occurred during the relevant quarter (including steps taken, or proposed to be taken, by LGFA in relation thereto).

• Details of any lending to CCOs during the quarter and the amount of CCO loans outstanding. Statement of Intent By 1 March in each year the Company will deliver to the Shareholders its draft SOI for the following year in the form required by Clause 9(1) of Schedule 8 and Section 64(1) of the Local Government Act 2002. Having considered any comments from the Shareholders received by 30 April, the Board will deliver the completed SOI to the Shareholders on or before 30 June each year. Shareholder Meetings The Board will hold an Annual General Meeting between 30 September and 30 November each year to present the Annual Report to all Shareholders. The Company will hold a meeting with the Shareholders' Council approximately every six months – prior to the Annual General Meeting and after the Half Yearly Report has been submitted. Other meetings may be held by agreement between the Board and the Shareholders' Council.

9. Acquisition/divestment policy LGFA will invest in securities in the ordinary course of business. It is expected that these securities will be debt securities. These investments will be governed by LGFA’s lending and/or investment policies as approved by the Board and/or Shareholders. Any subscription, purchase or acquisition by LGFA of shares in a company or organisation will, if not within those investment policies, require Shareholder approval other than as concerns the formation of wholly-owned subsidiaries and the subscription of shares in such wholly-owned subsidiaries.

10. Activities for which compensation is sought from Shareholders At the request of Shareholders, LGFA may (at its discretion) undertake activities that are not consistent with its normal commercial objectives. Specific financial arrangements will be entered into to meet the full cost of providing such as activities. Currently there are no activities for which compensation will be sought from Shareholders.

34


11. Commercial value of Shareholder’s investment LGFA will seek to maximise benefits to Participating Local Authorities as Borrowers rather than Shareholders. Subject to the Board’s views on the appropriate capital structure for LGFA, the Board’s intention will be to pay a dividend that provides an annual rate of return to Principal Shareholders equal to LGFA fixed rate bond cost of funds plus 2.00% over the medium term. As the Shareholders will have invested in the LGFA on the basis of this limited dividend, the Board considers that at establishment the commercial value of LGFA is equal to the face value of the Shareholders’ paid up Principal Shares - $25 million. In the absence of any subsequent share transfers to the observed share transfers on 30 November 2012, the Board considers the current commercial value of LGFA is at least equal to the face value of the Shareholders’ paid up Principal Shares of $25 million. This equates to a value per share of $1.00.

12. Accounting policies LGFA has adopted accounting policies that are in accordance with the New Zealand International Financial Reporting Standards and generally accepted accounting practice. A Statement of accounting policies is attached to this SOI. The following statement is taken from the Financial Statements presented as part of LGFA’s Annual Report 2019 (updated where necessary), accordingly, the statement does not contemplate LGFA lending to CCOs.

35


ATTACHMENT: Statement of accounting policies 1 Statement of accounting policies a. Reporting entity The New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency Limited (LGFA) is a company registered under the Companies Act 1993 and is subject to the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002. LGFA is controlled by participating local authorities and is a council-controlled organisation as defined under section 6 of the Local Government Act 2002. LGFA is a limited liability company incorporated and domiciled in New Zealand. The primary objective of LGFA is to optimise the debt funding terms and conditions for participating local authorities. The registered address of LGFA is Level 8, City Chambers, 142 Featherston Street, Wellington Central, Wellington 6011. b. Statement of compliance LGFA is an FMC reporting entity under the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMCA). These financial statements have been prepared in accordance with that Act and the Financial Reporting Act 2013. LGFA’s bonds are quoted on the NZX Debt Market. LGFA is a profit orientated entity as defined under the New Zealand Equivalents to International Financial Reporting Standards (NZ IFRS). The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with New Zealand Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (NZ GAAP) and they comply with NZ IFRS and other applicable Financial Reporting Standard, as appropriate for Tier 1 for-profit entities. The financial statements also comply with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). c. Basis of preparation Measurement base The financial statements have been prepared on a historical cost basis modified by the revaluation of certain assets and liabilities. The financial statements are prepared on an accrual basis. Functional and presentation currency The financial statements are presented in New Zealand dollars rounded to the nearest thousand, unless separately identified. The functional currency of LGFA is New Zealand dollars. Foreign currency conversions Transactions denominated in foreign currency are translated into New Zealand dollars using exchange rates applied on the trade date of the transaction.

36


Changes in accounting policies NZ IFRS 9. New Zealand Equivalent to International Financial Reporting Standard 9. Financial Instruments. NZ IFRS 9 (2014) is effective for the fiscal year commencing 1 July 2018. NZ IFRS 9 replaces NZ IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement and sets out the requirements for hedge accounting and impairment for financial assets and liabilities. LGFA early adopted NZ IFRS 9 (2010) for the classification and measurement of financial instruments at commencement of business in 2012. LGFA has elected to apply NZ IFRS 9 (2014) on a retrospective basis. Comparative information has not been restated as there has not been a material impact. Instead, the impact of adopting the new standard is reflected in opening equity on 1 July 2018. Hedge accounting There has been no change to accounting policy for hedge accounting as LGFA’s current fair value hedge accounting meets the requirements of NZ IFRS 9. Impairment NZ IFRS 9 prescribes an expected credit loss impairment model which replaces the incurred loss impairment model in NZ IAS 39. The expected credit loss model requires LGFA to account for expected credit losses and changes in those expected credit losses at each reporting date to reflect changes in credit risk since initial recognition. LGFA has not previously incurred any credit losses under the incurred loss impairment model (NZ IAS 39) and the introduction of the expected credit loss model (NZ IFRS 9) has not had a material impact on the measurement of LGFA’s financial assets. The changes to LGFA’s accounting policies for expected credit losses on financial assets are set out below. Methodology to determine expected credit losses As at 30 June 2019, LGFA deemed that there had been no significant increase in credit risk since initial recognition for any financial asset and calculated the loss allowance for these instruments at an amount equal to 12-month expected credit losses, using the estimated probability of default multiplied by the estimated recovery rate. The estimated probability of default is based on the Standard & Poor’s’ (S&P) Annual Global Default Study. Individual securities were assigned a probability of default over the 12-month period year based on their S&P, Fitch or Moody’s credit rating. Unrated local authorities were assigned a shadow credit rating of A+, based on all complying with LGFA’s financial covenants as at 31 December 2018, and S&P rating methodology where all New Zealand local authorities who have a credit rating from S&P are rated between AA and A+. The estimated recovery rate is assigned using the S&P recovery rating scale. All local authorities were assigned a category of 1+, based on LGFA holding security over a council’s rates which, in the event of a default, would give a statutory manager the legal right to impose a targeted rate to recover the principal and interest owing. All other financial assets were assigned a recovery rate based on the industry category and average S&P recovery rates for the security type.

37


The Treasury (New Zealand Debt Management) was assigned a category of 1+ for derivatives in gain. Early adoption standards and interpretations LGFA has not early adopted any standards. New standards adopted NZ IFRS 15. Revenue from Contracts with Customers. NZ IFRS 15 has been adopted from 1 July 2018. There has been no impact on the financial statements. Standards not yet adopted LGFA does not consider any standards or interpretations in issue but not yet effective to have a significant impact on its financial statements. NZ IFRS 16 Leases NZ IFRS 16 becomes effective from 1 July 2019 and will not have a material impact on the financial statements. Change in presentation. Statement of financial position LGFA has changed the order of presentation of assets and liabilities in the Statement of financial position to reflect the order of liquidity for financial assets and liabilities. The change in presentation has been applied to both the current reporting period as well as associated comparatives. d. Financial instruments Financial assets Financial assets, other than derivatives, are recognised initially at fair value plus transaction costs and subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest rate method. Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand; cash in transit, bank accounts and deposits with an original maturity of no more than three months. Purchases and sales of all financial assets are accounted for at trade date. At each balance date, an expected credit loss assessment is performed for all financial assets and is calculated as either:

• Credit losses that may arise from default events that are possible within the next 12 months, where no significant increase in credit risk has arisen since acquisition of the asset, or

• Credit losses that may arise from default events that are possible over the expected life of the financial asset, where a significant increase in credit risk has arisen since acquisition of the asset.

Impairment losses on financial assets will ordinarily be recognised on initial recognition as a 12-month expected loss allowance and move to a lifetime expected loss allowance if there is a significant deterioration in credit risk since acquisition.

38


Financial liabilities Financial liabilities, other than derivatives, are recognised initially at fair value less transaction costs and subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest rate method. Derivatives Derivative financial instruments are recognised both initially and subsequently at fair value. They are reported as either assets or liabilities depending on whether the derivative is in a net gain or net loss position respectively. Fair value hedge Where a derivative qualifies as a hedge of the exposure to changes in fair value of an asset or liability (fair value hedge) any gain or loss on the derivative is recognised in profit and loss together with any changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability. The carrying amount of the hedged item is adjusted by the fair value gain or loss on the hedged item in respect of the risk being hedged. Effective parts of the hedge are recognised in the same area of profit and loss as the hedged item. e. Other assets Property, plant and equipment (PPE) Items of property, plant and equipment are initially recorded at cost. Depreciation is charged on a straight-line basis at rates calculated to allocate the cost or valuation of an item of property, plant and equipment, less any estimated residual value, over its remaining useful life. Intangible Assets Intangible assets comprise software and project costs incurred for the implementation of the treasury management system. Capitalised computer software costs are amortised on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the software (three to seven years). Costs associated with maintaining computer software are recognised as expenses. f. Other liabilities Employee entitlements Employee entitlements to salaries and wages, annual leave and other similar benefits are recognised in the profit and loss when they accrue to employees. g. Revenue and expenses Revenue Interest income Interest income is accrued using the effective interest rate method.

39


The effective interest rate exactly discounts estimated future cash receipts through the expected life of the financial asset to that asset’s net carrying amount. The method applies this rate to the principal outstanding to determine interest income each period. Expenses Expenses are recognised in the period to which they relate. Interest expense Interest expense is accrued using the effective interest rate method. The effective interest rate exactly discounts estimated future cash payments through the expected life of the financial liability to that liability’s net carrying amount. The method applies this rate to the principal outstanding to determine interest expense each period. Income tax LGFA is exempt from income tax under Section 14 of the Local Government Borrowing Act 2011. Goods and services tax All items in the financial statements are presented exclusive of goods and service tax (GST), except for receivables and payables, which are presented on a GST-inclusive basis. Where GST is not recoverable as input tax, then it is recognised as part of the related asset or expense. The net amount of GST recoverable from, or payable to, the IRD is included as part of receivables or payables in the statement of financial position. The net GST paid to, or received from the IRD, including the GST relating to investing and financing activities, is classified as a net operating cash flow in the statement of cash flows. Commitments and contingencies are disclosed exclusive of GST. h. Lease payments Payments made under operating leases are recognised in profit or loss on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. Lease incentives received are recognised as an integral part of the total lease expense, over the term of the lease. i. Segment reporting LGFA operates in one segment being funding of participating local authorities in New Zealand. j. Judgements and estimations The preparation of these financial statements requires judgements, estimates and assumptions that affect the application of policies and reported amounts of assets and liabilities, and income and expenses. For example, the present value of large cash flows that are predicted to occur a long time into the future depends critically on judgements regarding future cash flows, including inflation assumptions and the risk-free discount rate used to calculate present values. Refer note 2a for fair value determination for financial instruments.

40


The estimates and associated assumptions are based on historical experience and various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these estimates. The estimates and underlying assumptions are reviewed on an ongoing basis. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognised in the period in which the estimate is revised, if the revision affects only that period, or in the period of the revision and future periods if the revision affects both current and future periods. Where these judgements significantly affect the amounts recognised in the financial statements they are described below and in the following notes.

41

30 June 2020 Dear LGFA stakeholder

Statement of Intent 2020/21 Please find attached the Statement of Intent (SOI) for the 2020/21 year. LGFA remains focused on delivering strong results for our council borrowers and shareholders. For our borrowing councils we seek to optimize funding terms and conditions by

• Achieving savings in borrowing costs

• Provide longer dated funding and

• Provide certainty of access to markets. For our shareholders we are focused on

• Delivering a strong financial performance

• Monitoring asset quality and

• Enhancing our approach to treasury and risk management. The following points regarding the 2020/21 SOI are worth noting

• The SOI performance targets are similar to the previous year’s targets except we have increased the target for both market share and council satisfaction scores to 85% from the previous 80% and 75% targets.

• There remains some uncertainty within the SOI forecasts relating to the amount of both council loans and LGFA bonds outstanding as this depends upon the magnitude and timing of council borrowing. The likely impact of COVID-19 on the financial position of councils and their borrowing requirements is still evolving but we have increased our estimates of council borrowing (and bonds issued) by $250 million in each of the next three years compared to the Draft SOI that you received in February 2020. While councils are faced with reduced revenue that may lead to a cut in capex, this could be offset by the need to co-invest alongside Central Government to assist with an infrastructure investment led growth recovery.

• The timing and amount of refinancing of council loans maturing in May 2021 and the associated repayment of the LGFA May 2021 bonds might also have an impact on the SOI forecasts.

The changes made to the Final SOI compared to the Draft SOI that you received in February 2020 for comment have been

43

• We have broadened the objectives to include contributing to the four well beings and to assist the sector with its response to COVID-19.

• Net interest income has reduced by $200,000 in the 2020/21 year reflecting lower interest rates (approximately 0.75% lower) but has increased by $300,000 and $6.7 million in the subsequent years because of the higher level of assets and increase in the base on-lending margin compared to the starting position.

• Expenses have reduced by $200,000 in the first two years due to a lower expected amount of offshore bond holders reducing our Approved Issuer Levy payments.

We can provide you with a tracked change version of the Draft and Final SOI documents if you wish. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or require further clarification on anything relating to the SOI or LGFA in general. Yours sincerely

Mark Butcher Chief Executive

44

4.4 Statement of proposal for review of

Dangerous Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy

Meeting: Strategy, Planning & Development Committee


Reporting officer: Paul Cook – Manager, Building Control

1 Purpose To approve and adopt for consultation the Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy Statement of Proposal

2 Recommendation/s That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee: 1. Adopts the statement of proposal and draft Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings

Policy which is subject to the Special Consultative Procedure Process under the Local Government Act 2002.

2. Resolves to seek public submissions on the proposal between 20 July 2020, and 20 August 2020, in accordance with the Special Consultative Procedure process.

3. Authorises the Chief Executive to make any necessary drafting, typographical or

presentation corrections to the attached supporting documents prior to consultation.

3 Background This the Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy (DAIBP) has been drafted to replace Whangarei District Council’s former “Dangerous, Insanitary and Earthquake-Prone Buildings Policy” dated December 2011. This (DAIBP) statement of proposal includes new references to affected buildings. References to Earthquake-Prone buildings have been removed, as these are now covered under a separate Act.

4 Discussion Under Part 6 of the Building Act councils are required to determine whether buildings in their district are dangerous, affected (by a dangerous building) and/or insanitary. In carrying out this responsibility councils may seek advice from employees, volunteers and contractors of Fire Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) and others considered competent to give advice. If advice is sought, the council must give due regard to that advice. Under s.131 a the policy must state: -

Council’s approach to performing functions under the Act

Council’s priorities in performing these functions

how the policy applies to Heritage Buildings

45

how the policy applies to affected buildings If a council is satisfied that only part of a building is dangerous, affected or insanitary it may apply the provisions of the Act and in doing so may exercise any of its powers or perform any of its functions in respect to that part of the building rather than the whole of a building.

4.1 Financial/budget considerations The financial and budget considerations are dealt with under operational budget in the compliance area, additionally the Building Act allows for charging for performing this function.

4.2 Policy and planning implications The policy must be adopted (and amended or replaced) in accordance with the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002. Furthermore, the council must provide a copy to the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) once it has been adopted or amended. The policy must be reviewed within 5 years of being adopted and at intervals of not more than 5 years.

4.3 Options

This is a requirement Under s.131 Council must adopt a policy on dangerous and insanitary buildings.

4.4 Risks Council does not have the resources to carry out a systematic survey of the standard of buildings across the District, nor does it need to.

However, in order to identify whether a building is dangerous, affected or insanitary Council will utilise any of the following mechanisms: -

the observations of its staff or contractors

information or complaints received from members of the public or members of professional bodies such as Engineering New Zealand, etc

events arising following natural or manmade disasters

notification from the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE)

notification from FENZ In determining whether a building is dangerous or affected with respect to a fire hazard, Council may seek the advice of FENZ. Similarly, in determining whether a building is insanitary with respect to drinking water, waste disposal or weathertightness, the council may seek the advice of appropriate sources, such as its Environmental Health Team, technical building specialists, testing laboratories, geotechnical, fire or structural engineers, etc. The council may also be guided by relevant Bylaws and seek legal advice.

5 Significance and engagement The decisions or matters of this Agenda do not trigger the significance criteria outlined in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, and the public will be informed via the special consultative procedure as set out in section 83 of the Local Government Act.

6 Attachments

Statement of Proposal Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy

Low Seismic Zone Document for Earthquake Prone buildings

Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy

Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings presentation

46

Statement of Proposal

Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Building Policy

Draft 2020

47

Table of Contents Overview ............................................................................................................................... 3 What is the policy about? ...................................................................................................... 3 Why is it being reviewed? ..................................................................................................... 3 Identifying Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings ...................................................... 3 Factors we consider .............................................................................................................. 3 Solutions ............................................................................................................................... 4 Issues to consider ................................................................................................................. 4 Having Your Say ................................................................................................................... 4 Key dates for providing your views are: ................................................................................. 4 Making a Submission ............................................................................................................ 4 Being heard .......................................................................................................................... 5 Where can I get more information? ....................................................................................... 5

48

Overview Council is calling for submissions on a policy that aims to make sure people aren’t harmed by dangerous buildings, buildings near dangerous buildings, and buildings that are insanitary. We are calling for submissions from as wide a range of people involved in buildings as is possible while we review our Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy. Consultation on the policy will open on 20 July and close on 20 August. Anyone who is interested can find all the information about it on our website, or they can call or come in to see us, however actual submissions should be in writing.

What is the policy about? The policy lays out the reasons, objectives, policies and processes used to identify whether or not a building is dangerous or is affected by a dangerous building, or is insanitary, and what should happen once they are identified.

Why is it being reviewed? The policy is being reviewed because legislation in the area has changed. In the past Earthquake Prone Buildings were also covered in this policy, but they are now covered in a separate Act. We are removing the reference to earthquake prone buildings from our Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy and reviewing what was in the joint policy.

Identifying Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Information that a building might be dangerous, affected or insanitary could come into Council from many sources. Our staff or contractors might notice something about a building, a complaint could come in from members of the public or from members of professional bodies such as Engineering New Zealand. It could be that a building is identified after an event like a slip, flood, fire or other natural or human caused disaster. The Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) or Fire and Emergency New Zealand FENZ could also let us know. Once the report comes in and we need to investigate, many different agencies could be involved. FENZ for fire hazards, health inspectors for drinking water, waste disposal, building inspectors for weathertightness, and a range of technical building specialists, testing laboratories, geotechnical, fire or structural engineers.

Factors we consider Many factors would be considered when deciding how to approach the building, but people’s safety would be paramount. We will consider the:

• scale and immediacy of risk to occupants and the public • likelihood of harm to adjoining properties • environmental impacts including contamination of water bodies • availability and viability of alternative options,” he said.

49

Solutions A range of solutions could be required, from issuing formal notices, requiring the owner to carry out remedial work, or council undertaking the remedial work, through to demolition. An important thing to note is that wherever possible, Council would seek the co-operation of the owner and occupant to achieve compliance. We would aim to get the matter resolved correctly without having to resort to the formal notice provisions of the Act; however, this may not always be possible. The situations that cause a building to be dangerous, affected or insanitary can be very diverse and dynamic, so flexibility in our approach is important.

Issues to consider One of the matters we want to highlight through this process is that lack of maintenance, overcrowding and unauthorized building alterations and converting aged buildings can cause serious building problems for occupants and those who use buildings. “Failing to obtain a building consent or deciding to use a building for a purpose it is not suited for can result in a building posing a danger to occupants, the general public or other properties and no longer complying with the Building Code. “This has the potential to affect a wide range of people from building occupants, to owners, to those carrying out work - even to those living next door, so we’d like people to read about it and let us know what they think we need to take into consideration in this policy,” said Mr Cook.

Having Your Say We are seeking community feedback in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 (Section 83) Special Consultative Procedure. As part of this procedure, we provide you with the opportunity to present your views to Council on the Draft Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy .

Key dates for providing your views are: 20 June Submissions on the Draft Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy Walking and Cycling Strategy and this Statement of Proposal open Information is available on the website at www.wdc.govt.nz/DAIpolicy 20 August Submissions close at 5pm. Date to be advised Proposed dates for hearing submissions by Council Hearings Committee Date to be advised Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy is adopted by Council It should be noted that the above dates may be amended following the receipt of submissions. Those submitters wishing to be heard will be contacted, and advised of proposed hearing dates and the location of any hearing.

Making a Submission Any person or organisation can make a submission on the Draft Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy.

50

http://www.wdc.govt.nz/DAIpolicy

Submissions can be made, either electronically online, by email or on paper. Submissions should:

• Where possible, clearly state the part of the Draft Policy that the submission point relates to.

• What your views are and the reasons for them • Any amendments to the Strategy that you are seeking • Whether you wish to be heard in support of your submission.

All submissions must be received by 5 pm on 20 August 2018. You can make a submission online at: www.wdc.govt.nz/DAIpolicy or Email your submission to: [email protected], or Post your submission to: Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy Whangarei District Council Private Bag 9023 Whangarei 0148 Submissions can also be hand delivered to any Whangarei District Council Office or Service Centre listed below. Whangarei Forum North – Rust Avenue Ruakaka Service Centre, Takutai Place, Ruakaka

Being heard Any person who makes a submission will have the opportunity to be heard by Council; but must make that request in their written submission. No anonymous submissions will be accepted. The Council is legally required to make all written or electronic submissions available to the public and to Councillors, including the name and address of the submitter. The submissions, including all contact details provided, will be available to the public. Information will be available to the public subject to the provisions of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987. If you consider there to be compelling reasons why your contact details and/or submission should be kept confidential, you should contact Submitters who have asked to be heard will be advised of the hearing dates available.

Where can I get more information? Copies of this Statement of Proposal can be viewed on Whangarei District Councils website at: www.wdc.govt.nz/DAIpolicy Alternatively, copies of the Statement of Proposal can be viewed at Whangarei District Council Offices at: Whangarei Forum North – Rust Avenue Ruakaka Service Centre, Takutai Place, Ruakaka Alternatively, call Whangarei District Council free phone on 0800 932 462 or 09 430 4200 or email: [email protected]. The Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy is attached as a separate document.

51



Earthquake-Prone Buildings DRAFT

June 2020

53

Earthquake Prone Buildings

Background

This document replaces Whangarei District Councils “Dangerous, Insanitary and Earthquake-Prone Buildings Policy” dated December 2011.

The Council is no longer required to have a policy for earthquake prone buildings as amendments to the Act including the introduction of Subpart 6A now deals with earthquake prone buildings. A new policy has been written for Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings.

Purpose

The purpose of this document is to set out Whangarei District Councils obligations in terms of earthquake-prone buildings and the legislative requirements contained in Section 6A of the Building Act 2004 (the Act).

Introduction

New Zealand is an earthquake prone country. Following the devastating earthquakes in Christchurch in 2010 and 2011 and Kaikora in 2016, the Act was reviewed and a new section added (Part 6A). The changes saw the introduction of a national system for the identification and management of earthquake prone buildings (EPBs). The national system ensures EPBs are managed consistently and strike a balance between:

protecting people from harm in an earthquake

the costs of strengthening or removing EPBs; and

the impact on New Zealand’s built heritage

The Act defines key terms and provides the framework for managing risk and a system for the identification of EPBs based on risk.

System for managing earthquake prone buildings

Building Act 2004 Sets framework for managing risk

Regulations Defines key terms, criteria and ratings

Methodology How to identify EPBs

Engineering assessment guidelines Technical methods for assessment

EPB Register National public register of EP buildings

Note: any reference to an EPB in this document, means all or part of a building

54

Legislative Requirements

The Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 was introduced on 13 May 2016 and saw the introduction of Subpart 6A to the Building Act 2004. Subpart 6A1 sets out the requirements for EPBs; these requirements are determined based on seismic risk. The Building (Specified Systems, Change the Use and Earthquake-Prone Buildings) Regulations 2005 define moderate earthquake and ultimate capacity and provide categories of earthquake ratings.

A building or part of a building is defined as being EP if it’s ultimate capacity will be exceeded in a moderate earthquake, and if it were to collapse, would do so in a way that is likely to cause injury or death to persons in or near the building or on any other property, or damage to any other property. Ultimate capacity means the probable capacity of a building to withstand earthquake actions and maintain gravity load support on the building as a whole and its individual elements or parts. Earthquake rating means the degree to which the building or part of the building meets the requirements of the Building Code2. There are two ratings prescribed in the Regulations:

0% to less than 20%; and

20% to less than 34% A building is deemed EP if it's rating is below 34% of the new building standard (NBS) of the expected seismic performance of an existing building relative to the minimum that would apply under the Building Code to a new building on the same site with respect to life safety. Buildings covered by the Act

The system focuses on the most vulnerable buildings, in terms of public safety. The EPB provisions apply to non-residential buildings and some larger residential buildings that are at least two storeys and either:

contain three or more household units; or

are used as a hostel, boarding house, or other specialised accommodation

Buildings excluded by the Act

The Act does not apply to:

farm buildings

stand-alone retaining walls

fences

statues and other monuments that cannot be entered

wharves

bridges

tunnels

storage tanks

1 sections 133AA – 133AY 2 Schedule 1 of the Building Regulations 1992

55

Priority buildings (s.133AE) The Act defines certain buildings as priority buildings; however, because Whangarei is in a low seismic zone, this section of the Act does not apply. Timeframes The TA must identify all EPB’s by 2032 (s.133 AG.4 (a)); owners3 have 35 years from the date of their first notice to remediate their EPB’s.

Seismic risk area

WDC must identify potentially EPB by:

Owners of EPB must carry out seismic work within (time from issue of EPB notice):

Priority Other Priority Other

Low N/A 1 July 2032 N/A 35 years

The TA must report progress towards identifying EPBs to MBIE every three years for a fifteen-year period ceasing in 2032. The first report is due in June 2020 and must cover the period from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2020. Thereafter reports are due in 2023; 2026 and 2029 with the final report due in 2032.

3 Owner obligations are discussed in detail throughout this document

56

Seismic Risk

New Zealand is an earthquake prone country. To help us manage the risk to public safety, NZ is categorised into three seismic zones (low, medium and high). Each zone has a hazard factor assigned to it, which is used in the design of new buildings.

Low

Medium

High

Whangarei District has a seismic risk factor4 of .10 therefore falls into a Low Seismic Risk zone.

Seismic Risk Z Factor Location

Low Z< 0.15 Northland5

These seismic risk factors are used to set time frames for identifying and remediating EPBs and reporting on progress to MBIE.

4 Seismic risk factors are sourced from NZS1170.5:2004 Structural Design Actions Part 5: Earthquake actions NZ 5 Whangarei, Far North and Kaipara District Councils

57

TA must identify EPBs (s.133AG)

A TA must apply the EPB methodology6 to all buildings in its district to identify whether buildings or parts of buildings are EP. This methodology must be put in place from 1 July 2017. Regardless of the methodology, if the TA has reason to suspect that a building or part of a building is EP, then it must identify it as being potentially EP.

Buildings that are potentially EP fall within certain category profiles; these profile categories are:-

Category Low seismic risk

A Unreinforced masonry buildings

B Buildings constructed prior to 1976 that are either three or more storeys or 12 metres or greater in height above the lowest ground level (other than unreinforced masonry buildings in Category A)

C Buildings constructed prior to 1935 that are one or two storeys (other than unreinforced masonry buildings in Category A)

Exclusions (s.133AA) The following buildings are excluded:

a building that is constructed primarily of timber framing without other construction materials providing lateral support

a building strengthened to at least 34%NBS (or the equivalent of this)

a building that a TA has previously notified the owner in writing is not EP prior to commencement

a building that the TA has found to be EP and for which it has issued a notice under s.124 of the Act prior to commencement (and is therefore subject to Schedule 1AA of the Act)

a building for which the TA has a previous assessment that has a %NBS reported for the building greater than 34%NBS and that meets the criteria set out in section 3.3 of this methodology

buildings for which a TA obtains information or a special study that shows a particular subset of buildings is not EP due to particular circumstances or special local characteristics, where there is a robust technical basis for this information or study

6 EPB Methodology – The methodology to identify EPBs published in July 2017 by MBIE

58

TA must request engineering assessment (s.133AH) If a TA identifies a building or part of a building as being potentially EP, it must ask the owner in writing to provide an engineering assessment and explain what will happen if the building is deemed EP. The request must:

be dated and identify all or parts of the building that are potentially EP

explain the TAs reasons for deeming it EP

set out the owner’s obligation o the date the assessment is due o the consequences of failing to undertake the assessment within the required

timeframe o ability to apply for an extension of time

Owner’s obligations following a request for an engineering assessment (s.133AI - AJ)

If the TA has requested the owner provide an engineering assessment they must do so by the date specified in the notice issued under s.133AH. The owner may either:

provide an assessment that complies with the EPB methodology

provide evidence of a factual error made by the TA when determining the building is EP; or

notify the TA that they do not intend to provide an assessment Note: as it may not be cost-effective to remediate a building, the owner may choose to do nothing, although they are still obliged to advise the TA of this decision. In this circumstance, the building must be demolished within the 35 year period.

If the TA has incorrectly identified the building as being EP, it must cancel the request for an engineering assessment and provide written notice of this decision to the owner. If the owner fails to provide an assessment or has advised they will not provide an assessment, the TA must proceed as if it had determined the building to be EP. In this instance, the TA may obtain an engineering report and recover the costs from the owner. The TA must then determine the earthquake rating and issue a notice for the building in the prescribed form. If the owner is unable to provide the engineering assessment in time, they may apply for an extension of time; however, must do so within 2 months of the due date. The TA may grant or refuse an extension of time. Extensions of time are for a maximum period of 12 months and may only be granted once. No further extensions of time are permitted. The TA must notify the owner of their decision in writing.

59

Determining whether a building is EP (s.133AK)

Upon receiving an engineering assessment the TA must determine whether the building is EP and its rating.

Building is EP Actions

No N/A

Yes Determine rating

Notify owner in writing building is EP and advise rating

Issue EPB notice for the building

Update and record information in EPB register

If the TA does not receive an engineering assessment by the due date, it must proceed as if the building were EP and take the actions above but does not have to determine the rating. Issuing EPB notices for EPB’s (s.133AL)

The TA must promptly issue an EPB notice, which must be in the prescribed form and dated. Furthermore, it must:-

identify the part or all of the building that is EP

specify the rating

require the owner to undertake seismic work to remove the hazard

state the deadline for doing the seismic work

state how to apply for an exemption under s.133AN

state how to apply for an extension of time under s.133AO (heritage buildings) If the notice has been issued because the owner failed to provide an engineering assessment, the notice must state that the TA has determined it is EP and the rating it has applied to the building. A copy of the notice must also be issued to the owner, occupier and any other person who

has an interest in the land; this includes:

every person who has an interest in the land on which the building is situated under a

mortgage or other encumbrance registered under the Land Transfer Act 2017

every person claiming an interest in the land that is protected by a caveat lodged and

in force under section 138 of the Land Transfer Act 2017; and

every statutory authority that has exercised a statutory power to classify or register, for

any purpose, the building or the land on which the building is situated; and

Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga, if the building is a heritage building

Note: If a notice is not given to any or all of the above parties it does not make it invalid.

Deadline for completing seismic work (s.133AM)

The owner must complete seismic work on the building within 35 years of the date of the first notice regardless of whether it was issued under this section of the Act or s.124 (c) (i) since revoked. Note: seismic work may include demolition of the building

60

Owner may apply for an exemption (s.133AN)

An owner of a building subject to an EPB notice may apply to a TA for an exemption from the requirement to carry out seismic work. The application must be in writing and be accompanied by a fee imposed by the TA.

The TA may grant an exemption from the requirement to complete seismic work on a building if it has:-

the prescribed characteristics;7

either ‘nil to low’ or ‘low to moderate’ intensity of occupation and passage (life safety consequences)

consequences or likelihood of damage to other properties in the event of the building collapsing

An EPB must have all the required characteristics and features listed above, to be eligible for an exemption; the focus is on buildings with a low consequence of failure.

Prescribed Characteristics Assessment

Limited current use Not many people use or are near this building, or if they are, this is infrequent or not for long

Limited expected use This limited use is also true for the foreseeable future

Limited harm Very few people use or are near the building or any nearby buildings (now and in the foreseeable future); or

How the building is expected to collapse means very few people inside or nearby are likely to be hurt

Limited damage The building is not near other buildings; or

Its collapse is only likely to cause minor damage to other property

Does not affect strategic transport routes

N/A in low seismic zone

Not required in an emergency Building is not likely to be needed in an emergency

Exemptions can only be granted to a building already deemed EP. The TA should only grant an exemption if there is a low consequence associated with the building’s failure in terms of life safety and property damage. The types of building expected to be eligible for an exemption are likely to be those located well away from other buildings or passers-by, e.g. small rural community halls or churches. If the TA grants an exemption it must issue an EPB exemption notice identifying the building (or the part thereof) that is exempt; noting that the owner does not have to carry out seismic work and setting out the TAs reasons for granting the exemption. The TA may review and / or revoke the exemption at any time, if the building no longer has the prescribed characteristics. An exemption stays in force until the TA revokes it.

7 Regulation 10 and Schedule 4 of the Building (Specified Systems, Change the Use, and Earthquake-prone Buildings)

Regulations set out the required building characteristics for an exemption i.e. age, construction type, use, level of occupancy, location in relation to other buildings or building types, and any other characteristics

61

Extensions of time for Heritage buildings (s.133AO) If the building is a Category 1 historic place or national historic landmark, the owner may apply to the TA for an extension of time to complete the seismic work. The application must be in writing and be accompanied by a fee imposed by the TA. The TA may grant an extension of time (up to 10 years) to complete the seismic work; however, the owner must take all reasonably practicable steps to manage or reduce the risks associated with the building being EP and comply with any conditions the TA deems necessary for managing the risks. If the owner fails to comply with the conditions the TA may revoke the extension. The TA must re-issue the notice after granting or revoking an extension and update the EPB register. EPB notices and EPB exemption notices (s.133AP) Once a notice has been issued (or re-issued), it must be attached, removed or replaced (as applicable) as soon as practicable in a prominent place on the building. If a notice becomes illegible the owner must advise the TA who will issue a replacement notice. Note the TA can require the owner to attach, remove or replace notices. Assessing information relating to EPBs (s.133AQ) As soon as practicable after receiving an engineering assessment, the TA must determine in accordance with the EPB methodology:-

whether the building is EP; and

if it is EP, it’s rating The TA must then notify the owner of its decision in writing, confirming the rating and issue an EPB notice. If the building is already subject to an EPB, and the rating has changed, the TA must re-issue the notice and advise the owner the rating has changed.

Imposing safety requirements (s.133AR)

A TA may put up a hoarding or fence to prevent people from approaching the building and erect a notice warning people not to approach the building or restricting entry to persons or groups.

If the TA has put up a hoarding or fence, no person may use or occupy the building or permit anyone else to use or occupy the building, other than in accordance with the terms of notice.

The notice must be in writing and attached to the building in question. The notice may only be issued for a maximum period of 30 days. The notice can be re-issued only once, again for a maximum period of 30 days. A copy of the notice must also be issued to the owner, occupier and any other person who

has an interest in the land; this includes:

every person who has an interest in the land on which the building is situated under a

mortgage or other encumbrance registered under the Land Transfer Act 2017

every person claiming an interest in the land that is protected by a caveat lodged and

in force under section 138 of the Land Transfer Act 2017; and

every statutory authority that has exercised a statutory power to classify or register, for

any purpose, the building or the land on which the building is situated; and

62


Note: If a notice is not given to any or all of the above parties it does not make it invalid.

TA may carry out seismic work (s.133AS)

If seismic work has not been completed on an EPB (by the deadline specified on the EPB notice), the TA may apply to the District Court to carry out the work (note that seismic work may include demolition). Before applying to the Court, the TA must give the owner 10 days written notice of their intention to do so. The TA may recover their costs from the owner and place a charge on the land until such time as it receives these costs. Alterations to buildings subject to an EPB notice (s.133AT)

A Building Consent Authority (BCA) must not grant a building consent on a building that has an EPB notice unless it is satisfied that the building will continue to meet the provisions of the Building Code for means of escape and access and facilities. Furthermore, that after the alteration, the building will continue to comply with the provisions of the code as it did before the work began or if it did not comply before the work began, continue to comply at least to the same extent as it did. Despite this a TA may allow the alteration of the building without the building complying with the Code provided that

the alteration includes the necessary seismic work; and

if the building were required to comply with the specified provisions, it would be unduly onerous for the owner in the circumstances; and

the permitted non-compliance with the specified provisions is no more than is reasonably necessary in the light of the objective of ensuring that the building is no longer earthquake prone; and

after the alteration, the building will continue to comply with the specified provisions, and other provisions of the building code, to at least the same extent as it complied with those provisions immediately before the building work began

If substantive alterations8 are carried out, the alterations must include the seismic work that is necessary to achieve compliance. Substantial alterations means

(x + y) > (z ÷ 4)

&

(x + y) > $150,000

X Estimated value of the building work excluding seismic work

Y Estimated value of the seismic work

Z The total building value of the building

Process Council’s approach for the transition to the new system and methodology is:

8 Regulation 11 Building (Specified Systems, Change the Use, and Earthquake-prone Buildings) Regulations 2005

63

For buildings already assessed and not EP:

No action required

The Regulations exclude these buildings from being re-assessed under new methodology

For buildings already assessed and EP:

Write to building owners advising of change in legislation and giving them the options to:

• Accept the existing earthquake-prone seismic assessment; or • Engage a suitably qualified structural engineer (at their cost) to undertake a

new engineering assessment using the new methodology (EPB Methodology) within 12 months.

If an owner elects to accept the existing EP rating Council will:

issue an EPB Notice which is required to be displayed in a prominent place in the building, and

Add the building details to the national register of earthquake-prone buildings All buildings that have been identified as being earthquake prone must be entered onto the national register (EPB Register) Procedure once EP status confirmed

The procedure for EPBs is:

Once the EP status of a building has been confirmed, an earthquake-prone building notice will be issued

The issuance of the notice triggers the requirement for the building’s details to be added to the national EPB register.

The timeframe for strengthening EPBs in Whangarei (a low seismic zone) is 35 years from the date the EPB notice is issued.

However, there are additional triggers requiring strengthening earlier than the 35-year timeframe – when the building is subject to a change of use or a substantial alteration (i.e. where the value of alterations is >25% of the rateable value of the building).

Timeframe extensions of 10 years for specific heritage buildings and exemptions from strengthening are also possible in accordance with the guidance criteria provided by Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE). The EP status of a building will be publically available on the Land Information Memorandum (LIM) as long as the building remains EP. Identification of EPB The TA identifies EPBs in its district by doing a desktop review of its records, as follows:-

Start in the CBD first then alphabetically, street by street to identify potential buildings

Look for the design date of the building (based on existing records e.g. building permits or consents)

Search using Maps, GIS or Google Earth Visual identification of buildings:

Height (lowest ground level surrounding the building to the highest point on the roof structure)

Use of building

Construction type

64

Dangerous, Affected and

Insanitary Building Policy Whangarei District Council

1 July 2020

65

Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings

Purpose of Policy

The purpose of this policy is to meet the legislative requirements of the Building Act 2004 (the Act),

specifically section 131, which requires the Territorial Authority (TA) to adopt a policy which states:-

the approach that Council will take in performing its functions under the Act

its priorities in performing those functions; and

how the policy will apply to heritage buildings

Background

This policy replaces Whangarei District Councils “Dangerous, Insanitary and Earthquake-Prone

Buildings Policy” dated December 2011.

The previous policy has been replaced due to legislative changes including the addition of affected

buildings and multiple changes to earthquake prone buildings; the latter no longer requiring a policy.

This policy therefore addresses the requirement to have a policy for dangerous, affected and insanitary

buildings.

The first part of this policy discusses legislative requirements; the second part deals with risk

assessment and management.

Introduction

This policy sets out the Territorial Authority’s (i.e. Whangarei District Council) position in respect to the identification, assessment and management of dangerous, affected and / or insanitary buildings. The council is committed to ensuring the Whangarei region is a safe place to live and work in. Conversions of existing aged buildings, lack of maintenance, overcrowding and unauthorised building alterations can cause serious building problems for occupants and those who use buildings. The failure to obtain a building consent or use a building for a purpose for which it is not suitable can result in a building no longer complying with the Building Code and posing a danger to occupants, the general public or other properties. The legal test under the Act that has to be met by the TA in exercising its power is that it must be

satisfied that the threshold of being dangerous, affected or insanitary has been met and in most cases

the TA will seek professional advice on these aspects

Legislative Requirements

Under Part 61 of the Act the Territorial Authority (TA) is required to determine whether buildings in their district are dangerous, affected and / or insanitary. In doing so, a TA may seek advice from employees, volunteers and contractors of Fire Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) as being competent to give advice. If advice is sought, the TA must give due regard to that advice. Under s.131 a TA must adopt a policy on dangerous and insanitary buildings, which states:-

it’s approach to performing functions under the Act

it’s priorities in performing these functions

how it applies to Heritage Buildings

how it applies to affected buildings

The policy must be adopted (and amended or replaced) in accordance with the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002. Furthermore, the TA must provide a copy to the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) once it has been

1 Sections 121, 121A and 123-132

66

adopted or amended. The policy must be reviewed within 5 years of being adopted and at intervals of not more than 5 years. If a TA is satisfied that only part of a building is dangerous, affected or insanitary it may apply the provisions of the Act and in doing so may exercise any of its powers or perform any of its functions in respect to that part of the building rather than the whole of a building.

Definition of Key Terms

Part 6 of the Act provides the meaning of key terms and defines special provisions for dangerous,

affected and insanitary buildings.

Dangerous Buildings (s.121)

A building is dangerous for purposes of this Act if:-

a) in the ordinary course of events (excluding the occurrence of an earthquake), the building is

likely to cause

I. injury or death (whether by collapse or otherwise) to any persons in it or to persons on

other property; or

II. damage to other property; or

b) in the event of fire, injury or death to any persons in the building or to persons on other property

is likely

Affected Buildings (121A)

A building is an affected building for the purposes of this Act if it is adjacent to, adjoining, or nearby:-

a) a dangerous building as defined in s.121 (see above); or

b) a dangerous dam within the meaning of s.153

Insanitary Buildings (s.123)

A building is insanitary for the purposes of this Act if the building:-

a) is offensive or likely to be injurious to health because

I. of how it is situated or constructed; or

II. it is in a state of disrepair; or

b) has insufficient or defective provisions against moisture penetration so as to cause dampness

in the building or in any adjoining building; or

c) does not have a supply of potable water that is adequate for its intended use; or

d) does not have sanitary facilities that are adequate for its intended use

Heritage Buildings (s.7)

Heritage building means a building that is included on:-

a) the New Zealand Heritage List / Rārangi Kōrero maintained under s.65 of the Heritage New

Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014; or

b) the National Historic Landmarks / Ngā Manawhenua o Aotearoa me ōna Kōrero Tūturu list

maintained under s.81 of the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014

Building Work

For the purposes of this policy, building work includes the demolition of part or all of the building.

67

Objective

The objective in implementing this policy is to achieve compliance with the Act. The Act provides several

statutory tools for dealing with dangerous, affected or insanitary buildings; these include:-

issuing formal notices

owner carrying out remedial work

TA undertaking the remedial work; and

demolition

Wherever possible, the TA will seek the co-operation of the owner and occupant to achieve compliance,

without having to resort to the formal notice provisions of the Act; however, this may not always be

possible.

A flexible approach must be taken to achieve this overall objective due to the diversity and dynamics

which result in dangerous, affected or insanitary buildings.

Factors in determining the approach to be taken include:-

an assessment of the scale and immediacy of risk to occupants and the public

an assessment of the likelihood of harm to adjoining properties

an assessment of environmental impacts including contamination of water bodies

the availability and viability of alternative options

Identifying Dangerous, Affected and / or Insanitary Buildings

The TA does not have the resources to carry out a systematic survey of the standard of buildings across

the District, nor does it need to.

However, in order to identify whether a building is dangerous, affected or insanitary the TA will utilise

any of the following mechanisms:-

the observations of its staff or contractors

information or complaints received from members of the public or members of professional

bodies such as Engineering New Zealand, etc

events arising following natural or manmade disasters

notification from the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE)

notification from FENZ

In determining whether a building is dangerous or affected with respect to a fire hazard, the TA may

seek the advice of FENZ. Similarly, in determining whether a building is insanitary with respect to

drinking water, waste disposal or weathertightness, the TA may seek the advice of appropriate sources,

such as its Environmental Health Team, technical building specialists, testing laboratories,

geotechnical, fire or structural engineers, etc. The TA may also be guided by relevant Bylaws and seek

legal advice.

Heritage Buildings

Whilst heritage buildings will be assessed in a manner consistent with assessments for other potentially

dangerous, affected or insanitary buildings, special efforts will be made to meet heritage objectives. It

is important that in remediating such buildings that heritage values and their protection are not lost sight

of.

Discussions will be held with owners and Heritage New Zealand to identify a mutually acceptable way

forward.

68

Where a dangerous, affected or insanitary building notice is issued for a heritage building, a copy of the

notice will be sent to the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga as required by s.125(2) (f) of the Act.

Investigation

Once the TA becomes aware of a potential problem, they must carry out a full investigation including

but not limited to consideration of the following points:

review TA records prior to site visit

o understand what consents have been approved for this site; whether a Compliance

Schedule exists; the status of the Building Warrant of Fitness / IQP reports; Notices to

Fix, etc)

review GIS / aerials prior to site visit

o understand whether there are any natural or manmade hazards or other issues to be

aware of)

how the TA was made aware of the situation

location of the building

actual site conditions

previous and current use of the building

occupancy numbers

ownership / occupancy details

whether the public have access to the building e.g. via the building or adjacent land and

waterways

what aspects of the building are considered dangerous (all or part of the building)

whether any neighbouring properties are affected by the potentially dangerous or insanitary

building

what aspects of the building are considered insanitary e.g. lack of potable drinking water,

sanitary fixtures or waste disposal, light and ventilation or vermin

how and to what extent these aspects are non-compliant with the Building Code

who is or was responsible for creating this hazard (e.g. whether authorised or unauthorised

work has been carried out)

whether the land or building has heritage status

priorities (the immediacy) of the issue

Criteria for determining priority of issue

A building (or part of a building) will be classified as dangerous or affected if it is likely to cause injury

or death to the occupants, public or other property.

A building (or part of a building) will be classified as insanitary if it is likely to be injurious to health

occupants, public or people on other property.

The immediacy of the issue depends upon whether the building is occupied or poses a danger to other

property; for example:-

land is unstable

building is structurally unsound and considered dangerous to occupants or the public

building has a high fire risk

building lacks sufficient protection to occupants, public or other property (i.e. unfenced pool or large-scale excavations)

building which has poor sanitation and poses an immediate impact to the health of the occupants or the public

building is inadequately protected against moisture penetration i.e. not weathertight Note: A building is less likely to be classified as dangerous, affected or insanitary if it is unoccupied;

however, the risk to the public and other properties must still be considered. The TA will need to

69

carefully consider these issues and determine whether they warrant immediate action to prevent injury

or death. Each case must be considered on its own merits.

If the risk is significant e.g. the building is occupied or construction / earthworks pose a risk to the public

or other property, immediate action may be warranted. Sometimes you might have a situation where

the risk is significant but can be managed; in other situations it may not be possible to manage the risk.

There is always a risk that in the event of a fire, death or injury will occur; however, there must be

‘particular features’ for this risk to be ‘likely to occur’. Therefore the TA must firstly focus on whether

the building complies with the Building Code. If the answer to that question is NO, then the next

consideration must be to focus on what features do not comply with the Building Code that make this

building dangerous. A building may be non-compliant with the Building Code; however, this in itself

does not make a building dangerous.

The TA will take into account the cost of effecting remedial work in assessing the various means of

reducing the hazard to human life presented by a building which has been identified as dangerous,

affected or insanitary. Also the availability of alternatives to continued use and occupation of the

building, both in the short and long term (refer example below).

Following the site visit and preliminary investigation the TA will determine whether the building is

dangerous, affected or insanitary and if so, whether to issue a notice and / or take other actions.

Risk Management Scenario:

This scenario involves multiple people living in transient accommodation (e.g. Backpacker’s

accommodation), which does not have a fire alarm system. The risk is loss of life or serious injury

occurring due to people being unable to escape in the event of a fire (i.e. not aware of fire or smoke in

the building).

Risk Factor Extreme

Risk type Fire hazard

Building occupied Yes

Sleeping accommodation Yes

Death or injury likely Yes

Can risk be eliminated immediately No

Can risk be eliminated eventually Yes install compliant alarm

Can risk be minimised immediately YES

Interim measure - provide security guard 24/7 who could raise the alarm in event of emergency and have evacuation plans in place

NO

Evacuate the building; apply for building consent or complete work under urgency; obtain CCC / CoA and Compliance Schedule

Note: Timing may impact on the outcome of the site visit. For example, in the above scenario the risk

is extreme because there is sleeping accommodation in the building. Therefore if the visit was

70

conducted early in the day a plan to minimise the hazard could be put into place and agreed to by close

of business. However, if it was late in the day, this option may not be available and immediate

evacuation may be necessary.

TA Powers (actions)

If a TA is satisfied that a building is a dangerous, affected, or insanitary building it may do any or all of

the following under s.124:-

(a) put up a hoarding or fence to prevent people from approaching the building nearer than is safe

(b) attach in a prominent place on, or adjacent to, the building a notice that warns people not to

approach the building

(c) except in the case of an affected building, issue a notice that complies with s.125(1) requiring

work to be carried out on the building to

I. reduce or remove the danger; or

II. prevent the building from remaining insanitary

(d) issue a notice that complies with s.125(1A) restricting entry to the building for particular

purposes or restricting entry to particular persons or groups of persons

Note: The erection of a hoarding or fence is an action that a TA can take to ensure the immediate safety

of people and is not considered building work.

Notice requiring building work

Under s.125, a notice issued pursuant to s.124 (2) (c) must be in writing and fixed to the building in

question.

A copy of the notice must also be issued to the owner, occupier and any other person who has an

interest in the land; this includes:

every person who has an interest in the land on which the building is situated under a mortgage

or other encumbrance registered under the Land Transfer Act 2017

every person claiming an interest in the land that is protected by a caveat lodged and in force

under section 138 of the Land Transfer Act 2017; and

every statutory authority2 that has exercised a statutory power to classify or register, for any

purpose, the building or the land on which the building is situated; and


Note: If a notice is not given to one of the above parties it does not make it invalid.

The notice must state the time within which the building work must be carried out. The time must be no

less than 10 days after the notice is given or a period reasonably sufficient to obtain a building consent

if one is required, whichever period is longer.

The notice must also state whether the owner of the building is required to obtain a building consent in

order to carry out the work required by the notice.

Notice restricting entry

2 Council will work with other agencies, for example Transit New Zealand for State Highways, or other Council

departments, when considering any building such as a bridge that may be considered dangerous, to find a mutually

acceptable way forward.

71

Under s.124 (2) (d) a notice restricting entry must be in writing and fixed to the building in question. A

copy of the notice must be provided to the owner, occupier and any other person who has an interest

in the land.

The notice may also restrict entry to any part or all of a building; it may also be restricted to particular

persons or groups of persons.

In the case where a notice restricts entry to a building, it may be issued for a maximum period of 30

days; thereafter it may only be reissued once, for a maximum period of 30 days.

Requirement to obtain a building consent

Under s.125 the notice must advise the applicant of the requirement to obtain a building consent (if

applicable). However, under s.41 a building consent is not required in relation to building work where

it is not practical to obtain a building consent in advance and the building work has to be done under

urgency. If the applicant wishes to proceed under s.41 of the Act, the matter should be discussed and

agreed with the Council.

In these circumstances a full, written scope of work will be required, followed by an application for

Certificate of Acceptance as soon as practicable after completion of the building work.

If the TA carries out the building work, this section does not apply and a building consent is not required.

However, the TA must apply to the District Court for an order authorising it to carry out the work.

Order to the District Court (s.126)

If the owner does not carry out the building work identified in the notice or the building work is not

proceeding with reasonable speed, the TA may apply to the District Court to do the work itself. However,

before applying to the Court the TA must notify the owner in writing giving them no less than 10 days

of their intention to do so.

If the TA carries out building work, the owner is liable for the costs; such costs are recoverable via a

charge on the land.

Measures to avoid immediate danger or to fix insanitary conditions (s.129)

Where there is immediate danger or insanitary conditions present, the Chief Executive of the TA may

by warrant issued under their signature take any actions necessary to remove the danger or fix the

insanitary conditions. If any actions are taken under s.129 (2) the Chief Executive is required to apply

to the District Court seeking confirmation of the warrant.

The District Court is required to:-

confirm the warrant

confirm the warrant with modifications; or

set the warrant aside

The TA is not required to apply for confirmation of the warrant if the owner has notified the TA that they

do not dispute entry onto the land.

Prior to taking this step, the TA will engage legal advice before executing a warrant.

Records

72

Where a building is identified as being dangerous, affected or insanitary, a requisition will be placed on

the property file. This requisition will remain until the danger is remedied and made available if a Land

Information Memorandum is sought whilst the notice is in place.

73

Risk Framework

The purpose of this Section is to describe a process for systematically and consistently identifying risk.

The chance of something happening is measured in terms of consequences and likelihood; this is best

described using a matrix3.

Likelihood - a qualitative description of probability or frequency

Level Descriptor Description

A Almost Certain Is expected to occur in most circumstances

B Likely Will probably occur in most circumstances

C Possible Might occur at some time

D Uncertain Could occur at some time

E Rare May occur in exceptional circumstances

Consequence - the outcome of an event expressed qualitatively or quantitatively, being a loss, injury,

disadvantage or gain. There may be a range of possible outcomes associated with an event.

Level Descriptor Description

1 Insignificant No injuries

2 Minor May require some medical treatment

3 Significant Medical treatment required

4 Major Extensive injuries

5 Extreme Death

Risk rating – the chance of something happening that will have an impact upon objectives. It is

measured in terms of consequences and likelihood.

Consequences

Likelihood Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Extreme

Almost Certain Moderate Moderate High Very High Very High

Likely Moderate Moderate High High Very High

Possible Low Moderate Moderate High High

Uncertain Low Low Moderate Moderate High

Rare Low Low Moderate Moderate High

Legend:

Very high extreme risk; immediate action required

High high risk; senior management attention required

Moderate management responsibility must be specified

Low manage by routine procedures

3 Source AS/NZS 4630:1999 Risk Management

74

For the purposes of this Section, it is assumed that:-

there is no building consent for the building work being risk assessed; or

if the work was consented in the past, it is no longer compliant with that building consent

Unauthorised building work means:

building work for which a building consent has not been obtained when one was required; or

building work which is considered exempt but does not comply with the Building Code

If the consenting process has been completed and a CCC issued and there are elements of that building

work that do not comply then that work is considered to be non-compliant.

Note: In this scenario, it is likely that the bulk of the building work is compliant (work completed under

a building consent) as opposed to the building work which occurred without a building consent. This is

reflected in the risk assessment of unauthorised building work that occurs within a consented building

for example, an extension or additions to a dwelling.

Once the outcome has been established i.e. that a building is dangerous and / or insanitary; the risk to

other property (i.e. affected buildings) must then be considered using the same analysis.

75

Qualitative Measures of Consequences for Risks

Rating Consequences Description Examples

1 Insignificant Would not cause illness or injury to any person

Loss of amenity

Temporary or very minor nuisance or inconvenience

Lack of insulation

Unauthorised minor work e.g. carport, deck, small garden shed, temporary noise or odour, disconnected downpipe

2 Minor May cause very minor injury to people

Very minimal impact if any on people other than those in immediate proximity

Minor damage to local physical environment only

Significant loss of amenity, widespread impact from noise or odour

Unauthorised addition to existing building; multiple utility sheds on property; garden shed too close to boundary; mild stormwater runoff; tripping or slipping hazard in public place

3 Moderate Potential to cause significant injury or illness to people

Minor injury or illness to many people

May cause some significant damage to property or the environment

Can include multiple instances of minor effects long term

Structural elements fail that could cause a person to fall >1.0m but <2.0m

Unconsented habitable space

Significant storm water runoff

Leaky home

Persistent noise issues

4 Major Serious illness, injury or death to one or more people

Significant injury or illness to many people

Major degradation to the wider environment (not contained on offending property).

Structural elements fail that could cause a person to fall >2m

Non-compliant swimming pool

Electrical supply to unauthorised building

Sleepout or similar with unconsented sanitary fixtures

Expired BWoF or failed systems

5

Extreme Serious illness, injury or death to one or more people including building occupants, third parties (neighbours) or the general public.

Threatens overall integrity of buildings other than the offending buildings

Serious and irreversible degradation to the wider environment (not contained on offending property)

Serious threat to the overall structural integrity of the building such that collapse is imminent and would cause death or serious injury to third parties

Public Use building considered unsafe due to fire or insanitary risk whether due to unsafe heating, energy systems or lack of means of escape

Building condition could cause very serious harm to due to discharge or improper containment, processing of contaminants or hazards, including industrial and solid wastes

Large excavation threatening other property

76

Building Risk Factors – Dangerous Buildings

Risk Factor – B1 How can this occur? Impacts Impact rating

a) Deck (including stairs), roof tiles or roofing insecure or foundations / piles weak, removed or unsound

Degradation due to age Poor material quality Poor workmanship Unreasonable weight / loading Natural hazard including subsidence Willful damage Hazard zone not factored Poor design Change of use Fire / Flooding No / incomplete consent

May:-

cause a person or persons to fall or trip

prevent access in or out of building

persons to be hit by falling materials

blow on to other property / roads

dampness and moisture issues

misalignment of doors and windows

collapse of building with various impact depending on height, geography of site

Major

b) Internal support-bracing weak, removed or unsound

Degradation due to age Poor material quality Poor workmanship Unreasonable weight / loading Natural hazard including wind Willful damage Hazard zone not factored Poor design Fire No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

collapse or sag of walls

misalignment of doors and windows

further weakening to main structural elements

Moderate

c) Internal support-main structural beams weak, removed or unsound

Degradation due to age Poor material quality Poor workmanship Unreasonable weight / loading Natural hazard including wind Willful damage Hazard zone not factored Poor design Fire / Flooding Relocation of building Nearby excavation or erosion No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

full or partial collapse of building

Extreme

77

Risk Factor – B1 How can this occur? Impacts Impact rating

d) Flooring weak or unsound (not including surface failure)


May cause:-

injury due to falling through floor

illness due to moisture problems

Moderate

e) Bridges and retaining walls weak, removed or unsound


May cause:-

collapse

an injury or fall

nuisance to other property, block road or river

a lack of access resulting in isolation of property

Extreme

78

Risk Factor – D1-2, E1, F1-9, G1-15 How can this occur? Impacts Impact rating

a) Unsafe pedestrian access Slippery surface Unsafe slope Irregular rise in stairs Lack of handrail Ungraspable handrail No landing or at long intervals in stairs Size of landing does not accommodate door opening No / incomplete consent

May cause:

injury due to tripping, slipping or other hazard

Minor

b) Unsafe vehicular access of building

Slippery surface / unsafe slope Inadequate queuing / circulation space Inadequate sight distances Design does not avoid conflict between vehicles and people using or moving to space Safety from falling (lack of barriers or bollards) No / incomplete consent

May cause:

injury

damage to other property

Moderate

c) Failure or inappropriate installation or use of a specified system (not fire related) e.g. mechanical installations

Degradation due to age Poor material quality Poor workmanship Not fit for purpose No / incomplete consent

May cause:

entrapment of person or limbs resulting in injury

Major

d) Falling from places other than decks and stairs e.g. temporary site fences, mezzanine levels, etc <1.0m

Lack of suitable barrier Unreasonable weight Lack of warning No / incomplete consent

May cause:

injury

Minor

e) Falling from places other than decks and stairs e.g. temporary site fences, mezzanine levels, etc >1.0m

Lack of suitable barrier Unreasonable weight Lack of warning No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

injury or death

Major

f) Hazardous construction or demolition including access to site by small children

Unlimited access Unmarked projections Open hazards / projections Lack of safe route through site No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

injury or death


Major

79

Risk Factor – D1-2, E1, F1-9, G1-15 How can this occur? Impacts Impact rating

g) Destabilisation of neighbouring property due to construction site

Collapse of land due to poor ground strength No retaining walls in place Silt and erosion Over-excavation of site No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

injury or death


Extreme

h) Lack of adequate access or escape route for disabled persons including visibility, width, etc

Lack of knowledge and awareness Site specific No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

loss of amenity or inconvenience

Minor

i) Harms due to offensive odour, food contamination, inadequate privacy, inability to clean effectively, lack of amenity or other annoyance (excludes facility for load / drainage risks)

Inappropriate sanitary facility provision either for purpose or number No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

injury or illness

damage to property

Moderate

j) Contamination from storage manufacturing or processing of food including animal products, medical treatment of humans or animals reception of dead bodies

Inappropriate sanitary facility provision either for purpose or number No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

injury or illness

damage to property

Moderate

k) Loss of fresh air, air temperature or activity space

Lack of ventilation Mechanical air handling system failure or not appropriate No means of removing or collecting cooking fumes, moisture from laundry, steam etc No/incomplete consent

May cause:-


illness

Minor

l) Loss of noise transmission between adjoining occupancies

Lack of insulation Insufficient sound transmission class. Unreasonable noise levels No / incomplete consent

May cause:-


illness or injury

Minor

m) Lack of natural or artificial light Poor design Obstruction by neighbours No / incomplete consent

May cause:-


illness or injury

Minor

80

Risk Factor – D1-2, E1, F1-8, G1-15, H1

How can this occur? Impacts Impact rating

n) Inadequate ventilation or explosion from gas appliance or installation

Improper installation System / product failure No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

fire

damage to property

death or injury

Extreme

o) Hot water explosion Lack of pressure relief Temperature too high Unauthorised building work No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

fire

damage to property

death or injury

Extreme

p) Hot water unavailable Failure to provide Energy supply failure Unauthorised building work No / incomplete consent

May cause:

inconvenience

Insignificant

q) Foul odour, noise or other inconvenience

Unauthorised building work No / incomplete consent

May cause:

Inconvenience or nuisance

Insignificant

r) Unauthorised foul water, industrial waste, solid waste disposal

Illegal dumping System not fit for purpose Unauthorised building work No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

illness

contamination of the environment

damage to property

Extreme

s) Inefficient use of energy when sourced from a network utility operator or a depletable energy source

Failure to limit uncontrollable airflow Degradation due to age Poor material quality Poor workmanship No / incomplete consent

May:- generate systemic inefficiency generate unnecessary cost

Insignificant

81

Risk Factor – C, G9-10 How can this occur? Impacts Impact rating

t) Lack of means of escape (including accessible features and signage F8) or lack of, or expired BWOF

No means of egress at all Failure to maintain gates locks Expired BWOF Lack of signage / direction Inadequate for user numbers

Unauthorised changes to specified

systems or new systems added Alarms, etc not fitted or appropriate Lack of resource

Poor IQP performance Poor inspection, maintenance and monitoring process No / incomplete consent

May cause:- lack of warning of fire resulting in people

becoming trapped in a building or part of

a building if it catches fire serious injury from fire or attempts to

escape

Extreme

u) Unauthorised or unsafe installation

or operation of solid fuel heating system

Deterioration due to age

Lack of awareness Use of second hand appliance Use of incorrect material when operating

appliance No / incomplete consent

May cause:

fire when operated injury or damage to property

Extreme

v) Lack of appropriate fire retardation materials

Unauthorised work Poor installation

Poor quality materials No / incomplete consent

May cause:- fire to spread more rapidly

injury or damage to property

Major

w) Unauthorised electrical supply

installation or electrical supply in unsafe building

Unauthorised connection - no approval from Energy Provider

Poor installation

Poor quality materials No / incomplete consent

May cause:

electric shock and or fire injury or damage to property

Major

Risk Factor – F9 How can this occur? Impacts Impact rating

x) Non-compliant pool barrier,

unauthorised construction or lack of pool barrier

Poor audit / monitoring Poor or no maintenance on gates, landscaping, etc No control of what happens on neighbouring property (boundary fences) Lack of awareness of risk No / incomplete consent

May cause:

drowning or injury especially to young children

Extreme

82

Building Risk Factors – Insanitary Buildings

Risk Factor – G1, G12; G13 How can this occur? Impacts Impact rating

a) Insanitary due to lack of potable water supply or contaminated water

No connection to services Contamination of supply at source or by systems materials Lack of filtration Low rainfall No on site retention of water Failure to plan for growth Lack of resource consent Lack of public infrastructure provision Cost prohibitive private solutions Lack of awareness of potable standards No / incomplete consent

May:-

cause ill health due to drinking water that is not potable

result in reliance on other methods for obtaining water

Moderate

b) Insanitary due to drainage not functioning or non-existent drainage

Degradation due to age Poor material quality Poor workmanship Poor design Nearby works Failure to provide drainage solution Lack of resource consent Lack of public infrastructure provision Cost prohibitive private solutions Misunderstanding of sustainable solutions No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

illness from insanitary material

flooding

damage to property

Moderate

c) Insanitary due to drainage unauthorised discharge

Lack of resource consent Lack of public infrastructure provision Cost prohibitive private solutions No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

illness from insanitary material

flooding

damage to property

damage to environment

Major

d) Insanitary due to not enough facilities for loads (e.g. toilets)

Overcrowding due to poverty Overcrowding at events Unexpected increase in user / visitor numbers Inappropriate use / purpose group No / incomplete consent

May:-

result in insanitary conditions being perpetuated due to alternative measures being used

cause environmental degradation

cause illness

Moderate

83

Risk Factor – E2, G1-3 How can this occur? Impacts Impact rating

e) Insufficient facility for loads on other sanitary fixtures (e.g. bath, shower, hand washing)

Overcrowding due to poverty Overcrowding at events Unexpected increase in user / visitor numbers Inappropriate use / purpose group No / incomplete consent

May:-

result in insanitary conditions being perpetuated due to lack of facilities

cause environmental degradation

cause illness

inability to wash

Minor

f) Moisture ingress or moisture levels

too high

Degradation due to age and lack of

maintenance Poor material quality Poor design / workmanship Natural hazard including flooding

Willful damage Hazard zone not factored Fire / Flooding

Relocation of building Lack of impervious surface walls, floors and structural elements in contact with the ground

Spaces and cavities transmitting moisture and / or condensation No / incomplete consent

May cause:- illness

damage to entire structure

Major

g) Insanitary due to nature of

sanitation facility

Location of facility

No / incomplete consent Degradation due to age and lack of maintenance

Poor material quality Poor design / workmanship No / incomplete consent

May:-

not be able to clean facilities to an acceptable standard

cause illness

Moderate

h) Lack of laundering facilities Inappropriate sanitary facility provision either for purpose or number No / incomplete consent

May cause:-

injury or illness

damage to property

Insignificant

84

BUILDING RISK MATRIX

Risk Factor D, A or I Impact rating

Likelihood

Risk Rating

Possible options for risk mitigation

Key:

Impact rating: (1) insignificant (2) minor (3) moderate (4) major (5) extreme

Likelihood: (A) almost certain (B) likely (C) possible (D) unlikely (E) rare

Risk rating: very high, high, moderate, low

85

3/07/2020

1

Whangarei District CouncilDangerous, Affected and Insanitary Building Policy

Purpose of this policy

• To ensure people can use buildings safely without endangering their health

• This is a legislative requirement that now includes: • Affected buildings • And excludes earth quake prone buildings (this is done nationally)

87

3/07/2020

2

How will this be done

• Through the special consultative procedure under the Local Government Act 2002

• Council has prepared a draft Policy and will consult with the community

• This will be available online and over the counter at Customer services

How does this affect you

• The new proposed policy will prioritise buildings through a risk frame work

• Council will

• Assess the scale and immediacy of risk to occupants and the public

• Assess the likelihood of harm to adjoining properties

• Assess of environmental impacts including contamination of water bodies

• Consider the availability and viability of alternative options

88

3/07/2020

3

What would be the next steps

• Wherever possible, Council will seek the co-operation of the owner and occupant to achieve compliance

• however, this may not always be possible and the formal provisions of the Act would apply:

• Council would issue formal notice

• The owner must carry out remedial work or

• Council would undertake the remedial work and may demolish

89

5.1 Camping in Public Places: End of Season Report: 2019/20

Meeting: Strategy Planning and Development Date of meeting: 16 July 2020 Reporting officer: Reiner Mussle - Manager Health and Bylaws, Nina Darling - Bylaws

Enforcement Co-ordinator and Vita Strohush – Strategic Planner (Bylaws)

1 Purpose To report on the outcomes of the camping in public places monitoring and enforcement programme for the 2019/20 summer.

2 Recommendation

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee notes the report on the outcomes of the camping in public places monitoring and enforcement programme for the 2019/20 summer.

3 Background In June 2019 Council received a report providing an overview of the camping in public places monitoring and enforcement programme for the 2018/2019 summer. The report also included an overview of the budget required for the next season. Funding from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) was received for the second successive year to support a volunteer summer ambassador programme over the 2019/2020 season, including enhanced monitoring, replacement signage and to maintain toilet and rubbish facilities and services. Council funding was also used for the core enforcement and monitoring programme provided by our enforcement contractor, Armourguard. This report details the outcome of the above programmes and funding, as well as matters relevant to the COVID-19 response for freedom camping.

4 Development and Implementation

4.1 Responsible Freedom Camping Ambassador Programme MBIE funding of $245,000 was approved for the 2019/2020 season and was used to contract a Responsible Camping Co-ordinator and roll out an ambassador education and volunteer programme. This season volunteer presence was expanded to 16 sites and ran from 13 December 2019 to 21 February 2020. The Responsible Camping Co-ordinator established a commercial campground liaison programme to facilitate full utilisation of available camping sites. A targeted media programme was delivered through Council’s

91

Facebook page. The final report on the Responsible Freedom Camping Ambassador and Education Programme 2019/2020 is provided in Attachment 1.

4.2 Armourguard monitoring and enforcement programme Based on Council’s previous experience in the 2018/19 summer season, 23 sites were identified for priority monitoring visits throughout the season. The cost of this season’s monitoring and enforcement program was initially estimated to cost approximately $135,000. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on both additional time and monitoring requirements added substantial additional costs. The enforcement programme provided by Council’s contractor (Armourguard) was split into two seasons equating to two different monitoring frequencies at key sites: Spring Shoulder: 26 October – 11 November 2019 - (Monitoring of sites every other day) Peak Season: 12 November 2019 – 25 March 2020 – (Daily monitoring) Peak season monitoring also included twice daily monitoring of 7 specific sites which were identified as requiring intensive monitoring being: Ruakaka, Tamaterau, Ocean Beach, Kowharewa, Matapouri, Woolleys and Sandy Bays out to 29 February 2020. This was in addition to the visits provided under the responsible camping ambassador programme outlined above. This approach was more intensive than in 2018/2019 when 19 sites were visited, spring and autumn shoulder seasons (alternate day monitoring) were longer, and without any targeted twice daily monitoring.

It became apparent very early in the season that camper numbers were higher earlier on and therefore likely to be higher throughout the season. As such, peak season monitoring was implemented in early November 2019 and but for the intercession of COVID-19 restrictions would have been anticipated to continue to the end of Anzac weekend.

This perception was subsequently borne out in the numbers of vehicles recorded at each of the sites. A significant increase in vehicle numbers was recorded between this and the previous season as discussed in more detail in 5.1 below.

4.3 COVID-19 Response At the start of COVID-19 lockdown some communities in Northland did not want freedom campers and made them feel unwelcome, forcing Police to relocate them all to Whangarei. Some campers were ‘trapped’ by the lockdown with nowhere else to go while they waited for international flights, or because they live on the road permanently in self-contained vehicles, or are homeless and living in vehicles. These campers had to be accommodated at four central locations in Whangarei to ensure they could be monitored and were close to essential services. This was a joint Civil Defence, DHB, Police, and Council exercise that ultimately also included a local organisation that supports the homeless that assisted to find some individuals more suitable accommodation.

A small number of CRMs were received about trapped campers at the commencement of lockdown from residents near designated sites wishing to be advised as to the official plan for these campers, along with queries from some affected campers. These CRMs have been excluded from the totals discussed in more detail in 5.3 below. Targeted

92

communications/media liaison was implemented to support the exercise once key agencies had agreed a plan and implementation of the exercise was in place. Two of the four sites had to be set up to assist non self-contained vehicles as, while the expectation was only self-contained vehicles would be used during the lockdown, the reality was very different. All non self-contained vehicles were moved to sites with individually assigned port-a-loos, where access to shower facilities could also be managed. On the ground, campers were monitored and details recorded for contact tracing purposes in a collaborative effort between a key Council staff member (Grant Alsop – Parks and Recreation Field Officer), contracted enforcement staff (Armourguard), along with some support from Council’s Environmental Health Officers. Numbers gradually reduced as international visitors were able to leave and return to their home countries. However as at 12 May 2020, shortly before the expiry of the level 3 COVID-19 restrictions, 33 persons in 27 vehicles remained at these sites. Of these, only three were international visitors.

Overall, the affected people were compliant with the directions of Council and enforcement staff, and subsequently expressed positive comments and gratitude both directly to Council and also via national and international media in which Mr Alsop’s efforts were particularly highlighted.

In level 2 restrictions, Councils enforcement contractor was initially visiting designated freedom camping sites to record contact details for attendees, to assist with any potential contact tracing. Toilet facilities were also being monitored for enhanced cleaning requirements. However, as of 31 May 2020 this daily contact tracing ceased as it was no longer deemed legally required of Council and as level 2 put the emphasis on individual campers to self-record their movements and contacts.

5 Outcomes

5.1 Armourguard Monitoring and Enforcement Programme During site visits over the spring/summer camping season, enforcement officers recorded the time and date at the site, the type of vehicle and whether they were compliant. Compliance documented included:

Were the campers in the designated site

Was the type of vehicle correct for the site

Had the campers complied with the maximum night stay rule

Had the campers complied with the 28 day between sites rule

The summary analysis for 2019/20 is based on the 23 key monitoring sites between Labour Weekend 2019 and 23 March 2020 (just prior to the commencement of COVID-19 level 4 restrictions).

2017/18 (19 sites) 2018/19 (19 sites) 2019/20 (23 sites)

Total number of vehicles recorded

4955 8124 13411

Percentage of vehicles compliant (including

vehicles stated as being ‘day visitors’)

87% vehicles compliant



Self- contained vs non self-contained

Of the monitored sites that allowed for both self-contained and non self-

Of the monitored sites that allowed for both self-contained and non self-

Of the monitored sites that allowed for both self-contained and non self-contained

93

contained vehicles just over 48% were self-contained

contained vehicles just over 53% of vehicles were self-contained

vehicles just over 73% of vehicles were self-contained

Reason for non-compliance 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20

Parking outside designated site 84% 81% 27%

Non self-contained in a self-contained only site

2% 3% 6%

Exceeded maximum night 14% 11.5% 65%

Other 4.5% 2%

The data indicates a 65% increase in the number of vehicles recorded at the key monitoring sites by enforcements officers for the 2019/20 season as compared to the 2018/19 (noting while more sites were monitored and more frequently, the season also finished earlier due to the COVID-19 Level 3 and 4 restrictions). Even with a noticeable increase in camper numbers, overall compliance improved. This supports anecdotal feedback provided by the Responsible Camping Co-ordinator and the Freedom Camping Enforcement Team Leader (Armourguard) that on the whole campers appeared more cognisant of the rules this season. The trend towards an increase in self-contained vehicles has continued from previous years. The sharp increase in non-compliance due to overstaying the maximum nights (relative to other non-compliance) may be a product of the more intensive monitoring (increased period of daily monitoring with some sites also under twice daily surveillance) as compared to previous years. A breakdown of instances of non-compliance by area is provided in Attachment 2. The top hot-spots for non-compliance were Woolleys Bay (46 recorded instances), Ocean Beach (39), and Kowharewa Bay (35).

5.2 Responsible Camping Ambassador Programme In 2018/2019 some ambassador services were provided by Armourguard. This season the MBIE funded ambassador programme was entirely managed by the Responsible Freedom Camping Co-ordinator. Armourguard was contracted exclusively for enforcement. This division of responsibilities was administratively simpler and assisted with role clarity and allocation of sites. The full Final Report on Responsible Freedom Camping Ambassador and Education Programme 2019/2020 is provided in Attachment 1. A breakdown of the financial costs of the Responsible Freedom Camping Programme to 13 March 2020 is included. Over the season the ambassadors connected with 4629 camper vehicles. Based on vehicles on average containing two occupants, it is estimated the ambassadors connected with 9000-plus freedom campers. This estimate is only a snapshot of the volume of freedom campers in the Whangarei District, as the ambassadors only operated during a 10-week peak period and did not cover all sites. Both the ambassadors and officers reported a significant improvement in camper attitudes this season, the vast majority showing awareness of responsible camping behaviour.

94

5.3 Complaints and other Feedback

A full overview of CRMs received throughout the season (26 October 2019 to 13 March 2020) is provided in Attachment 3. The date of 13 March 2020 as the end of the season was chosen to avoid later CRMs related to COVID-19 response, which are addressed elsewhere in this report. In total over the 2019/2020 summer season WDC received 151 CRMs with complaints about freedom camping.

Five positive CRMs were received, referring to the quality of signage and the work of the Responsible Freedom Camping Ambassadors.

Some CRMs raised more than one complaint theme, and these were counted separately for the purposes of this analysis, for example complaints about overstaying as well as littering. The table below shows the most frequent complaint themes were camping outside designated sites, non self-contained camping, and overstaying.

Summary of complaints by category

* some CRMs referred to more than one category/issue

2017/2018 summer

2018/2019 summer

2019/2020 summer

All complaints 119 78 215

Unlawful camping 105 46 134

camping outside designated site 32

non self-contained camping in default area or area restricted to self-contained vehicles only

32

overstaying 28

camping in prohibited area 15

breach of parking conditions (cl.6.4 bylaw) 14

overcrowding, campers blocking parking or access

13

General complaints (including bylaw) 9 27 58

infrastructure and signage 13

nuisance (noise, laundry, port-a-loos, traffic) 11

safety concerns (including dogs) 9

vehicle dweller 9

nature of complaint unspecified 7

community opposition 3

suggestions 2

not enough freedom camping spaces 2

more enforcement needed 1

breach of liquor ban 1

Environmental or sanitary 6 5 23

littering and sanitary 21

emptying dishwashing onto the grass 1

damaging dotterel nesting grounds 1

From the 2017/2018 to 2018/2019 season the number of complaints has fallen markedly from 119 to 78, which is credited to the success of the education and monitoring programmes. Although it would appear that 2019/2020 season has seen almost three times as many complaints (from 78 to 215), this is attributed to a substantial rise in the numbers of freedom campers, as well as a request for staff vigilance in recording any comments or complaints (including verbal suggestions) about Freedom Camping this season. Attachment 3 provides detailed breakdown of complaints by location. Overall, the highest numbers of CRMs were received for Marsden Bay (22), Wellington’s Bay/Whangaumu (18),

95

Ocean Beach (16), Ruakaka Riverside Reserve (14), Woolleys Bay (13), Matapouri (12), Sandy Bay (9), Ruakaka Beach Reserve (8), and Cobham Oval (8). A comparison of CRMs over the past three seasons shows that Ruakaka generated nearly double the amount of complaints compared to other sites. Wellingtons Bay/Whangaumu Reserve emerged as a problem site this season, when increased numbers of campers and the introduction of port-a-loos to the reserve contributed to a spike of complaints from residents.

Even though the Ruakaka data has been aggregated over three sites, these sites are in close proximity to each other and the problem generally stems from very high demand for freedom camping in this area. The table below shows a breakdown of Ruakaka complaints by monitored site and by year. While issues have generally settled down at Ruakaka Beach Reserve, the data shows the problem has migrated further up the same street. The below data shows that it is unwise to correlate the number of complaints with non-compliance. Complaints are driven by a number of factors, including the size of the adjoining resident population, attitudes of that community and camper behaviours.

Areas 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020

Ruakaka Riverside Reserve 0 0 14

Ruakaka Beach Reserve 22 8 8

Ruakaka Princess Road Reserve 0 0 2

96

5.4 Comparative data analysis

A comparison of CRM complaints to instances of non-compliance witnessed by Armourguard reveals that some sites, while generating only a small number of CRMs, had very high volumes of non-compliance that were picked up by Armourguard. This supports previous anecdotal advice from staff around Woolley’s Bay, Ocean Beach and Kowharewa Bay being the main problem sites.

Of note are Marsden Bay Reserve and Sandy Bay. For Marsden Bay Reserve, with a total of 22 CRMs (highest number of CRMs for any single site), only 3 instances of non-compliance were recorded by Armourguard. Sandy Bay, on the other hand, is our District’s busiest site according to CamperMate data with 11,165 views on the app during the season. This site also had the second highest vehicle count at 488 vehicles, as recorded by the Responsible Camping Ambassadors. Despite this, Sandy Bay generated 9 CRMs and only 1 instance of recorded non-compliance.

5.5 Other matters Te Araroa Trail Te Araroa trail walkers arriving in our District during peak season are adding additional pressure on freedom camping site supply. This has been raised in the previous year’s report, which pointed out the lack of sufficient toilet facilities at key exit locations and “along the way”. The most popular sites, Sandy Bay and Wolleys Bay tended to be already at capacity when walkers arrive.

97

This year the Reotahi site presented a challenging problem with walkers staying there in tents while waiting for the ferry to the Bream Bay side. Currently tents are prohibited at this site, however because walkers are arriving there on foot, they have no transport to move on and no alternative options nearby. It has been advised that allowing all modes of freedom camping at the Reotahi site is impracticable, as this would invite freedom campers with large tents towing trailers. The driveway accessing the Reotahi carpark is narrow and has very limited visibility, which would pose a significant safety problem with trailers. A permit regime for tenting at the Reotahi site is also deemed unsuitable due to operational costs. We suggest allowing limited tent camping for trail walkers with proof of registration with Te Araroa Trust could be a cost-effective solution. Currently, Te Araroa Trust already has a mechanism in place for voluntary registration of walkers. Implementation could be looked at as part of the current bylaw review.

Key areas in demand CamperMate1 data on freedom campsite popularity provides useful way to quantify demand at specific locations within our District. This is calculated as the number of times users of the app viewed a profile page (information on the freedom campsite) and gives an indication of site popularity. The top 7 sites have each had over 10,000 views, with Sandy Bay the most popular at 11,165 views during the season. Sandy Bay, Ocean Beach, Woolleys Bay and Kowharewa Bay were amongst the busiest areas (Table 3). However, despite the Tutukaka coast reportedly being under the most pressure from freedom camping, more than half of overnight freedom camping stays were in the urban part of Whangarei (Figure 5)2. This generally supports the advice from staff that it would be desirable to find sites for freedom campers in the city where they can readily access shops, restaurants, etc.

Vehicle Dwellers Freedom Camping under the Act and thus our “Camping in Public Places Bylaw” provides for, and assumes, a recreational or vacation-based activity for limited periods by:

domestic and international travellers

local holiday-makers, and those who purposefully circuit the country such as the so called ‘Grey Nomads’ and others taking short term seasonal work in varied locations.

Unfortunately, the above does not readily apply to homeless people or people living permanently in vehicles, mainly busses, either by choice or due to other reasons, as they are not “camping”. However, Council’s designated sites and other default areas where freedom camping is not prohibited are also utilised by:

Vehicle dwellers who live permanently in their (usually self-contained vehicles) largely or exclusively within the Whangarei District

Homeless persons living in non self-contained vehicles and cars

Whilst not specifically provided for under the Bylaw, staff believe it has always been Council’s intention not to use this Bylaw in order to address matters relating to permanent vehicle dwellers or homelessness.

1 https://report.campermate.co.nz/index.html 2 campermate

98

https://report.campermate.co.nz/index.html

Over the years, council and our contractors have been trying to deal with the issues around permanent vehicle dwellers and homeless people sleeping in cars sympathetically and pragmatically. However, it is becoming more and more difficult to balance the wishes and needs of homeless people and vehicle dwellers against complaints from the general public, as well as from freedom campers, who don’t understand the differences between genuine freedom camping and homeless people / permanent vehicle dwellers. As a result, and prior to the next season, the manager Health & Bylaws will liaise with affected parties and departments with the aim of developing some practical strategies on how to better manage permanent vehicles dwellers and homeless people sleeping in cars. Where possible, this potentially could include identifying a limited number of sites where vehicles dwellers are able to ‘park’ for longer periods, possibly through a permit system. However, such sites should be suitably separated from freedom camping sites, identified under the Bylaw, to avoid rule confusion and allegations of double standards. The recent COVID-19 Level 4 and 3 restrictions brought this group of site users into focus providing a snapshot of the number of persons falling into these categories at a point in time. As noted above, shortly before the expiry of the COVID-19 level 3 restrictions that followed the level 4 ‘lockdown’, despite the best efforts of all agencies collaborating to assist, 33 persons in 27 vehicles remained at these sites. Of these only three were international visitors.

Rubbish/toilets Complaints relating to rubbish and toilets remain but are comparatively low. As per previous summers, Grant Alsop, Field Officer, Parks and Recreation has not raised any significant concerns regarding toilets and water use at the designated camping sites. A one-off issue that arose at Ocean Beach was attended to promptly with port-a-loos provided while a repair was carried out.

Signs An extensive programme of signage implementation was carried out in conjunction with the introduction of the current bylaw in 2017/18. This season, signage has been maintained and replaced as required.

6 Next summer

6.1 Other matters It is unclear what the impacts of COVID-19 would be on freedom camping next summer and when international travel would resume. With domestic travel now allowed, it is expected in the medium-term demand will bounce back as most of our District’s tourism spend in the previous years was generated by domestic visitors. There is a possibility that domestic freedom camping may increase, with New Zealanders not being able to travel abroad and turning to exploring our own backyard instead. The first long weekend since domestic COVID-19 restrictions lifted has seen sustained demand for freedom camping. Comparison of CamperMate data3 for Queens Birthday weekends in 2019 and 2020 shows relatively steady uptake of freedom camping post COVID-19. At first glance, views of campsites on the CamperMate app during these

3 CamperMate National Freedom Camping report. Retrieved 22/06/2020 from https://report.campermate.co.nz/index.html

99

https://report.campermate.co.nz/index.html

periods have dropped by more than half from 2,343 views in 2019 to only 1,104 views in 2020. However, based on the app GPS data, a total of 333 overnight stays were registered during the long weekend this year (29/05/2020 to 31/05/2020) compared to 419 in the previous year (31/05/2019 to 02/06/2019). Keeping in mind the restrictions on international arrivals in place in 2020 we can reasonably presume that nearly all the 333 overnight stays would have been domestic visitors. Furthermore, data from Infometrics shows that in 2019 42.5% ($167m) of domestic tourism expenditure in the Whangarei District was attributable to visitors originating from Northland and a further 32% ($126m) to visitors from Auckland. For international tourism expenditure the largest source was Australia at 28.4% ($25.8m). The government has announced it is committed to introducing a trans-Tasman COVID-safe travel zone as soon as it is safe to do so.4

Upcoming changes at national level LGNZ Responsible Freedom Camping Working Group has recommended a review of the Freedom Camping Act 2011, as well as the Camping-Ground Regulations 1985. The group has also suggested to establish MBIE as the authority to set and enforce requirements self-containment standard NZS 5465:2001. If changes to the self-containment standard proceed that work is expected to take at least two years. In its March 2020 update the group indicated it does not see an impetus to flip the basis of the Freedom Camping Act to ban the practice unless councils specifically allow it. However, work in this stream has been put on hold during the response to COVID-19.

Bylaw review The current Camping in Public Places bylaw was adopted in 2017 and has now been in operation for three summers. During this time data has been collected on the effectiveness of monitoring and enforcement of the bylaw. While minor changes can be made to the bylaw by resolution, many of the more pressing problems with the bylaw can only be addressed through a review. These include the duration of temporary closures of sites and reassessment of areas that have become problematic. The Bylaw is therefore recommended for an early review to address persistent issues that have accumulated since the bylaw was first adopted in 2017.

6.2 2020/2021 Ambassador/enforcement programmes

Recent 2020/2021 Annual Plan budget cuts, due to COVID-19, has seen a $100k reduction of the relevant cost centre, which therefore only leaves approximately $60k for future freedom camping enforcement. This amount is insufficient to provide even a complaint based only enforcement approach and where Council wishes to provide adequate monitoring and enforcement, additional funds will have to be found, especially in the absence of suitable MBIE funding. At the time of writing, the absence of information regarding when or if there will be opportunities to make application for MBIE funding make it difficult to be definitive about what will be available or needed in the way of an ambassador/enforcement program and how funding would be configured.

4 Beehive, 5 May 2020. Prime Ministers Jacinda Ardern and Scott Morrison announce plans for trans-Tasman COVID-safe Travel Zone https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/prime-ministers-jacinda-ardern-and-scott-morrison-announce-plans-trans-tasman-covid-safe

100

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/prime-ministers-jacinda-ardern-and-scott-morrison-announce-plans-trans-tasman-covid-safe

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/prime-ministers-jacinda-ardern-and-scott-morrison-announce-plans-trans-tasman-covid-safe

As a result, staff are planning to provide a report to Council’s Strategy, Planning & Development Committee, most likely during September 2020 and are hopeful by that time clarity on future MBIE funding will be available. This, together with any remaining freedom camping (Bylaw) enforcement budgets, will then dictate the scope and size of next season’s enforcement program. However, and in the absence of MBIE Ambassador funding and where Council wishes to continue with this successful program, hard decisions will have to be made between achieving the right balance between enforcement and ambassador-based education (if any) and their relevant costs, with limited budgetary availability. From an enforcement perspective (excluding ambassador program) possibilities include:

Scenario Comment Funding Implication

Level 3 or 4 restrictions are re-implemented

Council will need to be prepared to implement a procedure similar to that followed between March to May. Sites are reduced to a small number of central city sites, monitored daily with provision of facilities for non self-contained vehicles and homeless persons living in vehicles.

The approximate cost for this type of monitoring is $400/day

Level 2 restrictions and contact tracing requirements are re-implemented

All key/designated sites visited daily at times most likely to capture attendees present.

The approximate cost for this type of monitoring is $660/day

NZ borders remain closed to international tourists, but with an increase in domestic visitors

A monitoring service level ranging from “complaint only” monitoring to full monitoring, such as was in place during the previous season. This excludes the ability to have a repeat of an Ambassador program. The need to maintain capacity to provide Covid-19 alert level-based service in the event this was re-implement by government.

Depending on the service levels / response timeframes, early indications are that the daily cost for this will range from $370 to $930. However, more detailed calculation options will be provided in future and once MBIE funding availability has been determined.

NZ enters a tourism ‘bubble’ with Australia

As above with capacity to respond quickly to expand services/increase targeted monitoring frequency to meet additional demand.

As above

7 Significance and engagement The decisions or matters of this Agenda do not trigger the significance criteria outlined in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, and the public will be informed via the agenda publication on Council’s website.

8 Attachments

1. The final report on the Responsible Freedom Camping Ambassador and Education Programme 2019/2020

2. A breakdown of instances of non-compliance by area 3. CRMs received throughout the season (26 October 2019 to 13 March 2020)

101

Attachment 2 Instances of Non-Compliance recorded by Enforcement Officers Labour Weekend 2019 - 23 March 2020 by site.

Site Recorded instances of non-compliance

TOTAL 290 Woolleys West 46 Ocean Beach 39 Kowharewa 35 Tamaterau 24 Onerahi Beach Road 22 Whangarei Falls 18 Wellingtons Bay 17 Reotahi 14 Finlayson 11 Parua Bay 11 Matapouri Morrison 8 Tarewa 8 Ruakaka Beach Reserve 8 Woolleys East 6 Cobham Oval 5 Matapouri Wehiwehi 4 Bascule 4 Marsden Bay 3 One Tree Point 3 McLeod’s Bay 2 Sandy Bay 1 Waipu Caves 1 William/Pohe 0 Manaia 0

113

Attachment 3 Overview of Customer Relationship Management logged on freedom camping issues. These are the complaints logged via Council’s Customer Relationship Management (CRMs) between 26 October 2019 to 13 March 2020. During this period, we received 151 CRMs with complaints about freedom camping. Feedback was also received via the Facebook page, and this was managed separately by the Responsible Camping Coordinator.

No analysis has been undertaken regarding the validity of each of the complaints. CRM entries were reviewed and classified into themes. Some complains referred to multiple/repeated breaches of the bylaw. Each reference to a separate complaint theme was counted counted separately for the purposes of this analysis, for example complaints about overstaying as well as littering. However, where a single CRM mentioned multiple vehicles breaching the rules, this was counted only once.

Freedom camping complaint themes by area

2019/2020 summer season

2019-2020

Grand Total 215

Marsden Bay Reserv e 22


overstaying 3



2

Whangarei – general default areas 20

Wellington's Bay / Whangaumu 18


Overstaying 4



3

l ittering and sanitary 1



Ocean Beach 16


8




overstaying 1


more enforcement needed 1

Matapouri 17

115

overstaying 5




2


2

damaging dotterel nesting grounds 1



Ruakaka Riv erside Reserve 14



4


emptying dishwashing onto the grass 1


overstaying 1

Woolleys Bay 13



overstaying 2


2



Sandy Bay 9

overstaying 2


2




Ruakaka Beach Reserve 8





Cobham Ov al 8

overstaying 3

vehicle dweller 2




1

Finlayson Street / Reyburn House Lane 6

116



vehicle dweller 1


Onerahi Beach Reserv e 6




1



Kowharewa 5



1

Whananaki North 5

overstaying 2




McAuslin Road 4

overstaying 2


2

Pataua South 4


overstaying 1

Otamure Bay 3

l i ttering and sanitary 1

vehicle dweller 1


1

Onerahi Sportspark 3


vehicle dweller 1

Whananaki South 3

l i ttering and sanitary 1



1

Reotahi 3



1


Tamaterau 3

117

suggestion 2


Bascule 2



Mair Park 2


1


Ruakaka Princess Road Reserve 2


Wilsons dam 2



Ngunguru School 2


Portland 2

overstaying 1


1

Whangarei Falls 2


1

not enough freedom camping spaces 1

Waikaraka 2

Non self-contained camping in default area or area restricted to self-contained vehicles only

2

Parua Bay 2


2

Waiarohia Reserv e 2

vehicle dweller 1


1

Pohe Island 2

vehicle dweller 1


Uretiti 1

Helena Bay 1

Waipu 1

118

5.2 Operational Report – Corporate Group – July 2020



Reporting officer: Alan Adcock (General Manager – Corporate/CFO)

1 Purpose

To provide a brief overview of work across functions and services that the Corporate Group is responsible for.

2 Recommendation

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee notes the Corporate Group operational report for July 2020.

3 Background

The Strategy, Planning and Development Committee terms of reference list key responsibilities which include provision of an operational report from the Corporate Group. This report provides a brief overview of some of the operational highlights across functions and services of the Corporate Group, including comment on some future planned activities.

4 COVID-19 Statement

The impacts of COVID-19 have been considered. There are no impacts expected.


The decisions or matters of this agenda do not trigger the significance criteria outlined in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, and the public will be informed via agenda publication on the website.

6 Attachment

Corporate Group Operational Report – July 2020

119

1

Operational Report – Corporate Group – July 2020

Information Communications Technology (ICT)

The ICT department is an enabler to the organisation providing technology project management and maintaining all ICT systems and applications to support business processes.

ICT Operations

Regular upgrades of network devices (software and hardware), maintenance of ICT systems and applications, upkeep of ICT infrastructure and security continues to be the main focus of the ICT Operations team.

ICT Operations also has responsibility for directly managing contracts with most vendors and suppliers of technology – such as software licencing, service desk, network links, infrastructure (hardware & software) and cloud services. Vendor management meetings and discussions are on-going to ensure levels of service are consistently maintained, if not improved.

Post Council approval, we have undertaken a contract variation with TechnologyOne, our enterprise system provider. The variation included a significant capital cost upfront but results in reduced operational costs over the term of contract. The term of contract was also increased by two years taking contract expiration to 2028.

Now more than ever, there is an emphasis on “work from anywhere” and the team is required to ensure our corporate systems are adequately protected and monitored. We are therefore working on an enhanced Security Strategy in line with the Government Cyber Security Bureau (GCSB) security policy framework, i.e. the NZ information Security Manual. Once the strategy is approved, we will start actioning any remediation tasks based on priority.

The figure below shows the number of staff remotely connecting to our corporate environment over the last 30 days (26 May – 24 June).

Priority tasks June:

Investigate and implement a network event monitoring tool and establish a robust review process

Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance – digitally signing emails sent from WDC domain to make it harder for threat actors to conduct phishing attacks that spoof brands and get those messages delivered to inboxes

Investigating network enhancements to accommodate security changes made by the Department of Internal Affairs relating to the National Dog Database

Changing our current mobile management software to a more robust one and to allow WDC to be device agnostic

121

2

Reviewing and planning the replacement end-of-life network devices

Implement comprehensive reporting – i.e. how many personal devices are connected to the WDC network, which devices have not registered on the network for a certain period, active user accounts that have not been used for a certain period

Testing the latest Windows Feature upgrade (1903) to be deployed to all staff PCs after financial year-end

Continuing the remediation tasks as highlighted by the third-party Security report

Assisting with Council meetings via the VMR

Assisting/supporting the SCADA upgrade project and Lutra implementation

Preparing for financial year-end – Technology One application support

Technical lead/support for ICT Projects – SIGMA, GIS viewer replacement, Digital Platform, CiA, Microsoft Teams.

ICT Projects All ICT projects have been progressing during lockdown, albeit with some schedule changes to

accommodate collaboration with third parties remotely.

Project Description Current Status

Comment

Technology One Ci to Ci Anywhere (CiA)

Next software upgrade of core Council system

Delayed Stream 1: Handover of support to operational staff complete

Stream 2: Re-planning completed – Go Live scheduled for March 2021. Currently resolving issues raised during testing and completing functional areas that are not yet configured.

Digital Platform Review and redevelopment of Council websites

Delayed Theme built by OpenCities, with only a few minor issues to resolve. Resumed demos of platform to WDC staff. We purchased training for 5 WDC employees on how to write for the web including accessibility. Website build started - key landing pages created, started building Council Document section of the new website.

Digitisation Converting physical property files into digital format

Delayed A draft digital process for Building Consents has been drawn up and is being reviewed.

The IANZ audit has recommended some enhancements needed to be made on the Document Management system as well as our main Financial application TechnologyOne. These are also being investigated thoroughly.

Library Returns Sorter Project

An automatic returns sorter for the Central Library.

In progress Project has resumed and contracts are being established.

SIGMA Asset management migration and upgrade of GIS

Delayed The external consultant continues to make good progress on development of data migration scripts.

122

3

Finance

End of Financial Year

30 June brings the end of another financial year. The Finance team in conjunction with ICT have performed the necessary processes to ‘roll over’ and set-up the system ready for a smooth transition into the new financial year.

2020-21 Annual Plan The 2020-21 Annual Plan is scheduled to be adopted on 9 July. After adoption various tasks will be undertaken to allow us to report the new financial year’s monthly operating results against budget and forecast.

2019-20 Annual Report Preparation of the 2019-20 Annual Report has commenced, as well as the preparation of financial statements for Council Controlled Organisations including Whangarei District Airport, Northland Events Centre Trust and Whangarei Art Museum Trust. A number of year-end adjustments and reconciliations will be completed in order to provide a draft operating result as part of the August 2020 Council meeting. Various file notes will be prepared over the coming weeks in order to provide audit with our intended treatment of particularly technical areas. By front footing these issues we hope to resolve any audit concerns to reduce the risk of potential delays during the final audit. COVID-19 has resulted in audit delays, added significant complexity, and prioritisation of audit of the financial statements of the Government. This has prompted Government to propose legislation to extend the statutory reporting timeframes for a range of public sector organisations by up to two months. The proposed changes depend on the legislation passing before the House rises in early August. Regardless of the outcome of this legislation we will continue to work to our current timeline. However, SOLGM have warned that due to audit prioritisation of central government financial statements, even if we are ready audit may not be available. Any delay in the completion of the 2019-20 Annual Report may impact negatively on other work streams including the Long Term Plan. We will continue to communicate with Audit New Zealand. The final audit is scheduled to begin 17 August.

2021-31 Long Term Plan

Initial planning and foundation work for the 2021-31 Long Term Plan is underway.

Microsoft Teams Deployment

Roll out of MS Teams – a collaboration platform to not only replace Skype for Business but also provide additional functionality.

On track Phase 1 (delivering MVP) complete.

Phase 2 planning in progress. Approach will be agile and factor in customer requirements and available features.

123

4

CiA Upgrade

Finance staff continue to familiarise themselves with the new system, and provide support and training to the wider organisation for the Purchase to Pay process. With the recent retirement of our Accounts Payable Administrator, other members of the finance team are performing the tasks of this role to ensure our suppliers continue to receive prompt payment. This vacancy has been advertised internally as part of the redeployment programme. We are continuing to process additional payment runs to assist our suppliers during this difficult period.

The customisation of dashboards (a new feature of the upgrade) continues. The intention is to introduce this useful tool to department managers to provide them with a ‘live’ snapshot of their department’s spend against budget for the new financial year.

Revenue

Property, rating and receivable transactions

The team is working hard to ensure that the first instalment for 2020-21 land rates are accurate and on time, notwithstanding the delayed adoption of the Annual Plan.

Over 12,000 dog registration fees were sent out in late June. A redeployed staff member is temporarily helping to fill vacancies during this high-volume season. Assistance is also being provided by the Customer Services team.

There were 250 property sales this month, 2855 for the year. This is 93% of last year.

Water

The water meter readers have addressed four of the six weeks backlog caused by the COVID-19 lockdown. This has impacted revenue for 2019-20. Water rates billing is 1% less than 2018-19.

Collection and recovery

The maximum rates rebate for 2020-21 is $655. We are waiting for proposed changes to the Rates Rebate Act 1973 that should eliminate the need for witnessed applications and possibly enable online forms. However, we will still open the rates rebate office from 20 July to 14 August, with a dedicated desk at Forum North from then to the end of September. Appointments will be sent early July. Rather than employing seven casuals as last year, we will be staffing four desks from the Revenue team, assisted by two redeployed staff.

Land rates arrears at 30 June are $3.4 million, $0.6 million higher than last year. Of the almost 1,900 properties owing land rates, 762 have the 4th instalment only owing. For those properties that attracted a penalty on the fourth instalment we asked ratepayers to contact us to discuss payment options. A second arrears letter will be sent in July, before recovery actions start.

124

5

Despite less arrears correspondence (we did not send a second arrears letter during the lockdown), the collection and penalty statistics have improved over last year.

125

6

Business Support

Information Management (IM)

Digitisation Demands

The demand for digitisation of files and working in a digital way has increased across the organisation since COVID-19 changed the way we work. While this is positive as departments are looking at business processes in a new light and are more open to moving away from paper-based processes, it does provide a level of risk as digitisation has to meet standards before paper can be destroyed.

The IM team are working closely with teams on solutions that include:

Provisioning scanning facilities that meet the standards

Providing advice and support to ensure there is awareness and implementation of requirements

Assisting with business process changes to move to digital only

Working with ICT on system / technology support.

DigiHub and Building Consent Process

The DigiHub is currently operating below desired production levels due to lower resourcing levels and the high demand for scanning of on-demand files. Work continues with People and Capability to resolve this as soon as possible.

As a result of the IANZ audit of BCA processes there is an increased urgency to improve the building consent document management and accept digital consents up front. Work is well underway with ICT on this.

Procurement

Procurement Manual

An agenda item is currently being prepared for approval of the reviewed Procurement Policy. This is the result of substantial work by staff and aligns Council with procurement practice in the Local Government sector, in particular the updated Government Procurement Rules. This review has been completed in conjunction with writing a new Procurement Process Manual (the Manual) that reflects the principles of the Policy, and the development of templates and checklists that follow the operational processes outlined in the Manual.

Updated templates that are relevant to the existing policy are progressively being published, and preparations being made to publish the remainder of the templates when the updated policy to which they refer is approved.

Sustainable procurement is also of front of mind and we are actively working towards putting measures in place to promote and encourage sustainability in our procurement practices.

Travel

Council’s Travel Policy is due for review, so work has started on updating the policy to reflect current best practice and to ensure it is aligned with other Council policies and strategies and guidance from MBIE and the Auditor General.

126

7

COVID-19 has meant the cancellation of a number of travel bookings, so staff have been liaising with Hello World to ensure refunds/rebooking arrangements are applied and accounted for in an appropriate way.

Electricity

The Electricity Supply Contract with Genesis is one year into a three-year contract. This contract is with Genesis, however the amounts invoiced to us by Genesis include the Electricity Authority (EA) Levy which is based on the number of units used.

It was announced in June that the EA has issued its final decision regarding reform of the Transmission Pricing Methodology (TPM). This is the way transmission costs are allocated to customers. As expected, the EA is moving towards a beneficiary pays approach to allocating the costs of the grid, which is a departure from the current method of applying costs across all grid users (reflecting the fact that this is a shared asset).

Council has joined with major interested parties from across Northland to argue against this change. This lobbying has resulted in some changes to the EA’s approach, however the recently announced changes will result in higher electricity charges for consumers in Northland (including Council) and are expected to be effective from April 2023. The detail of how these changes will be applied by Transpower is not yet known, so the impact on Council budgets cannot yet be predicted with any certainty. Staff will continue to monitor the costs of this contract.

Procurement

Since returning to the office there has been a noticeable increase in requests for procurement advice and assistance from staff across the organisation. Many of the projects have been impacted by COVID-19 in some way, and staff are working hard to find savings while still providing the most suitable solutions.

Major work streams in procurement this month have included:

Service/Good Being Procured

Detail Procurement Commencement Date

Business Owner

Date Advertised on GETS

Expected End Date

Civic Centre project

To assist the Civic Centre team with requirements around procure-ment aspects

External procurement consultant engaged June 2018

All of Council 31 Oct 18 Ongoing involvement through design & construction phases

Waahi Whakaritea Kaupapa

Event Booking System

V&E Commenced November 2019

V&E 30 January 2020

June 2020

Old Municipal Building

Providing Procurement advice on procurement and purchasing decisions

October 2019 Community To be determined

Ongoing

EFTPOS Provision of EFTPOS services to Council

February 2020 Business Support

Quote requests issued June 2020

October 2020

Sound upgrade

Upgrade of Sound equipment

June 2020 Venues and Events

To be determined

To be determined

127

8

Service/Good Being Procured

Detail Procurement Commencement Date

Business Owner

Date Advertised on GETS

Expected End Date

at Stadium for Rugby World Cup

Generator Generator for Stadium for Rugby World Cup


To be determined

To be determined

Big Screen Big screen for Stadium for Rugby World Cup


To be determined

To be determined

Dent St Developer

Finding a developer for Dent St site owned by Council

June 2020 District Development

23 June 2020

October 2020

General procurement support and advice continues to be available across the business and at the weekly Procurement Clinic.

Property – Fleet – Phones – Leases and Licenses

Another busy period for the Business Support team as things have slowly started to return to a state of normal.

Work has become more reactive in terms of repairs and maintenance as we try to manage expenditure.

Supplies of Personal Protective Equipment have continued to be sporadic and much time has been spent collating orders for various departments, sourcing and distributing the required items.

Vehicles have almost entirely been called back to the pool following Level One announcement. Vehicle servicing and repairs are being completed and we are currently reviewing the Vehicle Policy.

Support is ongoing for District Development, Community Development and Parks and Recreation in regard to rent relief packages. This includes reviewing and collating rents and operational charges to allow department managers to provide accurate forecasting and the financial implications of any rent relief. Significant support also continues Pensioner Housing as they continue to operate without having been able to replace the incumbent who changed roles November 2019.

Business Support Projects (Updates, Delays or Deferrals)

Project Current Status Comment

Information Management Plan

Delayed Options analysis for archives exit is in final draft stages.

Policy development underway.

128

9

Communications

Digital Platform project

We have now shifted into the content phase of the project. This involves updating and improving website content and moving it to the new platform. This will be the focus for the next few months.

Media

Media issues of note include:

Water – rain good, but continue saving water – restrictions lifted (but continue saving water)

COVID-19: Council is back up and running

Rates/Annual Plan

Go ahead to clean up Sustainable Solvents

Communications projects

A summary of campaigns of note include:

Campaign Comment

Annual Plan A campaign to support the Annual Plan consultation closed on 4 June. Once the Annual Plan is adopted in July, we’ll start to communicate the support options available through the COVID-19 Relief Package.

Water situation Our water campaign continued throughout June until the removal of restrictions at the end of the month. While restrictions have been removed, the key message around responsible water use will remain through the winter.

Freedom Camping Survey Ran social media and print campaign promoting a customer survey on attitudes to Freedom Camping management within our District. Engagement with the survey was high with over 1000 responses received.

Placemaking Consultation – Round One

Developed Communications collateral and ran social media and print campaign for round one of the Placemaking Consultation with the Tikipunga and Hikurangi communities.

Social media

Top three highest posts reach on Facebook in June 2020 – refer to Appendix 1 for details.

Topic Engagement

End of Water Restrictions 15,600 people reached

1547 reactions, comments and shares

Placemaking launch – timeline post 10,500 people reached

1447 link-clicks, reactions, comments and shares

About one third of this attention came from paid “boosting”, but it was also accompanied by ad placements across Facebook and Instagram.

129

10

Facebook audience/followers

At the time of this report the page has 9768 Likes, reflecting growth of 100 in the last month.

Website

Top 5 pages visited

5710582859025996

61546346

6457664867286825

69747138

72877372747074657660

80838274

8384

8706

9034

93889537

9670

5000

5500

6000

6500

7000

7500

8000

8500

9000

9500

10000

Jun

-18

Jul-

18

Au

g-1

8

Sep

-18

Oct

-18

No

v-1

8

Dec

-18

Jan

-19

Feb

-19

Mar

-19

Ap

r-1

9

May

-19

Jun

-19

Jul-

19

Au

g-1

9

Sep

-19

Oct

-19

No

v-1

9

Dec

-19

Jan

-20

Feb

-20

Mar

-20

Ap

r-2

0

May

-20

Jun

-20

Jul-

20

Au

g-2

0

FACEBOOK LIKES 2018 - 2020

Roading alert – Onerahi road shoulder-closures.

13,500 people reached

2,168 link-clicks, likes, comments and shares

May (previous report) June 2020

GIS maps Water storage (dam levels)

Cemeteries GIS maps

Water Storage (dam levels) Pay online

Contact Us Dog registrations (new)

Pay rates online Contact us

COVID-19 page is now the 14th most visited page on the website and its popularity is still dropping. Today’s website statistics appear basically “back to normal” for this time of year.

Notable:

Sportsgrounds page popular with people looking for info about closures (through a link on that page)

Rubbish disposal (transfer stations) page popular

School holiday programmes page being noticed

COVID-19 page is not in the top 100.

130

11

People and Capability

COVID-19

Our shift to Alert Level 1 on 9 June was much quicker than we had anticipated. We have had a cross organisation team working on redeployment opportunities for those who had capacity through this uncertain period. The shift to Level 1 meant that we were able to resume the majority of face to face services we offer to the Community, this shifted focus for those people relying on interaction with the public (e.g. Venues and Events and Libraries) back out to those services.

We are continuing to experiment with different ways of working to provide the best service to our customer. One of the positives that has come out of this is that those people who are not well enough to come into the office but are well enough to work remotely are able to do so with minimal disruption.

We have put steps in place to move back into Level 2 should the need arise. The uncertainty continues for all of us, at work, at home and in the community.

Health and Safety

Permit to Work System

We have had a cross organisation group review our permit to work system with the view to improving the familiarity of those people with limited experience of the system and review the effectiveness of our current process/system. The meeting was facilitated by Errol Barnett, Health and Safety Manager at Refining NZ.

Some of the outcomes of the meeting were:

Alter the system so only one permit to work form. Other aspects can be attached (e.g. hot work, CSE, excavation and so on)

Develop an internal awareness course for ALL staff to go through

Develop a start-up certificate that must be signed off before operations accept a project.

Traffic Sensors in the Forum North Carpark

The sensors at the Rust Ave entrance to the Forum North carpark have been identified as a trip hazard. We have received three incidents reported by members of the public that resulted in ambulance calls and subsequent visits to the hospital. A review by the Health and Safety committee recommended removal however minimisation strategies have been implemented including making the designated crossing more obvious and increased signage

Shared Service with KDC

We have been approached by Kaipara District Council to consider some shared service in Health and Safety. We are looking into how it could work with the purpose of enabling some improved collaboration across our Districts (e.g. Contractor Management).

131

12

Employee numbers

Prior to the pandemic we had anticipated an increase in our staffing to meet the growing needs of the community. However, as we moved through the pandemic our employee numbers reduced and we committed to making savings from personnel costs.

Filled Positions FTE* Total Positions FTE* Turnover

31 January 2020 376.09 396.09 9.6%

31 March 2020 371.12 394.39 9.3%

30 May 2020 362.75 391.52 11.3%

* FTE – Full time equivalent

To make the savings we are, among other things, reconsidering all vacancies. The redeployment team has contributed to this by working with leaders to prioritise vacancies and projects. As a result, we have a portion of vacancies that we do not believe we have the skills to fill internally so we have advertised these roles (e.g. Stormwater Engineer).

This reduction in numbers is increasing our expectations of our staff. Following on from the disruption we have all experienced we are asking people to be more adaptable and agile. The challenge will be in the prioritisation of work over the coming months; as it is not sustainable for a smaller number of people to undertake more and more work.

132

13

Appendix 1

Social media (top performing posts) Post

133

14

Post

134

15

Post

135

5.3 Operational Report – Strategy, Planning and Development – July 2020

Meeting: Strategy, Planning and Development


Reporting officer: Alison Geddes – General Manager, Planning & Development

Dominic Kula – General Manager, Strategy & Democracy

1 Purpose

To provide a brief overview of work across services that the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee is responsible for.

2 Recommendation

That the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee notes the Strategy, Planning and Development Operational report for July 2020

3 Background

The purpose of the Strategy, Planning and Development Committee is to update Councillors on operational matters relating to the Strategy, Planning and Development departments.

This report provides a brief overview of some of the operational highlights for June 2020 and provides some further comment on future planned activities.


The decisions or matters of this Agenda do not trigger the significance criteria outlined in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, and the public will be informed via Agenda publication on the website, Council News, Facebook or any other channel you currently use to inform customers – please also advise Communications.

5 Attachment

Operational Report – Strategy, Planning and Development – July 2020

137

of 11

July 2020 Operational Report Strategy, Planning and Development Operational Report (reporting on June 2020) Procurement update - Summary of Contracts Approved Under Delegated Authority This provides a summary of the award process and works being undertaken for contracts awarded under Chief Executive and General Manager delegated authority. Planning and Development Strategy There were no contracts awarded for this period. Democracy There were no contracts awarded for this period. Economic Development This period covers a sustained time under level 1 restrictions and many businesses are now coming to terms with what trading may look like for the foreseeable future. Real time information as to the impact post COVID-19 on local businesses is scant and much anecdotal information is at odds with predictions made during levels 4 through 2. Inter-agency communications at a regional level suggest there is likely to be a more adverse effect in September/October 2020 when the current tranche of government wage subsidies cease. Despite anticipated central government announcements relating to “shovel ready” projects many attendees at a construction sector event held late June 2020 did not have high level of confidence in this resulting in a positive impact on their businesses, particularly those involved in the residential construction sector. Jobseeker numbers continue to rise, and MSD are working closely with a number of large businesses who are considering or have recently announced staff redundancies. On a more positive note a small survey undertaken by the department polled 70 plus businesses. About 70% of these businesses were involved in the sector and only 3 of the respondents stated that they would most likely be closing their businesses due to COVID-19. The Economic Development Facilitator has commenced maternity leave and a temporary internal redeployment is being sought to cover the next 6 months. Until this is filled it will result in a limited capacity by the department to fulfil her duties over the duration of her leave. District Promotions Whangarei District Love It Here! Facebook page Posts throughout June focused on sharing local information, good news content with destination marketing also recommencing.

139

of 11

For the month ending 30 June 2020, the Whangarei District Love It Here! Facebook page achieved:

• 18,294 Likes • Reached (the number of people who saw a post)

- Organic (unpaid) 77,522 - Paid 92,797 - TOTAL 170,319

Whangarei District Love It Local campaign Shop window posters and decals are now available to all Whangarei businesses. The artfiles are also available to businesses who wish to add the wordmark to their own assets e.g. websites, signage. Advertising Advertising schedule with AA Traveller has been agreed including advertising in four print publications distributed throughout New Zealand and the addition of Whangarei content (banners) on two AA Traveller eNewsletters to 130,000 AA members and 55,000 subscribed non-members, for no additional cost. Commercial Property With the level 1 announcement on 8 June 2020, business appears for many tenants to be as per usual. The vast majority of tenants have indicated trade is the same or better than last year. There is the concern that this is a hangover from the level 3 and 4 restrictions but the variety of business across the board experiencing this resurgence shows a more positive outlook than expected. There are however some examples of tenants enquiring as to further assistance and council’s recovery package. Forestry Work has started to review the current portfolio and establish objectives for each of the Council registered forests. Economies of scale, location, legislative requirements are all to be reviewed in preparation with recommendations for Council to consider in the coming months. Airport The airport continues to show a positive recovery with Air New Zealand confirming two flights daily into July 2020 with the occasional 3 or 4 flights per day possible. Parking revenue is slowly increasing with more passenger movements. The café remains open with some positive support from locals between flights. Overall the airport is essentially operating at 50% of the norm but is showing better than expected signs regarding a recovery. A quick-fire users survey is being developed to gauge some of the post COVID-19 travel impacts. The annual satisfaction survey was due to be completed in April 2020 however the lock down and the significant changes in aviation movements warrants a more specific look at those airport users.

140

https://www.facebook.com/whangareiloveithere/

of 11

The terminus re-roof has been completed with a fresh coat of paint applied while scaffolding was in place. Local artist Melinda Butt completed the mural work at no additional cost to a ‘standard touch up’. The completed work compliments the highly successful Street Printz Manaia collective based in the city centre. Strategy Annual Plan and Long Term Plan Through the Corporate Planning Steering group staff have been working on the Annual Plan. Consultation on the 2020-21 Annual Plan closed on 4 June 2020 followed by deliberations on 16 June 2020. Adoption of the Annual Plan is scheduled for an extraordinary Council Meeting on 9 July 2020. Work has also continued on the 2021 – 31 Long Term Plan. The vision and strategic drivers for this LTP were endorsed by Council in May 2020. This has now set the direction for the next stage of work which includes key information briefings for Council on topics such as infrastructure, development contributions, rates and revenue and finance policy. Placemaking Programme A community survey has been started in Hikurangi and Tikipunga. This survey will help inform the priorities of the plans, with the results being reported back to Council in August 2020. Climate Change The draft Climate Change Action Plan will be shared with elected members at a Council Briefing on 8 August 2020, including detail of resourcing and the implications of COVID-19. Bylaw review programme Staff have implemented a bylaw review programme to ensure we review our existing bylaws within the statutory timeframes. A briefing will be held on 8 July 2020 to discuss the Camping in Public Places Bylaw, and research into Class 4 Gambling. Whangarei District Growth Strategy A report back on the draft Whangarei District Growth Strategy will be held on 12 August 2020. Following this briefing, direction will be sought on further engagement with our Community. Kaipara Moana Central government’s 2020 Budget identified funding to support environmental job creation. The Kaipara Moana was identified as a potential recipient of funding in government media releases, however the exact amount has not yet been confirmed. Council will receive further updates when information is released by the Ministry for the Environment. City centre A further briefing on the City Centre Masterplan will be held on the 22 July 2020, this will provide feedback and amendments based on the comments received at the 20 May 2020 briefing as well as seeking direction on next steps leading into the 2020 – 21 Long Term Plan. Staff are working with the District Development team to support the newly formed City Core Inner-city Working Party.

141

of 11

District Plan Urban and Services Plan Change Package The Urban and Services Plan Change Package decision was notified on 3 June 2020, the period for appeal to the Environment Court closed on 15 July 2020. At the date of writing this report one Appeal had been received from Mr Noel William Dyer (ENV-2020-AKL-75). COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Bill A submission was prepared and submitted to the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Bill. The submission was focussed upon improving the workability of the provisions and enforceability. Key topics:

• Monitoring of permitted activities for New Zealand Transport Agency and KiwiRail.

• Monitoring of consents and enabling appropriate conditions of consent and cost recovery.

• Consultation with hapu and the timeframes.

• Noting the lack of protection of vegetation in Outstanding Landscape and Features, coastal environment, Outstanding and High Natural Character.

Rolling Review Updates Staff presented to Te Karearea on 23 June 2020, providing an overview of the RMA and an updated of District Plan Rolling Review and the next topics to commence. WDC Appeal to Northland Regional Plan GMO Northland Regional Council resolved on 16 June 2020, to adopt provisions to manage the release of GMOs in the Coastal Marine Area and to settle the Whangarei District Council and Far North District Council Environment Court appeal. Documentation has been circulated between parties. Resource Consents Resource Consent Processing The number of applications received in June 2020 totalled 42, which is similar to the monthly numbers received during and since the commencement of the COVID-19 pandemic and signals a continuing reduction in consent numbers. Nine subdivision, 21 land-use and 12 other permission applications were received.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Jun-19 Jul-19 Aug-19 Sep-19 Oct-19 Nov-19 Dec-19 Jan-20 Feb-20 Mar-20 Apr-20 May-20 Jun-20

Subdivision Consents Received Land Use Consents Received

Other Permissions Received Total Applications Received

Volu

me

of A

pplic

atio

ns

142

of 11

Resource Consents No large scale applications were received during June 2020 with proposals generally being minor land use applications and small scale subdivision proposals. Hearings Two applications were heard by Independent Commissioners during June 2020. One was a retrospective application for a dwelling built within setbacks at Langs Beach and the other was a 2 lot subdivision at Whau Valley Road. Both were approved. Post-Approval Twenty-seven post-approval applications were received for June 2020. This is an increase from last month and at a similar level compared to this time last year but a significant decrease from high levels being experienced October 2019 – February 2020. Twelve survey plan approvals (s223), 13 completion certificates (s224) and 2 other post-approval related application were received. All new applications are now being processed within timeframes. The post-approval team is also reviewing 3 policies; Performance Bond Policy (Policy 0051), Uncompleted Works Bond Policy (Policy 0074) and Road Naming Policy (Policy 0064).

Appeals An appeal has been received against a staff decision to decline a retrospective resource consent application for the removal of part of a protected stone wall at Three Mile Bush. Building Department – 02 June – 26 June 2020 Building Consent Processing Building consent applications and inspections are meeting the annual plan requirements in terms of delivery for this month. LIMs and PIMs remain at a high level of service delivery and accuracy.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


s223 Received s224 Received Other PA Received Total Received

Volu

me

of A

pplic

atio

ns

143

of 11

Building Consents Received, Issued and Suspended The building consent activity has seen a higher level of activity from last month. The applications are increasing in volume; however, it is not known what levels will continue at.

Roles and responsibilities under the Building Act 2004 The Building Departments role is to make sure that we (the BCA) are satisfied on reasonable grounds that the provisions of the building code would be met if the building work were properly completed in accordance with the plans and specifications that accompanied the application. The table below summarises the sections of the Act which set out the roles and responsibilities of each party involved in lodging and processing a building consent. Navigating the Building Act 2004 (BA04) Section 14D Responsibilities of designer This sets out this specific role of what they

must do Section 14F Responsibilities of building consent authority

Identifies Council role and responsibility for ensuring that the consent complies with the building code

Section 17 All building work must comply with building code

The BA04 cites the code that is a performance based code which has 41 clauses including stability, fire safety, access, moisture, safety of users, services and facilities and energy efficiency.

Performance Indicators

Jun-20 Year's Average To Date

Building Consents Issued In 20 Days 98% 95%

Inspections (Completed within 48 Hrs) % Complete Within 2 Working Days 98% 99%

LIMs % Within 7 Days 98% 78%

LIMs (Statutory Requirement) % Within 10 Days 100% 100%

PIMs % Within 5 Days 90% 64%

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180


Consent Applications Received Consent Applications Issued Applications Suspended Consent Applications Issued

144

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2004/0072/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM162576#DLM162576

of 11

Section 19 How compliance with building code is established

This clause identifies the pathways a BCA must adhere to establish compliance with the building code

Section 40 Buildings not to be constructed, altered, demolished, or removed without consent

This clause cites the requirement for building consent

Section 44 When to apply for building consent

This identifies the sequence for building consent

Section 45 How to apply for building consent

This identifies what needs to be achieved and by whom as well as linking all other Acts, TA requirements and other specific sections of the BA04.

Section 48 Processing application for building consent

This identifies the BCA requirements for decision making, and statutory times that are applied. It also identifies the further reasonable information requirement or RFI under sub section 2.

Section 49 Grant of building consent This section identifies the “satisfied on reasonable grounds” provision in the BA04. The technical decision.

Section 51 Issue of building consent The formal permission document with all of the requirements for the owner to adhere to.

The applicant is responsible for assembling the information required by the Building Act and Code. The WDC website provides technical information on how the code can be met, and a duty Building Consents Officer and staff are available to assist applicants and discuss issues if necessary. Public information provided by Council is audited by MBIE as part of the accreditation process and is kept up to date with all changes to regulation and requirements. In addition, regular industry meetings are held to discuss requirements and changes to codes and practices. When the designer has not provided sufficient information to show compliance with the building code via the plans and specifications that are submitted with the building consent application, the application is suspended and an RFI (Request for Information) is issued. Approximately 60% of Building Consent applications require RFIs. Many of those requests involve multiple items. The main areas where these RFIs are sought are summarised in the table below. Building code clause Summarised/ general terms for the RFI Stability Site suitability and geotechnical related questions to ground

conditions and engineering design Structure Steel framing and design, bracing of walls for implied loads. Protection from fire Fire stopping systems and designs for smoke and flame Energy efficiency Modelling methods and calculations used for buildings performance

index These are significant components of any building consent and sufficient detail is required to ensure the BCA is satisfied on reasonable grounds that applications meet the Building Code.

145

of 11

The level of detail required can sometimes be regarded as excessive and costly but staff have little discretion in implementing the Building Act and Building Code.. Council approvals are for the life of the building and the cost of not getting it right can be very high for the end user and the Council. Days to process building consent applications Statutory days are known as working days identified by the Building Act 2004. The statutory days do not include weekends, public holidays and suspension or on hold days. The customer days incorporate the suspension or on hold days and are reliant on responses from applicants or agents. The RFI letter sent to applicants consolidates the requests but these may have more than one suspension and often not all aspects are responded to in one reply. Statutory days vs elapsed time The chart below shows the average number of days for the customer vs the average number of statutory days. This shows there is a gap between statutory and elapsed days. The gap is the amount of time the applicant takes to satisfy the RFI.

Health and Bylaws Environmental Health

Food Act 2014 – Council’s Environmental Health Officers (EHO’s), in their roles as Food Act Verifiers and under COVID-19 level 1, have returned to conduct on-site, face-to-face Food Act verifications. However, the negative impact that COVID-19 lockdown has had on our ability to verify all food businesses once a year (those which require an annual verification) most likely will result in the team failing to achieve their Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s), which required a 100% achievement. Those premises which were not able to be verified within the scheduled months (during lockdown), will be verified in coming weeks and whilst late, still ultimately achieve our goals and legal requirements.

On a more positive note, the team is dealing with higher than usual numbers of new food business enquiries and applications, especially in the home-cooking and coffee cart areas, which by far exceed the three food business which have recently closed down, due to the impact of COVID-19.

Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 – annual inspections of alcohol licensed premises have resumed, with the team focusing on a substantial backlog. However, the negative impact that COVID-19 lockdown has had on our ability to inspect all alcohol licensed premises once a year most likely will result in the team failing to achieve their Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s), which required a 100% achievement. Those premises which were not able to be inspected within the scheduled (lockdown) months, will be inspected in coming weeks and whilst late, still ultimately achieve our goals and legal requirements.

146

of 11

Health Act 1956 registered premises – Annual inspections of premises registered under the Health Act, such as hairdressers, funeral parlours, offensive trades etc, have resumed and the team is playing catch up. However, the negative impact that COVID-19 lockdown has had on our ability to inspect all alcohol licensed premises once a year most likely will result in the team failing to achieve their Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s), which required a 100% achievement. Those premises which were not able to be inspected within the scheduled (lockdown) months, will be inspected in coming weeks and whilst late, still ultimately achieve our goals and legal requirements.

Bylaws

General matters – Since the start of COVID-19 level 2, all enforcement through our Enforcement Contractor, Armourguard has restarted, including parking enforcement as of 1 June 2020.

Armourguard Enforcement Statistics – as these are now only reported quarterly and due to the report deadline being before the June 2020 statistics were available, no quarterly statistical data is provided for the month of June 2020. However, during the August 2020 report a summary for the 2019/20 financial year data will be provided. Māori Relationships Growth Strategy Review The team have been working with Strategy to plan a process for Māori to proactively engage with the Growth Strategy review, and renew Māori aspirations through this early engagement. A hui with Te Huinga has been organised for early July 2020. Matariki Community Planting Day They have also supported a cross organisation kaupapa involving Parks, and Venues and Events to incorporate a planting day at the eastern side of Mt Parihaka with a very popular Māori lunar event Matariki. A site visit in early June 2020 was to establish a layout and plan for the event. The department provided cultural advice and performed relevant ceremonies to open the event on the day. Three planting days have been organised (27 June 2020, 11 July 2020 and 25 July 2020) the first one was well attended. Hapū Engagement in Otaika Local hapū Te Parawhau and Te Uri o Te Tangata expressed concerns relating to a bridge scouring project on the Otaika River at Loop Rd. A hui with NTA representatives was held to establish what the initial concerns were, and our department met onsite with hapū to listen and provide feedback. Climate Change Staff are working to establish a multi council and hapu initiative for this kaupapa. Te Reo Māori Te Rōpu Toa o Te Reo Māori have resumed their wananga, post lockdown with kaiako Keith Hawea. Progress is steady with this rōpu who are in the review stages prior to lockdown. Civic Centre Hui with Te Huinga and Hapū Prior to lockdown hui were scheduled for this kaupapa. To date hui have been organised with Te Huinga and the wider hapū of Whangārei in early July 2020.

147

of 11

Democracy & Assurance Democracy With the move to Level 1, meetings were held in Council Chambers as per the normal meeting schedule. The monthly meetings of the Community Development Committee, Infrastructure Committee and Strategy, Planning and Development Committee resumed, and the first meetings of the Risk and Audit Committee and the Te Kārearea Strategic Partnership Forum were held. In addition, the Democracy Team supported two Council Meetings, five briefings and two workshops. The Council Meetings were livestreamed to the public on Facebook. Sixteen alcohol licence applications were put through to the District Licensing Committee for consideration. Council has received 10 new LGOIMA requests since the last Operational report in June 2020. 97 requests have been received since the beginning of 2020. The requests covered a variety of topics including:

• information about properties (such as resource consents, land use applications, noise control or dog control calls outs, and email correspondence)

• instructions (if any) from Government regarding a Maori standing committee • evidence supporting a parking infringement that was issued • statistics for Refuse Management Targeted Rates • Emails and CCTV footage related to the requester.

Insurance Insurance renewal has begun for the 2020-21 insurance year. The public liability and professional indemnity insurance will renew on 1 July 2020. The premium for this insurance increased by 70% due to some large local authority claims within New Zealand that have hardened the market. Given the increases staff are reviewing the insurance cover for all other schedules including vehicle insurance, trustee liability, statutory liability and material damage. These schedules renew on 1 November 2020 and staff are currently confirming asset data for this renewal. Risk Management The Council risk management framework is due for review and is being updated following the risk management briefing held with elected members on 9 June 2020. An updated risk management framework will be presented to elected members during the risk framework briefing on 18 August 2020. Business Continuity Work continues on development of the Council business continuity plan. This has developed from the initial departmental checklists into a full document and high-level checklist reflecting the way staff worked through challenges encountered during the COVID-19 lockdown period. The COVID-19 watch group are still active and maintain a watching brief on the situation across the country and the globe. They are reviewing how staff worked through the lockdown period and how we will maintain council services should the country move back up the alert levels. Work with Council Organisations Staff have been working alongside our Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) to ensure that all final statements of intents (SOI) are presented to council in the meeting following receipt of the SOI. Elected members will receive the remaining statements of intent in the appropriate committee in July 2020. Work continues on supporting business owners with the governance of both CCOs and CO’s to ensure that they and council are meeting their statutory obligations.

148

of 11

Consultation The Annual Plan 2020-21 consultation process is complete, pending adoption on 9 July 2020. The creation of a stakeholder database for that consultation will provide a resource to work from heading into the Long Term Plan 2021-31. The review of the Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy is being prepared for consultation. This is a statutory requirement and therefore requires a Special Consultative Procedure. Submissions will be sought from 20 July 2020, closing 20 August 2020. Preparation continues on the process for renewal of the resource consent for Kioreroa Water Treatment Plant. The development of a Technical Advisory Group aims to assist with the coordination of multiple stakeholders across the relevant groups of those with interest in this resource consent.

149

Strategy, Planning and Development Committee Agenda

Documents

Transcript of Strategy, Planning and Development Committee Agenda