|
|
|
|
AGENDA
Ordinary Council Meeting Wednesday, 18 December 2024
|
|
|
Date: |
Wednesday, 18 December 2024 |
|
Time: |
10.30 am |
|
Location: |
Cromwell Service Centre, 42 The Mall, Cromwell
(A link to the live stream will be available on the Central Otago District Council's website.)
|
|
Peter Kelly Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
18 December 2024 |
Notice is hereby given that a Council Meeting will be held in Cromwell Service Centre, 42 The Mall, Cromwell and live streamed via Microsoft Teams on Wednesday, 18 December 2024 at 10.30 am. The link to the live stream will be available on the Central Otago District Council’s website.
Order Of Business
Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 November 2024
24.14.1 Declarations of Interest Register
6 Community Board Chair Update
24.14.2 Community Board Chair Update
24.14.3 Update to the Register of Delegations for Community Boards (and some other updates)
24.14.4 Road Stopping - Swindon Street, Ophir
24.14.6 Update on School and Community Speed Limits
24.14.7 Cromwell Aerodrome - Medical Helipad
24.14.8 Draft District Grass Verge Policy
24.14.9 Extension of Temporary Alcohol Restriction Zone.
24.14.10 Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024 - Council Briefing.
24.14.11 Application to Remit Rates on Intra Boundary Property
24.14.12 Manuherekia Valley Community Hub
24.14.14 Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 9 December 2024
11 Resolution to Exclude the Public
24.14.15 CEO Conditions and Performance Objectives Review
24.14.16 Confidential Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 9 December 2024
Members Her Worship the Mayor T Alley (Chairperson), Cr N Gillespie, Cr S Browne, Cr L Claridge, Cr I Cooney, Cr S Duncan, Cr S Feinerman, Cr C Laws, Cr N McKinlay, Cr M McPherson, Cr T Paterson
In Attendence P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), L Fleck (General Manager - People and Culture), J Muir (Three Waters Director), S Righarts (Group Manager - Business Support), D Rushbrook (Group Manager - Community Vision), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), L Webster (Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure), W McEnteer (Governance Manager)
1 Karakia
Cr Feinerman will begin the meeting with a karakia.
2 Apologies
3 Public Forum
Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 November 2024
|
18 December 2024 |
MINUTES
OF A Council Meeting
OF THE Central Otago District
Council
HELD AT Ngā Hau e
Whā, William Fraser Building, 1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Wednesday, 27 November 2024 COMMENCING AT
10.31am
PRESENT: Her Worship the Mayor T Alley (Chairperson), Cr N Gillespie, Cr S Browne, Cr L Claridge, Cr I Cooney, Cr S Duncan, Cr S Feinerman, Cr C Laws, Cr N McKinlay (via Microsoft Teams), Cr M McPherson, Cr T Paterson
IN ATTENDANCE: P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), L Fleck (General Manager - People and Culture), J Muir (Three Waters Director), S Righarts (Group Manager - Business Support) (via Microsoft Teams), D Rushbrook (Group Manager - Community Vision), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), L Webster (Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure), Q Penniall (Infrastructure Manager), P Morris (Chief Financial Officer), A Rodgers (Principal Policy Planner), P Keenan (Capital Projects Programme Manager), G Robinson (Property and Facilities Manager), D McKewen (Systems and Corporate Accountant), T Bates (Property Officer), R Williams (Community Development Advisor), H Laverick (Roading Asset Engineer), M Hardman (Roading Asset Manager), J Thomas (Water Services Sampling & Monitoring Team Leader), S Reynolds (Governance Support Officer)
1 Karakia
Cr McPherson gave a karakia to begin the meeting.
2 Apologies
There were no apologies.
3 Public Forum
There was no public forum
4 Confirmation of Minutes
|
Resolution Moved: Feinerman Seconded: Browne That the public minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 30 October 2024 be confirmed as a true and correct record. Carried |
5 Declarations of Interest
Members were reminded of their obligations in respect of declaring any interests. There were no further declarations of interest.
6 Community Board Chair Update
|
24.13.2 Community Board Chair Update |
|
Norman Dalley, Chair of the Teviot Valley Community Board joined the meeting to discuss matters of interest to the Board. Mr Dalley noted that he was pleased that Curtis Pannett would be joining the board to fill the extraordinary vacancy and stated the importance of having someone from a younger generation on the board. He gave an update on the issue of berm mowing in the valley, and was pleased to acknowledge that the majority of the community have been keeping their berms tidy. Mr Dalley discussed the project that is underway in Millers Flat to rejuvenate the domain, and spoke of the residential builds that had been recently completed in the ward and noted that the adoption of the Teviot Valley Spatial Plan was timely as the area experienced moderate growth. He then responded to questions. |
7 Reports
Note: Cr Gillespie assumed the Chair as the Planning and Regulatory portfolio lead.
|
24.13.3 Adoption of Teviot Valley Spatial Plan |
|
To consider adoption of the Teviot Valley Spatial Plan. The adoption of the Teviot Valley Spatial Plan would enable plan changes in the Teviot Valley and allow a range of housing types to meet changes in demand. The plan focuses on the development of medium density infill housing in the centre of Roxburgh township and protects productive rural land on the outskirts. |
|
Resolution Moved: Feinerman Seconded: McPherson That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Adopts the Teviot Valley Spatial Plan. Carried |
Note: Cr Feinerman assumed the Chair as the Community Vision and Experience portfolio lead.
|
24.13.4 Molyneux Stadium |
|
To consider the status of the Molyneux Stadium and a staged investment approach for maintenance and compliance work to retain the building and bring it up to standard. |
|
Resolution Moved: McPherson Seconded: Paterson That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves a staged investment approach for the Molyneux Stadium to continue to proceed with maintenance and compliance work to make the building fit for purpose as recommended in the Building Condition Assessment attached as Appendix 1. C. Approves an estimated $1,200,000 for maintenance and refurbishment/renewal work over nine years in the Draft Long-Term Plan 2025-34 as recommended in the Building Condition Assessment and the quantity surveyors estimated costs set out in Table 1 of the report, funded from Vincent Community Board Reserves. D. Approves for earthquake strengthening, required asbestos removal, and fire safety and accessibility compliance work to the Molyneux Stadium to proceed in year 2027/28 of the Draft Long-Term Plan 2025-34 at an estimated cost of $4,430,000, funded from Vincent Community Board Reserves. E. Authorises the Chief Executive to do what is necessary to give effect to the resolutions. Carried |
Note: Cr McPherson declared an interest in item 24.13.5. He left the room and did not vote on the item.
|
24.13.5 Grants Policy |
|
To approve the updated Grants Policy. Discussion followed on the difficult climate for running events and it was noted that some long standing events in the district were no longer on the calendar and that multi-year funding for events was seen to be too risky in this environment. The policy would be amended to be reviewed alongside the Long-term Plan. |
|
Resolution Moved: Laws Seconded: Paterson That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves the amended Grants Policy noting that wording would be changed from ‘Locals’ to ‘Residents’ and it would be noted that financial sustainability would read ‘preferred’ rather than ‘required’. The policy would also be reviewed to be consistent with the adoption of Long-term Plan. C. Endorses the Events Framework. Carried |
Note: Cr Duncan assumed the Chair as the Roading portfolio lead.
|
24.13.6 Bridge Postings |
|
To provide Council information on the Central Otago District’s bridge postings. |
|
Resolution Moved: Duncan Seconded: Paterson That the report be received. Carried |
Note: Following discussion, at 12.12 pm item 24.13.7 was put on hold was returned to later in the meeting with additional staff members present.
Note: Cr Paterson left at 12.08 pm and returned at 12.12 pm.
Note: Cr Cooney left at 12.07 pm, and returned at 12.13 pm.
Note: Cr Claridge left at 12.08 pm and returned at 12.14 pm.
Note: Cr Laws assumed the Chair as the Three Waters and Waste portfolio lead.
|
24.13.8 November Wastewater Compliance Status Update |
|
To consider progress on achieving Otago Regional Council Consent (ORC) compliance for Central Otago District Council (CODC) wastewater activities. |
|
Resolution Moved: Alley Seconded: Claridge That the report be received. Carried |
|
24.13.9 Status Reports for Cromwell Rising Main and Cromwell Drinking Water Upgrade |
|
To consider status reports for the Cromwell Rising Main and Cromwell Drinking Water Upgrade projects. |
|
Resolution Moved: Duncan Seconded: Feinerman That the reports be received. Carried |
|
24.13.7 Emergency Works Funding - Oct 2024 Rainfall |
|
To consider funding options for emergency works following flooding in October 2024. Discussion followed on whether this amount should be funded from the general reserves emergency ledger, or from the roading emergency reserves which was already in deficit. It was noted that funding this roading cost through the general reserves did not signal that the roading budget for these issues was insufficient and would not cover future requirements. |
|
Resolution Moved: Gillespie Seconded: Alley That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Fund $480,494 from the roading emergency works reserve account for Council’s response to and recovery from the October 2024 flooding event. Carried |
Note: The meeting adjourned at 12.30 pm and returned at 1.02 pm.
|
24.13.10 Local Water Done Well - CODC Options for Development of Water Services Delivery Plans |
|
An update was given on the outcomes of the Local Water Done Well Review. |
|
Resolution Moved: Alley Seconded: Paterson That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Notes that CODC must draft a Water Services Delivery Plan and include as a minimum two options with one being the status quo. C. Directs the CEO to develop a Water Services Delivery Plan that includes the following options: (a) Status quo, (b) Single Council – Council Controlled Organisation, and (c) Multi Council – Council Controlled Organisation. D. Authorises the CEO in partnership with other participating Otago - Southland Councils to further develop the detail required to support a multi council CCO Water Services Delivery Plan. Carried |
Note: Her Worship the Mayor resumed the Chair.
|
24.13.11 Capex Report on Cromwell Memorial Hall |
|
To provide capex updates on the Cromwell Memorial Hall Project. |
|
Resolution Moved: Browne Seconded: Laws That the report be received. Carried |
|
24.13.12 Application for further remission of excess water charges |
|
To consider whether Council wishes to use its discretion to apply remission to an excess water charge. It was discussed that some clarification was needed on what defines ‘hardship’ and it was also noted that community boards should be receiving these cases in the future. The privacy issue in these instances was also noted. |
|
Resolution Moved: McPherson Seconded: Duncan That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves a further remission of excess water charges of up to $1,849.20. C. Notes that it considers this remission on a hardship basis due to the increase being an anomalous increase, and that this decision does not set a precedent. Carried |
Note: Cr Gillespie left at 1.48 pm and returned at 1.51 pm.
Note: Cr McKinley left at 1.53 pm and did not return to the meeting.
|
24.13.13 Community Outcomes for Central Otago District |
|
To consider new community outcomes for the 2025-34 draft Long-term Plan. |
|
Resolution Moved: Gillespie Seconded: Browne That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Adopts the revised community outcomes as attached for the 2025-34 draft Long-term Plan and ongoing Council strategic processes. Carried |
|
24.13.14 2024/25 Organisational Business Plan: First Quarter Results |
|
To receive the 2024/25 Organisational Business Plan. |
|
Resolution Moved: Alley Seconded: Feinerman That the report be received. Carried |
|
24.13.15 Financial Report for the Period Ending 30 September 2024 |
|
To consider the financial performance for the period ending 30 September 2024 |
|
Resolution Moved: Laws Seconded: Browne That the report be received. Carried |
|
24.13.27 Adoption of the Audited 2023/24 Annual Report |
|
To consider the adoption of the audited 2023-2024 Annual Report. |
|
Resolution Moved: Alley Seconded: Gillespie That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Receive and approve the annual report for the year ended 30 June 2024 C. Approve the Mayor and the Chief Executive to sign the representation letter D. Receive the audit report dated 27 November 2024 E. Adopt the annual report for year ended 30 June 2024 Carried |
8 Mayor’s Report
|
24.13.16 Mayor's Report · Attended the senior high school prizegiving’s for both Dunstan High School and Cromwell College and sent her congratulations to all students. · Attended the recent round of Community Board meetings, along with workshops, business breakfasts and community events and a road trip around Millers Flat. · Attended a Zone 5/6 meeting in Balclutha with Morrison Lowe who gave a presentation of their report as the water service discussion is progressed. · Had attended and been involved in discussions about the provision of health in Central Otago, noting the growth and requirements for the district in this sector. · Congratulated Vincent Community Board new chair Jayden Cromb and Deputy Chair Roger Browne. · Attended a reception at parliament for Air New Zealand who were celebrating 85 years in the aviation industry. · Attended the Provincial and Rural sector conference in Wellington. |
|
Resolution Moved: Alley Seconded: Duncan That the Council receives the report. Carried |
9 Status Reports
|
24.13.17 November 2024 Governance Report |
|
To report on items of general interest, receive minutes and updates from key organisations, consider Council’s forward work programme, business plan and status report updates. |
|
Resolution Moved: Paterson Seconded: Claridge That the report be received. Carried |
10 Community Board Minutes
|
24.13.18 Minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 29 October 2024 |
|
Resolution Moved: Duncan Seconded: Feinerman That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 29 October 2024 be noted. Carried |
|
24.13.19 Minutes of the Extraordinary Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 7 November 2024 |
|
Resolution Moved: Duncan Seconded: Feinerman That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Extraordinary Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 7 November 2024 be noted. Carried |
|
24.13.20 Minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 31 October 2024 |
|
Resolution Moved: Duncan Seconded: Feinerman That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 31 October 2024 be noted. Carried |
|
24.13.21 Minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 7 November 2024 |
|
Resolution Moved: Duncan Seconded: Feinerman That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 7 November 2024 be noted. Carried |
|
24.13.22 Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 5 November 2024 |
|
Resolution Moved: Duncan Seconded: Feinerman
That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 5 November 2024 be noted. Carried |
11 Committee Minutes
|
24.13.23 Minutes of the Audit and Risk Committee Meeting held on 3 October 2024 |
|
Resolution Moved: Duncan Seconded: Feinerman That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Audit and Risk Committee Meeting held on 3 October 2024 be noted. Carried |
12 Date of Next Meeting
The date of the next scheduled meeting is 18 December 2024.
13 Resolution to Exclude the Public
|
Resolution Moved: Gillespie Seconded: Browne That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject matter of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
Carried |
The public were excluded at 2.30pm and the meeting closed at 2.45pm.
|
|
5 Declarations of Interest
24.14.1 Declarations of Interest Register
Doc ID: 2003837
|
Report Author: |
Wayne McEnteer, Governance Manager |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Business Support |
1. Purpose
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.
Appendix 1 - Declarations of Interest ⇩
|
|
6 Community Board Chair Update
24.14.2 Community Board Chair Update
Doc ID: 2004656
1. Purpose
Jayden Cromb, Chair of the Vincent Community Board, Anna Harrison, Chair of the Cromwell Community Board and Norman Dalley, Chair of the Teviot Valley Community Board will join the meeting to discuss matters of interest to their Boards.
Nil
|
|
7 Reports
24.14.3 Update to the Register of Delegations for Community Boards (and some other updates)
Doc ID: 1981960
|
Report Author: |
Wayne McEnteer, Governance Manager |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Business Support |
1. Purpose of Report
To consider changes to the Register of Delegations as they apply to community boards, and several other revisions that have occurred from other business.
|
That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Adopts the changes to Register of Delegations as they apply to community boards, presented in appendix 2, noting that they will come into effect on 1 July 2025. C. Adopts the other identified changes, noting they will come into effect on 19 December 2024.
|
2. Background
The issue of the delegations as they apply to community boards was first brought to Council at its February 2024 meeting. At that time, it was agreed that the issue of district wide funding of council activities should be investigated first and then the delegations would flow from those.
The district wide funding of council activities was adopted at Council’s August 2024 meeting. Following that decision, Council instructed staff to hold a series of workshops with community boards and with Council itself to work on what an amended set of delegations might look like.
3. Discussion
Those workshops were carried out over the October and November 2024 meetings. Community boards were given a revised set of delegations as a starting point for conversation (see appendix 1). Discussion at the workshops focussed on whether the revised set of delegations fit with the intent of the district funding model and if there was anything missing the members wished to see.
Once staff had got feedback from community boards, it was collated, and changes were made. It was then presented to Council in a workshop session to sense check and to make further amendments if needed. Community boards also asked for the revised version to come back for a further sense check before going to Council for a final decision in December 2024. That revised version that had been discussed by all community boards and Council can be seen in appendix 2.
There is a further matter of delegation by exception. Part 2 of the delegations document discusses this concept and its expectations. However, this cannot continue with the delegations to community boards as proposed as they will have named delegations and then everything else will defer to Council rather than the other way around. It is proposed that clause 14 would remain in order for community boards to call an extraordinary meeting, but clause 13 would be deleted.
It is envisaged that the new set of delegations for community boards will come into effect on 1 July 2025 with the start of the new financial year.
Miscellaneous changes
The Register of Delegations is a living document and as a result is continuously revised as needed. There are several changes to make to the document to keep it up to date. They are as follows:
· Change the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Three Waters and Waste portfolio to Cr Laws and Cr McKinlay respectively.
· Change the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Community Vision and Experience portfolio to Cr Feinerman and Cr Browne respectively.
· Delete the Manorburn Recreation Reserve Committee as a subcommittee of the Vincent Community Board. The Community Board has asked for this to be deleted at the next opportunity.
For the sake of correctness of the Register, these miscellaneous changes should come into force immediately, with 19 December 2024 as the proposed date.
4. Financial Considerations
There are no specific financial considerations to be investigated to physically change the delegations document itself.
Many of the financial considerations relate to the district funding model discussion that have and continue to be worked through via the 2025-34 Long-term Plan.
5. Options
Option 1 – (Recommended)
Update the Register of Delegations as they relate to community boards.
Advantages:
· Reflects the decisions that have been made regarding the district funding model.
· There is a mismatch in the current Register of Delegations between the powers currently practiced by the community boards and where it is going after Council opted to move to a district funding model.
· Confirms the role that the community board has with the community.
Disadvantages:
· This update will remove powers that the community boards have traditionally had.
Option 2
Do not update the Register of Delegations as they relate to community boards.
Advantages:
· Nothing would need to change within the Register of Delegations regarding community boards.
· Community boards would keep their existing level of delegation.
Disadvantages:
· It does not reflect what is happening with budgets.
· It would cause confusion and likely require additional papers to Council and conversations with other community boards on decisions.
6. Compliance
|
Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions |
This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by keeping the Register of Delegations up to date, so that delegations that have been made can be easily tracked.
|
|
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc. |
Council has the discretion to change the Register of Delegations at will.
|
|
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts |
This is an electronic document and so there are no considerations to be made in this space.
|
|
Risks Analysis |
These changes reflect what has already happened in the districtisation discussion. In that sense there are few risks.
|
|
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external) |
This does not meet the threshold to trigger the Significance and Engagement Policy.
|
7. Next Steps
The Register of Delegations will be changed accordingly.
Appendix 1 - Document Presented to Community Boards as a Starting Point for Discussion ⇩
Appendix 2 - Revised version of the Register of Delegations for Community Boards ⇩
|
|
24.14.4 Road Stopping - Swindon Street, Ophir
Doc ID: 1989995
|
Report Author: |
Garreth Robinson, Property and Facilities Manager |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure |
1. Purpose of Report
To consider a proposal to stop and sell part of Swindon Street.
|
That Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to stop approximately 650.5m2 of unformed legal road fronting Swindon Street, and 317m2 of the unnamed unformed legal road, as shown in figure 5 (the Proposed Stopping Plan), in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981, subject to: - The land (stopped road) being sold at valuation as prescribed in the Public Works Act. - The parcels marked ‘A’ and ‘B’ being stopped and amalgamated with Record of Title OT366/26. - The parcels marked ‘C’ and ‘D’ being stopped and amalgamated with Record of Title OT188/110. - Easements (in gross) in favour of, and as approved to the satisfaction of, Aurora Energy Limited, being registered on the resulting titles if required. - The owner of Record of Title OT366/26 paying all costs associated with the preparation and registration of any easements required by Aurora Energy Limited. - The two applicants paying all other costs, including Council’s legal fees, in equal shares. - The stopping and legalisation being approved by the Minister of Lands. - The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive.
C. Authorises the Chief Executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolution. |
2. Background
On 9 September 2024, the Vincent Community Board (the Board) considered a proposal to stop approximately 650.5m2 of unformed legal road fronting Swindon Street and 317m2 of the unnamed unformed legal road.
The board agreed with the recommendation in the report.
At the Council meeting on 24 September 2024, Peter Dymock (Patterson Pitts), Matt Tipa and Sean Aldrich (applicants) spoke at the public forum regarding the application made for the road stopping. They noted that the issue was a historical one and as a consequence that the costs should be waived for the land. Mr Dymock stated that the cost to purchase the land would make fixing the boundary issue untenable.
After hearing the report, Council resolved that the item be left to lie on the table until a valuation can be obtained for the land at council’s cost.
Following this a valuation report, included as Appendix 1, was obtained and subsequently shared with the applicants, who have since submitted a proposal (refer to Appendix 2).
The recommendations outlined in this report remain unchanged.
Clause 13 of the request references that the normal practice is for applicants to pay market valuation for the land. The applicant has requested that this be waived in this instance because of a number of reasons raised in the request. These are addressed as follows:
Landowners have responsibility for determining the location of the property boundaries. The boundaries shown on the record of title are absolute, and the landowner has the responsibility of understanding where the boundaries are located on the ground.
The position of the boundaries should be understood before purchasing the property or before undertaking any building project. This can be achieved by locating survey pegs or having a surveyor define the boundaries.
Council does not require a full survey at the time of application of building consent and the buildings and water connections must be located in the position shown on the site plan submitted with the consent. This requires the landowner to understand where the boundaries are on the ground. The building consent is issued on this basis.
There are a number of situations where the property is located across boundaries. Unless a formal agreement has been entered into (for example a licence to occupy), there is no agreement to occupy the council or road.
The fact that time has passed does not constitute approval to occupy Council land or road reserve.
Locating buildings outside of a flood hazard does not constitute approval to occupy Council land or road reserve, unless a formal agreement has been entered into. The letter of request is attached as appendix 1.
The Roads
Swindon Street adjoins the western side of the Ida – Valley Omakau Road about 1.7 kilometres south of Omakau. From there, the road, which is well formed, runs westward through the township of Ophir to its end at the start of the Ophir Bridge Road. An overview of Swindon Street, which is about 800 metres long and 30 metres wide, as shown below in figure 1.
Figure 1 – Overview of Swindon Street
An unnamed unformed legal road (the road) adjoins the northern side of the intersection of Swindon Street and Ophir Bridge Road. The road runs eastward, parallel to Swindon Street, to its end at the start of MacDonald Street. The road is not formed for roading purposes but there is a track formed on part of the road and this is well used by local residents. An overview of the road, which is about 290 metres long and 20 metres wide, is shown below in figure 2.
Figure 2 – Overview of the Unnamed Unformed Legal Road (the ULR)
Private Encroachment
Section 3 Block VI Town of Ophir (Section 3) is located at the western end of the Ophir township adjacent to the intersection of Swindon Street and the unnamed legal road. The improvements on Section 3, which is a triangular property, include a dwelling that was relocated to the site in 1989, a freestanding garage, a small shed, fencing, lawns, and a selection of gardens.
Section 2 Block VI Town of Ophir (Section 2) is located immediately to the east of Section 3. Section 2 is a rectangular property. The improvements on Section 2 include a dwelling with an attached garage, two sheds, lawns, and a selection of gardens. An overview of Sections 2 and 3, as have been represented spatially in GIS, are shown below in figure 3.
Figure 3 – Overview of Sections 2 and 3 Block VI Town of Ophir
In 2023, the owners of Sections 2 and 3 noticed that the fence on the mutual boundary did not appear to align with the legal boundary. After some investigation, it was determined that the owners of Section 2 had encroached the mutual boundary and were occupying a slither of Section 3. A cross check to GIS also showed that the eastern boundary of Section 2 was further to the east than represented in GIS. A plan of the encroachment, and the approximate location of the true eastern boundary of Section 2, is shown below in figure 4.
Figure 4 – Plan of private encroachment and approximate location of true eastern boundary of Section 2.
Encroachments to Legal Road
While researching their legal boundaries, the owners of Sections 2 and 3 also discovered that they both encroach the legal road to varying degrees. Those encroachments are described as follows:
- The garage, small shed, and some gardens on Section 3, all encroach the unformed legal road that runs behind the property.
- The dwelling, some fencing, and some gardens on Section 3, all encroach Swindon Street.
- The dwelling, garage, and ‘front garden’ on Section 2 all encroach Swindon Street.
Agreement to Legalise Private Encroachment
The owners of Sections 2 and 3 have agreed to resolve the private encroachment by performing a boundary adjustment. On completion of the boundary adjustment, part of Section 3, about 198 square metres, will be sold and added to Section 2.
Application to Stop Legal Road
To resolve their encroachments to the legal road, the owners of Section 2 have now applied to stop part of Swindon Street, with the owners of Section 3 applying to stop part of Swindon Street and part of the unnamed road that runs behind the two properties. A plan of the proposed stopping, which also shows the recently surveyed boundary adjustment, is shown below in figure 5 and is summarised in the table below that.
Figure 5 – Plan of the Proposed Stopping (with recently surveyed boundary adjustment).
|
Schedule of Road to be Stopped |
|||
|
Parcel: |
Being Part of: |
Area (m2 - approx.): |
Parcel to be Amalgamated with: |
|
A. |
Unnamed legal road |
317.00 |
Section 3 Block VI TN of Ophir/RT OT366/26 |
|
B. |
Swindon Street |
408.00 |
Section 3 Block VI TN of Ophir/RT OT366/26 |
|
C. |
Swindon Street |
18.50 |
Section 2 Block VI TN of Ophir/RT OT188/110 |
|
D. |
Swindon Street |
224.00 |
Lot 1 DP 604359/ RT OT188/110 |
Table 1 – Schedule of Road to be Stopped (as shown in figure 5).
3. Discussion
Roading Network
The unnamed legal road that runs off Swindon Street and behind Sections 2 and 3 has a legal width of about 20 metres. Its current formation, which ‘swoops’ around Section 3 then on past Section 2, has come about through regular informal use.
If parcel A is stopped, the width of the first 40 metres of the western end of the unnamed road will be reduced and will range from 11 metres to 19 metres as shown below in figure 6, which is sufficient for future roading purposes.
Figure 6 – Overview of Post Stopping Width – Western End of the ULR.
Swindon Street has a legal width of approximately 30 metres. The formed road, which is well centred through the legal road, is about 8-9 metres wide. This leaves an unformed width of about 10 or 11 metres either side of the road.
If parcels B – D are stopped, the unformed road width on the northern side of the western end of Swindon Street will be reduced the property boundary to seal edge to approximately 3 metres. This is also sufficient for future roading requirements as it provides for both a footpath and any future widening of the road as shown below in figure 7.
Figure 7 – Overview of Post Stopping Widths – Western End of Swindon Street
Utility Networks & Provider Requirements
Aurora Energy Limited (Aurora) have an overhead pole network running through Swindon Street. Part of that network runs through the legal road in front of Sections 2 and 3, and part (an underground cable), runs around Section 3 and into the unnamed legal road as shown below in figure 8.
Figure 8 – Aurora’s Overhead Pole Network
If the stopping is approved, Aurora will require an easement (in gross) to protect:
- Any part of the stay identified in figure 8 that is located in or above parcel B,
- Any part of the underground cable identified in figure 8 that is found to be located in parcel B,
- Any other part of the overhead network that comes to be located in or above any part of the road that is to be stopped.
Legislation, Policy, & Statutory Procedure
Council’s Roading Policy determines the appropriate statutory procedure for stopping a legal road or any part thereof. The policy for selecting the correct statutory process is outlined in section 8.5 of Council’s Roading Policy, which says:
The Local Government Act 1974 road stopping procedure shall be adopted if one or more of the following circumstances shall apply:
a) Where the full width of road is proposed to be stopped and public access will be removed as a result of the road being stopped; or
b) The road stopping could injuriously affect or have a negative or adverse impact on any other property; or
c) The road stopping has, in the judgment of the Council, the potential to be controversial; or
d) If there is any doubt or uncertainty as to which procedure should be used to stop the road.
The Local Government Act process requires public notification of the proposal. This involves erecting signs at each end of the road to be stopped, sending letters to adjoining owners/occupiers and at least two public notices a week apart in the local newspaper. Members of the public have 40 days in which to object.
The Public Works Act 1981 road stopping procedure may be adopted when the following circumstances apply:
e) Where the proposal is that a part of the road width be stopped and a width of road which provides public access will remain.
f) Where no other person, including the public generally, are considered by the Council in its judgment to be adversely affected by the proposed road stopping;
g) Where other reasonable access will be provided to replace the access previously provided by the stopped road (i.e. by the construction of a new road).
It is proposed that the Public Works Act 1981 procedures be adopted for this application for the following reasons:
- The proposal is to stop part of the legal road widths only.
- Public access will not be adversely affected.
4. Financial Considerations
Council’s Roading Policy determines that the applicant is responsible for all costs and expenses associated with their road stopping. This includes purchase of the land at valuation, which is determined on a before and after basis, as prescribed in the Public Works Act 1981.
Other costs include valuer’s fees, survey and LINZ fees, LINZ Accredited Supplier and legal fees, and the costs associated with the preparation and registration of any easements.
While those costs would all usually be shared equally by the joint applicants, in this instance, it is proposed that the owner of Section 3 meets all costs associated with the preparation and registration of any easement required by Aurora, with the applicants sharing all other costs, including Council’s legal fees, equally.
Income from the sales of the stopped road will be paid to the Roading Administration Management (Unsubsidised) Account. From there it will be used to fund the correction of public roading matters such as the encroachment of formed roads.
5. Options
Option 1 – (Recommended)
To recommend that the Council agrees to stop approximately 650.5m2 of unformed legal road fronting Swindon Street, and 317m2of the unnamed legal road, as shown in figure 5, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981, subject to:
- The land (stopped road) being sold at valuation as prescribed in the Public Works Act.
- The parcels marked ‘A’ and ‘B’ being stopped and amalgamated with Record of Title OT366/26.
- The parcels marked ‘C’ and ‘D’ being stopped and amalgamated with Record of Title OT188/110.
- Easements (in gross) in favour of, and as approved to the satisfaction of, Aurora Energy Limited, being registered on the resulting titles if required.
- The owner of Record of Title OT366/26 paying all costs associated with the preparation and registration of any easements required by Aurora Energy Limited.
- The two applicants paying all other costs, including Council’s legal fees, in equal shares.
- The stopping and legalisation being approved by the Minister of Lands.
- The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive.
Advantages:
· The applicant’s various occupations of unformed legal road will be legalised.
· The income received will be used to fund the correction of other public roading issues.
· Is consistent with the provisions of Council’s Roading Policy and with the Public Works Act.
Disadvantages:
· None.
Option 2
To not agree to stop (an unformed) part of Swindon Street, or part of the unnamed unformed legal road, as shown in figure 5 (the Proposed Stopping Plan).
Advantages:
· None.
Disadvantages:
· The applicant’s various occupations of unformed legal road will not be legalised.
· Will not generate income that could fund the correction of other public roading issues.
· Does not recognise the provisions of Council’s Roading Policy or the purpose of the Public Works Act 1981.
6. Compliance
|
Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions |
Road stopping applications are governed by Council’s Roading Policy, and the:
- Public Works Act 1981, or the, - Local Government Act 1974.
Road stoppings promote the economic wellbeing of the community by generating income from the disposal of land that is held (but not required) for roading purposes.
|
|
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc. |
Council’s Road Stopping Policy applies to the application.
Consideration of this policy has ensured that the appropriate statutory process, being to legalise the road in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981, will be followed.
|
|
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts |
There are no climate change impacts related to the recommendation.
|
|
Risks Analysis |
There are no risks to Council associated with the recommendation.
|
|
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external) |
The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered, with none of the criteria being met or exceeded.
Notice of the completed road stopping will be published in the New Zealand Gazette.
|
7. Next Steps
1. Stopping/Legalisation approved by Council September 2024
2. Applicants advised of outcome On release of the resolution
3. Suppliers engaged September 2024
Appendix 1 - 20241027-Market Value-Adjoining 52-54 Swindon Street-lbo.pdf ⇩
Appendix 2 - Proposal to CODC - Nov. 2024.pdf ⇩
Appendix 3 - Stopping application - Swindown Street.pdf ⇩
|
|
24.14.5 Ratification of the Proposed Partial Road Stopping – Unformed Legal Road Off John Street, Ranfurly
Doc ID: 1981305
|
Report Author: |
Janice Remnant, Asset Management Team Leader - Property |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure |
1. Purpose of Report
To consider a proposal to partially stop two areas of an unnamed and unformed road off John Street, Ranfurly.
|
That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to partially stop the unnamed and unformed legal road adjacent to Lot 1 DP 8520, in two sections as shown in figure 3, subject to: · The provisions of the Public Works Act 1981 · Sections “A” and “B” total area of approximately 104.6 square meters being: - Sold to the applicant at valuation - Valued at the applicant’s cost - Amalgamated with Lot 1 DP 8520 · The applicant paying the cost of the survey and LINZ fees, and those of the LINZ Accredited Supplier · The applicant paying all legal fees · The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive
C. Authorises the Chief Executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolution.
|
2. Background
The Maniototo Community Board (the Board) considered an application from the owner of Lot 1 Deposited Plan (DP) 8520 (Lot 1) to partially stop two portions of an unformed legal road (the road) adjacent to the applicant’s property. The board agreed with the resolution as per below:
|
24.10.2 Proposed Partial Road Stopping – Unformed Legal Road Off John Street, Ranfurly |
|
To consider a proposal to partially stop two areas of an unnamed and unformed road off John Street, Ranfurly. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Duncan Seconded: McAuley That the Maniototo Community Board A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to partially stop the unnamed and unformed legal road adjacent to Lot 1 DP 8520, in two sections as shown in figure 3, subject to: · The provisions of the Public Works Act 1981 · Sections “A” and “B” total area of approximately 104.6 square meters being: - Sold to the applicant at valuation - Valued at the applicant’s cost - Amalgamated with Lot 1 DP 8520 · The applicant paying the cost of the survey and LINZ fees, and those of the LINZ Accredited Supplier · The applicant paying all legal fees · The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive
C. Authorises the Chief Executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolution. Carried |
The owner of Lot 1 Deposited Plan (DP) 8520 (Lot 1) has applied to partially stop two portions of an unformed legal road (the Road) adjacent to their property on John Street, Ranfurly. The application identifies the Road as being an irregularly shaped stub of road running off the southern side of John Street.
Spatially, the Road appears to have been designed to accommodate a cul-de-sac. The road is 12 metres wide (across the middle), is about 50 metres long, and has an area of about 795 square metres.
A plan of the Road, which also adjoins the Wallace Memorial Rooms on Council owned Record of Title OT392/242, is shown marked in yellow, below in figure 1.
Figure 1 – Plan of the Road (marked in yellow)
As shown in figure 1, the Road does not appear to add much value (if any) to the roading network. Initial investigations revealed that the Road contains a wastewater manhole, and laterals that service the Wallace Memorial Rooms and the Ranfurly Pool. A plan of the approximate location of the wastewater infrastructure is shown below in figure 2.
Figure 2 – Plan of approximate location of
wastewater infrastructure
The Road also provides legal access to the rear of the Wallace Memorial Rooms, and very occasional informal pedestrian access through to the rear of the Ranfurly Service Centre.
Figure 3 below identifies the two portions of the road to be stopped.
Figure 3 – Full plan of proposed stopping as shown in red
The total of the two areas “A” and “B”, to be stopped and amalgamated with Section 20 is approximately 104.6 square meters in total.
3. Discussion
Legislation and Policy
Council’s Roading Policy determines the appropriate statutory procedure for stopping a legal road or any part thereof. The policy for selecting the correct statutory process is as follows:
The Local Government Act 1974 road stopping procedure shall be adopted if one or more of the following circumstances shall apply:
a) Where the full width of road is proposed to be stopped and public access will be removed as a result of the road being stopped; or
b) The road stopping could injuriously affect or have a negative or adverse impact on any other property; or
c) The road stopping has, in the judgment of the Council, the potential to be controversial; or
d) If there is any doubt or uncertainty as to which procedure should be used to stop the road.
The Local Government Act process requires public notification of the proposal. This involves erecting signs at each end of the road to be stopped, sending letters to adjoining owners/occupiers and at least two public notices a week apart in the local newspaper. Members of the public have 40 days in which to object.
The Public Works Act 1981 road stopping procedure may be adopted when the following circumstances apply:
e) Where the proposal is that a part of the road width be stopped a width of road which provides public access will remain.
f) Where no other person, including the public generally, are considered by the Council in its judgment to be adversely affected by the proposed road stopping;
g) Where other reasonable access will be provided to replace the access previously provided by the stopped road (i.e. by the construction of a new road).
Therefore, the two partial road stoppings can be undertaken under the Public Works Act 1981 and requires no public consultation.
Evaluation of the Application
|
Item |
Criteria to be considered |
Evaluation |
|
District Plan |
Has the road been identified in the District Plan for any specific use or as a future road corridor? |
No.
|
|
Current Level of Use |
Is the road used by members of the public for any reasons? |
The Road provides very occasional informal pedestrian access to and from the rear of both the Council Service Centre and the Wallace Memorial Rooms |
|
Does it provide the only or most convenient means of access to any existing lots? |
Yes. The Road currently provides legal access to the garage and parking at the rear of Lot 2, and legal access to Lot 3.
If the stopping is approved, the sections of road that are to be stopped and amalgamated with Lot 1, will have no impact on legal access to Lot 2 and 3.
The applicant is considering a plan to develop Lot 1 into a multi-unit or unit title development. If the stopping is approved, it will also increase that development potential.
Legal access to the Service Centre on Section 9 is from Pery Street.
|
|
|
Will stopping the road adversely affect the viability of any commercial activity or operation?
|
No commercial activities are located on land that is adjacent to, or accessed from, the Road.
|
|
|
Will any land become landlocked if the road is stopped? |
No.
|
|
|
Future Use
|
Will the road be needed to service future residential, commercial, industrial, or agricultural developments?
|
No, but if approved, stopping the road could facilitate a multi-unit residential development.
|
|
Will the road be needed in the future to connect existing roads? |
The Road is a stub of no exit road that does not offer any level of connectivity to any other legal road.
|
|
|
Does the road have current or potential value for amenity functions, e.g., walkway, cycleway, recreational access, access to conservation or heritage areas, park land? |
The Road does not provide access to any recreational area, conservation land, or to a heritage area.
The following parties have been consulted and have provided their support of the proposal to stop the Road:
· Central Otago Recreational Users Forum · Alex Mountain Bikers Club · Fish & Game Otago · CODC Parks & Reserves Manager
Walking Access New Zealand have been asked for feedback on the proposal but had not replied at the time this report was completed.
|
|
|
Does the road have potential to be utilised by the Council for any other public work either now or potentially in the future? |
The Road does not have the potential to be used for any public work but could, if partially stopped, facilitate the construction of multiple residential units on Lot 1 but still allowing future development potential of Lots 2 and 3.
|
|
|
Does the road have landscape amenity value? |
No.
|
|
|
Access to Waterbody |
Does the road provide access to a river, stream, lake or other waterbody?
|
No.
|
|
If so, there is a need to consider Section 345 of the Local Government Act, which requires that after stopping the land be vested in Council as an esplanade reserve.
|
N/A (refer above). |
|
|
Infrastructure |
Does the road currently contain any services or other infrastructure, such as electricity, telecommunications, irrigation, or other private infrastructure?
|
The road contains a wastewater manhole, and laterals that service the Wallace Memorial Rooms and the Ranfurly Pool but will not be affected by the partial road stoppings. There is no electrical or other infrastructure in the Road. |
|
Traffic Safety |
Does the use of motor vehicles on the road constitute a danger or hazard?
|
No.
|
Roading Network
As noted above, the Road is a short no exit ‘stub’ of land that adds little to no value to the roading network. While the applicants could form the Road for the purpose of accessing their intended development of Lot 1, this would only really benefit the applicants.
Public Access and Amenity Values
The Road does not provide access to any recreation area, conservation land, heritage areas or to a waterbody.
4. Financial Considerations
Council’s Roading Policy determines that the applicant is responsible for all costs associated with the partial road stopping. This includes the purchase of the land at valuation.
In consideration of the policy, the applicant (owner of Lot 1) will be required to pay for the land being amalgamated with Lot 1 at valuation, the associated valuer’s fees and all legal fees.
5. Options
Option 1 – (Recommended)
To agree to stop the unformed legal road adjacent to Lot 1 DP 8520, in two sections as shown in figure 3, subject to:
· The provisions of the Public Works Act 1981.
· Section “A” and “B” and being:
- Sold to the applicant at valuation.
- Valued at the applicant’s cost.
- Amalgamated with Lot 1 DP 8520.
· The applicant paying all legal fees.
· The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive.
Advantages:
· The income received can be used to address public roading issues.
· Recognises the provisions of Council’s Roading Policy.
· Recognises the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981.
Disadvantages:
· None, as the partial road stopping still leaves enough useable unformed Road for current or future roading purposes.
Option 2
To not agree to partially stop sections of the unformed legal road adjacent to Lot 1 DP 8520.
Advantages:
· None, as the partial road stoppings are not required for current or future roading purposes.
Disadvantages:
· Additional income will not be available to address public roading issues.
· Does not recognise that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of Council’s Roading Policy.
· Does not recognise that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Public Works act 1981.
6. Compliance
|
Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions |
Road stopping applications are governed by Council’s Roading Policy, and the:
- Public Works Act 1981, or the, - Local Government Act 1974.
Private road stoppings promote the economic wellbeing of the community by generating income from the disposal of land that is held (but not required) for roading purposes.
|
|
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc. |
Council’s Road Stopping Policy applies to the application.
Consideration of this policy has ensured that the appropriate statutory process, being to stop the road in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981.
|
|
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts |
No sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts are related to the recommendation to stop the Road.
|
|
Risks Analysis |
There are no risks to Council associated with the recommended option.
|
|
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external) |
The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered, with none of the criteria being met or exceeded.
|
7. Next Steps
1. Stopping approved or declined by the Council
2. Applicant advised of the council’s decision on release of the resolution
3. Relevant Contractors & Suppliers Engaged December 2024
Nil
|
|
24.14.6 Update on School and Community Speed Limits
Doc ID: 1994854
|
Report Author: |
Holly Laverick, Roading Asset Engineer Quinton Penniall, Infrastructure Manager |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure |
1. Purpose
To provide an update on Central Otago District Council’s progress regarding School and Community speed limits, following the introduction of the new Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2024, which came into effect on 30 October 2024.
|
That the report be received.
|
Background
Since 2021, Central Otago District Council (CODC) has reviewed and updated speed limits across the district, to prioritise road-user safety and address community concerns.
This work included transitioning to the National Speed Limit Register (NSLR) in 2022, which replaced the bylaw process as the legal mechanism for setting speed limits. 82 targeted updates to speed limits were made, reflecting both technical/safety assessments and community feedback.
In 2023, CODC developed a draft Speed Management Plan (SMP), which focussed on tailored solutions for school and community speed zones. Public consultation was conducted from December 2023 to February 2024, and the proposal received strong community support. Following hearings in April 2024, the Speed Management Plan was finalised by Council, and later approved by the New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA).
Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2024
Prior to final NSLR certification (which makes speed limits legal and enforceable), the Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2024 (the Rule) was introduced. This has had serious implications for Council’s approach to speed management.
The Rule invalidated all Speed Management Plans that had not been implemented prior to 30 October 2024. Therefore, although the proposed speed limit changes aligned with the technical standards of the rule, they were no longer valid due to the planned implementation date of 15 November 2024.
The new rule also requires all speed limit changes implemented since 1 January 2020 to be reassessed against updated criteria and reversed if they are no longer compliant.
An assessment of speed limit changes since 1 January 2020 has been undertaken which found only one non-compliant change. The permanent 30 km/h speed limit on Gilling Place for Goldfields School is required to be replaced with a static variable 30 km/h limit, operational only during school hours. At all other times the speed is 50km/h. This reversal will come into effect as of 1st May 2025.
School speed limits can still be implemented under the Rule and are planned for the start of the new school year in January 2025. However, amendments are required to comply with the rule. This includes the location of the signs, and alteration of operating hours. The updated speed limits have been submitted to NZTA for director approval, using an Alternative Method Statement (attached). Once director approval is received, installation of the signage can occur.
Tarras, Roxburgh,
Alexandra Primary and St Gerards schools have school gates adjacent to State
Highways. Due to this, speed limit changes will be implemented in collaboration
with NZTA to ensure consistency.
Future Requirements
As a result of the Rule, implementation of the proposed local road speed limit changes in the 2024 Speed Management Plan will require consultation to be repeated in 2025. New consultation requirements will need to be met, including a minimum consultation period of 6 weeks (increased from 4) and benefit-cost assessments for each individual speed limit change. No consultation can be undertaken prior to May 2025.
Appendix 1 - Alternative Method Proposal: CODC School Speed Limits.pdf ⇩
|
|
24.14.7 Cromwell Aerodrome - Medical Helipad
Doc ID: 1991558
|
Report Author: |
Helen Giles, Property and Facilities Officer (Cromwell) |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure |
1. Purpose
To inform the Council regarding the proposal from the Cromwell Lions Club to establish a medical helipad at the Cromwell Aerodrome.
|
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
In February 2024, the Cromwell Lions Club approached Council with the request to establish a medical helipad at the Cromwell Aerodrome.
The Aerodrome is designated for airport purposes under the District Plan and a medical helipad is considered within the scope of this designation. Any further approvals and/or consents required would be the responsibility of the Cromwell Lions Club.
Currently the emergency helicopter lands on the grass at the northern end of the Cromwell air strip near Ripponvale Road. Patients are then prepared for their helicopter travel in the rear of the ambulance and transferred to the helicopter by gurney over the grass and uneven surface.
The preferred location for the helipad is off Ord Road, utilising an existing gate and in an area that will not interfere with the current hangar sites or refuelling facility and has no future development planned. The gate is only used by the fuel company and so access will be maintained for whenever emergency vehicle access is required. In addition, as this is a short distance from the refuelling facility, this enables helicopters to refuel easily, so they are prepared for their everchanging operational demands.
Figure 1: Preferred location for medical helipad at the Cromwell Aerodrome
The space required would be approximately 28m x 12m and would include a 12m diameter helipad and a turning pad for an ambulance. (Appendix 1.)
Council have engaged with the owners of the refuelling facility and the user group of hangar owners at the aerodrome, and both are supportive of the helipad.
Council would enter into a Licence to Occupy with the Lions Club for the land required and utilisation of the existing access.
The helipad would be established at no cost to Council. All costs including any power connection that may be required would be covered by the Lions Club. They would also be responsible for any ongoing maintenance work and the associated costs.
The facility would be for medical helicopters only to ensure it is available when it is needed. It will be clearly coloured as per aviation rules to identify this to any pilots.
The next step is that the Lions Club will seek funding for the helipad and then a licence to occupy will be issued prior to any work commencing.
Appendix 1 - Medical Helipad Draft Plan 16 April 2024.pdf ⇩
|
|
24.14.8 Draft District Grass Verge Policy
Doc ID: 1986892
|
Report Author: |
Gordon Bailey, Parks and Recreation Manager |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
David Scoones, Group Manager – Community Experience |
1. Purpose of Report
To approve a district wide grass verge policy
|
That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Adopts the Central Otago District Council Grass Verge Policy. C. Authorises the Chief Executive to do what is necessary to give effect to this reolution. |
2. Background
A number of years ago, the Teviot Valley Community Board (the Board) resolved that Council should mow the grass verges within the township of Roxburgh and Lake Roxburgh Village. Despite extensive searching of files, the exact decision, and reasons for it cannot be found.
Roxburgh was the only township within the district that had verges mowed other than verges that are adjacent to Council owned land.
At its March 2024 meeting the Board resolved the following
Moved: Dalley
Seconded: Jessop
That the Teviot Valley Community Board
A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.
B. The Board ceases to fund the mowing verges in Roxburgh and redistributes the budget across other costs centres within the open spaces contract area. And that Council is asked to develop a grass verge policy for the district.
3. Discussion
While it is acknowledged that once a service such verge mowing has been undertaken within a community it can be a challenge to reverse the decision as it could be seen as a reduction in services to ratepayers. In Roxburgh the vast majority of residents have undertaken the maintenance of their verge following the Boards decision earlier in the year not to continue mowing them.
The majority of Councils in New Zealand have policies relating to grass verge maintenance responsibilities. Appendix 1 outlines the draft Verge policy for the district.
The draft policy deals with verge mowing and clearly outlines that the adjacent resident is encouraged to mow the verge outside their property.
An Ombudsman case – W28151 recommended that Councils should have a verge policy. This decision is outlined below. Note the name of the Council subject to the complaint was withheld.
The complainant, an elderly widow, approached the Council several times without result for
assistance maintaining the berm outside her property. She was paying $20 per fortnight to a
private contractor to undertake the work and she submitted that it was unreasonable to
expect her to spend this amount maintaining Council property.
The Council advised the Ombudsman that it did not have a berm maintenance policy with
universal application throughout the city. However Council officers were sympathetic to the
complainant’s concerns, and undertook to put the issue before the appropriate Council
Committee.
The Committee considered the matter at two meetings, and the complainant and other
members of the public were permitted to speak. It then formulated a policy which recognised
that most residents voluntarily mowed their berm areas within the road reserve. However the
Committee resolved that where residents were unwilling or unable to mow the berm areas the Council would undertake the mowing on the basis of up to four rough cuts a year, so that the berm would not become a hazard to traffic or pedestrian movement. It also decided to
monitor and review the operation of the policy to determine whether there might be some
requirement to make provision for special cases. It seemed that this policy was a reasonable
one, as well as being very similar to the practice the Ombudsman understood had been
adopted by most local authorities. Accordingly, the complainant was advised that the
Ombudsman’s enquiries had led to the development of a policy which should help alleviate her difficulties and the investigation was discontinued.
As stated above residents in Roxburgh have only recently had their verge mowing ceased the draft policy proposes considering on a case-by-case basis Council may undertake verge mowing up to twice per year in Roxburgh only.
This option is not available to the rest of the district as residents have never had their verge mowed and rolling this option out across the district could result in many applications and additional cost.
The policy notes that some residents may be entitled to a subsidy from the Ministry of Social Development towards upkeep of their section.
Landscaping other than Council approved Tree planting on verges will be managed through the Councils Roading Bylaw.
4. Financial Considerations
The draft policy is confirming the status quo for the district. Currently Council does not maintain any grass verges outside residential properties except for those outside Council owned or managed properties.
Until the start of this financial year the Teviot Valley ratepayer was contributing $26,000 annually to mow the grass verges in Roxburgh with many getting no direct benefit. It is also noted not every street has grass verges, and that some are more difficult to maintain than others.
If adopted the policy may result in some additional mowing within the Roxburgh township. The extent of this is not expected to be significant with costs being monitored to ensure they can be managed within exiting grass maintenance budgets.
5. Options
Option 1
Council adopts the grass verge policy for the district.
Advantages:
· Clear policy on verge mowing is developed that can be applied across the entire district.
· The status quo for verge mowing is retained across the district.
Disadvantages:
· There are no perceived disadvantages from re-confirming with a policy the status quo concerning verge mowing.
Option 2
Council does not adopt the grass verge policy for the district.
Advantages:
· There are no perceived disadvantages from not re-confirming with a policy the status quo concerning verge mowing.
Disadvantages:
· Potentially need to increase rates or reduce other services to balance the open spaces maintenance contract across the district.
6. Compliance
|
Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions |
This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by determining the priority spending of budgets within the Teviot Ward to deliver the most appropriate and affordable levels of service.
|
|
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc. |
Decision is required to inform the 2024/34 Annual Plan.
|
|
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts |
Ceasing mowing verges is considered more sustainable as the decision to when and how the verges will be maintained sit with the adjacent resident.
|
|
Risks Analysis |
The decision does not trigger Councils risk matrix.
|
|
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external) |
This decision does not trigger Council significance and Engagement policy.
|
7. Next Steps
Following the Councils adoption of this policy it will be notified to the community by Councils media channels and loaded to Councils website.
.
Appendix 1 - Draft Verge Policy ⇩
|
|
24.14.9 Extension of Temporary Alcohol Restriction Zone
Doc ID: 1964420
|
Report Author: |
Alix Crosbie, Senior Strategy Advisor Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Dylan Rushbrook, Group Manager - Community Vision |
1. Purpose of Report
To consider consulting on the draft Alcohol Restrictions in Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw and Statement of Proposal as updated with the inclusion of the Teviot Valley and Merino Shears weekend.
|
That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Directs staff to consult on renewing the Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw, with the inclusion of the Teviot Valley in the Blossom Festival Temporary Alcohol Restriction Zone; and a new Temporary Alcohol Restriction Zone for the Merino Shears weekend. C. Appoints two members to hear submissions if required. D. Accepts that a bylaw is the most appropriate mechanism for addressing the issue. |
2. Background
A report was presented to the September 2024 Council meeting relating to the Alcohol Restriction in Public Places Bylaw.
In the discussion, Councillor Sally Feinerman raised issues of alcohol-related behaviour and nuisance in the Teviot Valley during the Blossom Festival weekend; including commentary from Police that there could be value in extending the existing Temporary Alcohol Restriction Zone to the Roxburgh Town Centre.
Members asked staff to investigate the options and return with a proposal to extend the alcohol-free area.
3. Discussion
Staff reached out to Sergeant Adam Elder of the New Zealand Police in order to substantiate the evidence base for an extension of the bylaw. The following additional information was received:
· “…each Blossom Festival there is a contingent of vehicle enthusiasts who travel through from Southland, Dunedin, and Balclutha. Usually they meet at Rae’s Junction and travel through Otago Lakes in various contingents. All are usually consuming alcohol, and they cause nuisance in the various towns they stop in with disorder type incidents. [Police] can only enforce the Liquor ban when they reach Alexandra and Cromwell.”
· “[Police] believe that there would be significant benefit to extend the liquor ban through the Teviot Valley to include Millers Flat, Ettrick and Roxburgh for the liquor ban for future Blossom Festivals.”
· “…having a similar liquor ban period in place in Alexandra over the Merino Shears which is usually the weekend after blossom festival would also be beneficial to kerb antisocial behaviour which arises from those attending the event preloading in the stadium carpark and stadium tavern carpark.”
Police also sent images to help formulate the evidence base for the bylaw. These have been redacted of private information and attached.
Extension of existing alcohol-free areas
Staff investigated three options for the extension of the alcohol restriction zone for the Blossom Festival weekend.
· Extension of the Alcohol Restriction Zone individual to the relevant townships
The first option is extension of the alcohol restriction zone to include the Millers Flat, Ettrick, and Roxburgh townships. This would involve mapping out the boundaries of each township and including them in the bylaw.
This would mean Police are able to act in the townships themselves, but may have a consequence of pushing large numbers of vehicles and people to roadside areas between townships – potentially causing an additional safety issue.
· Blanket approach
The second option considered was a blanket approach to the wider district over these time periods. Although potentially easier to administer, this was ruled out as it would unnecessarily impact people in the Maniātoto area, limiting their freedom without sufficient cause.
Staff felt this to be an overreach of Council’s regulatory authority.
· Corridor approach
The third option considered, and recommended preferred option, is to extend the alcohol restriction zone from the Central Otago district border with the Clutha district along a 4km wide ‘corridor’ that follows the State Highway (stretching 2km either side).
This corridor would begin at the edge of Raes Junction and follow State Highway 8 to meet the existing alcohol restriction zone boundary at Alexandra. All publicly owned land within this corridor is included in the bylaw.
This option has been updated into the Bylaw, Schedules, and Statement of Proposal.
Merino Shears Weekend
Merino Shears is a two-day annual event, usually taking place on Friday and Saturday. Staff have worked up an option for consultation based on the approach to the Blossom Festival weekend. This option has been updated into the Bylaw, Schedules, and Statement of Proposal.
A new Schedule 4 has been added to the Bylaw, proposing a temporary Alcohol Restriction Zone from 12:00am (midnight) on the Thursday before the start of Merino Shears weekend to 12am (midnight) on the Saturday of the Merino Shears weekend.
The same map of Alexandra has been used as in Schedules 1-3.
4. Financial Considerations
Costs associated with updating the bylaw are budgeted for and will be combined with the Class 4 Gambling and Board Venue Policy and Psychoactive Substances Policy reviews where possible.
There are costs relating to the additional signage at the new locations.
5. Options
Option 1 – (Recommended)
Approve the draft Alcohol Restrictions in Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw and Statement of Proposal for public consultation as updated with the inclusion of the Teviot Valley and Merino Shears weekend.
Advantages:
· Continue to proactively manage the potential for alcohol-related harm in public places.
· Continue to provide Police with an enforcement mechanism for alcohol related crime and disorder.
· Addresses known areas of concern identified by law enforcement and community representation.
Disadvantages:
· Some of the community may believe this is an unnecessary limitation on people’s rights and freedoms.
Option 2
Approve the draft Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw and Statement of Proposal for public consultation, without the inclusion of the Teviot Valley or Merino Shears weekend.
Advantages:
· No increased restriction for those who view the bylaw as an unnecessary limitation on people’s rights and freedoms.
Disadvantages:
· Does not address known areas of concern identified by law enforcement and community representation.
6. Compliance
|
Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions |
This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by minimising alcohol related harm and supporting local law enforcement.
|
|
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc. |
This decision aligns with other plans, including the sale and supply of alcohol and other regulatory functions. The additions are consistent with the previous Bylaw. |
|
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts |
No considerations.
|
|
Risks Analysis |
There are health and safety risks associated with anti-social behaviour. This decision seeks to minimise the risk. |
|
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external) |
Specific consultation requirements to be followed under section 147 of the Local Government Act 2002. |
7. Next Steps
Community consultation will be undertaken in accordance with the Local Government Act. Following consultation, a report will be provided to Council requesting adoption – or other actions as determined by the feedback received.
Appendix 1 - Blossom Festival weekend Teviot Valley images received via Police ⇩
Appendix 2 - Updated proposed Bylaw ⇩
Appendix 3 - Updated schedules ⇩
Appendix 4 - Updated Statement of Proposal ⇩
Appendix 5 - Previous report ⇩
|
|
24.14.10 Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024 - Council Briefing
Doc ID: 1992041
|
Report Author: |
Ann Rodgers, Principal Policy Planner |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure |
1. Purpose
To inform the Council of the process regarding applications accepted under the Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024.
|
That the report be received.
|
2. Background
The Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024 was introduced by the Government with the aim of making the approvals process faster and more efficient for a wide range of regionally and nationally significant infrastructure and development projects, including housing developments and renewable energy.
It’s similar to the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020, with eligibility and the types of authorisations that can be issued broadened, reflecting the emphasis of the Government on growth and development.
The Fast-Track Approvals Bill was released on 7 March 2024, when it had its first reading. Submissions closed 19th April 2024, the Environment Committee received approximately 27,000 written submissions from individuals and organisations on the draft Bill. It had a second reading on 13 November 2024. The intention is for the Bill to receive Royal Assent by the end of the year following the third reading. There may be some minor changes to the Bill, however any substantive changes are not expected.
This briefing is based on the recommendation from the Environment Committee that informed the second reading.
3. Discussion
The purpose of the Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024 is:
“… to facilitate the delivery of infrastructure and development projects with significant regional or national benefits”
The proposed system will be a ‘one-stop-shop’ for resource consents, notices of requirement, and certificates of compliance under the Resource Management Act (1991) and approvals required under the Wildlife Act 1953; Conservation Act 1987; Reserves Act 1977; Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1983; Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014; Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012; Crown Minerals Act 1991; Public Works Act 1981; and the Fisheries Act 1996.
Panel
All decisions are made by an independent Panel. The Panel Convener role is an Environment Court or High Court Judge appointed by the Minister (Infrastructure) and appoints a Panel made up of up to four people including one person nominated by the local authority.
Members of the Panel must collectively have:
· Knowledge, Skills and Experience relevant to the approvals sought and
· Expertise in environmental matters, and
· At least one member must be suitably qualified in te ao Māori and Māori Development.
Applications
The list of accepted Fast-Track projects was released on 6 October 2024. In total 149 projects were accepted for inclusion, two in the Central Otago District:
Bendigo – Ophir Gold Mining Project: Matakanui Gold Limited (a wholly owned subsidiary of Santana Minerals Limited); Open Pit and underground gold mine on the Bendigo and Ardgour Stations.
Remarkables Ski Area Upgrade and Doolans Expansion Project: Upgrade the Remarkables existing infrastructure and expand the existing Remarkables Ski Area into the adjacent Doolans Basin.
Opportunities to Comment prior to Lodgement
Prior to the lodging of a substantive application for a project on the list, the applicant must consult with:
· Relevant Iwi authorities, hapu and treaty settlement entities
· Relevant local authorities
· Relevant administering agencies
Opportunity for Comments on an Application
Once the application is lodged the Panel is required to invite comments from the following that are to be provided within 20 working days (no extensions):
· The relevant local authorities; and
· The relevant iwi authorities; and
· A Treaty settlement entity relevant to the listed project, The owners of the land on which the project is to be undertaken and the land adjacent to that land; and
· The occupiers of the land on which the project is to be undertaken and the land adjacent to that land unless, after reasonable inquiry, an occupier cannot be identified; and
· Ministers of the Crown responsible for the following portfolios:
· Arts, Culture and Heritage; Climate Change; Conservation; Defence; Education; Housing; Energy and Resources; Infrastructure; Land Information; Local Government; Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti; Transport; Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations; Urban Development; The Director-General of Conservation; and any requiring authority that has a designation on land on which the project is to be undertaken, or on land that is adjacent to the land on which the project is to be undertaken.
· A panel may also invite written comments from any other person the panel considers appropriate.
Once comments have been received the applicant will have 5 working days to consider and respond.
Further Information
The Panel may at any time prior to making a decision direct the EPA to request further information from the applicant and other relevant parties including the local authority.
Draft Conditions
Before the Panel grants approval they must direct the EPA to circulate draft conditions to the local authority, inviting comments.
Panel Decision-Making
The Panel is required to consider the applications, and any written comments received giving weight to the following (in order, it’s a hierarchy):
1. The purpose of the Fast-Track Approvals legislation.
2. The purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 set out in section 5 of that Act (“…to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources”).
3. Section 6 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (matters of national importance)
4. Section 7 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (other matters)
5. The provisions of any of the following, if relevant, made under the Resource Management Act 1991:
§ any national direction:
§ operative and proposed policy statements and plans (District Plan):
§ iwi management plans:
§ Mana Whakahono ā Rohe:
§ joint management agreements;
§ the relevant provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 or any other legislation that direct decision making under the Resource Management Act 1991.
The decision must be made within 25 working days.
Hearings/Appeal
There is no requirement to hold a hearing and no right of appeal other than to the High Court on points of law.
Cost Recovery
Local authorities may recover from an applicant the actual and reasonable costs incurred by the local authority in performing or exercising its functions, duties, or powers in relation to the relevant referral application or substantive application.
At this time we have limited information on the two projects in Central Otago. As indicated above the Bill is yet to be finalised and may be subject to further modifications prior to Royal Assent. Once the legislation has been enacted, we will have limited control over the process and timeframes other than to respond when requested.
Nil
|
|
24.14.11 Application to Remit Rates on Intra Boundary Property
Doc ID: 2000330
|
Report Author: |
Paul Morris, Chief Financial Officer |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Business Support |
1. Purpose of Report
To consider remitting rates on a property that spans the boundary between Central Otago District Council and Clutha District Council.
|
That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to remit $859.68 of rates for this property being all rates except for the General Rate $4.95 and the Uniform Annual General Charge of $121.58. |
2. Background
The property owner has a property on the Tapanui-Raes Junction Road (SH 90). Most of the property is in the Clutha District Council area and a small block of land approximately 1.5Ha sits on the Central Otago District Council (CODC) side of the district boundary.
The property attracts $986.21 in rates from CODC and the owner of the property has requested rates be remitted.
3. Discussion
Under normal circumstances CODC district boundaries should follow title boundaries to ensure this type of situation does not arise.
The property inside the Council’s district boundary is 1.5Ha and is part of a larger 9.3678Ha property mostly within the Clutha District Council. The following highlights the issue (the green line represents the district boundary).
The rates applicable to the Councils land portion of 1.5Ha is $986.21 as detailed in the table below.
Most of the costs are fixed ($969.26). The ratepayer considers Clutha District to be its district and pays over $16,000 in rates to that Council. The ratepayer does not directly pay Clutha District Council rates on the 1.5Ha that forms part of the Central Otago District Council area but will be paying fixed charges on the entire title.
CODC’s rates remission policy does not specifically deal with situations like this but it does have a general objectives designed to:
· Mitigate the effects of anomalies and inequities in its rating system, i.e. fairness and equity, i.e. economic well-being
· Assist new and existing businesses to increase their contribution to district employment, i.e. social and economic well-being
· Assist conservation of natural, historic and cultural resources, i.e. environmental and cultural well-being specific objectives are set out in each element of the policy.
It is considered that the policy generally applies in this case to mitigate an inequity in the rating system in that it appears unfair to levy rates in this case.
A further consideration to discuss is in relation to participation at the local body elections. The ratepayer currently could be classified as a ratepayer elector and request to participate in Central Otago District Council elections.
It would seem appropriate given that representation without taxation would be unfair, some contribution towards this Council is appropriate. It would follow that the General rate and Uniform Annual General Charge would be acceptable and highly appropriate.
4. Financial Considerations
The level of rates in question here is $986.21. It is not significant and any decision the Council makes, due to the unusual set of circumstances, is unlikely to be repeated at any significant level.
5. Options
Option 1 – (Recommended)
Remit all rates apart from the General Rate of $4.95 and the Uniform Annual General Charge of $121.58. This would mean a remission of $859.68.
Advantages:
· Retaining the general rates portion represents the ratepayer’s ability to participate in Council’s election process if desired. This ensures representation is coupled to a contribution towards the business of Council
· The unusual circumstances mean this does not set a wide-ranging precedent
· While not specifically detailed in the remissions policy, it does comply generally with the principles contained within it.
Disadvantages:
· Reduction of rating income of $859.68.
Option 2
Remit the full amount of $986.21.
Advantages:
· Fairness to the ratepayer whose main part of their property sits in another district which they consider to be their district and are therefore unlikely to use.
· While not specifically detailed in the remissions policy, it does comply generally with the principles contained within it.
Disadvantages:
· Does not consider the potential for the ratepayer to participate in future electoral processes within the Central Otago District Council
· Reduction of rating income of $986.21.
Option 3
Do not remit any rates.
Advantages:
· There is no reduction in levels of income.
Disadvantages:
· There is a degree of unfairness in this option as the ratepayer is being asked to pay rates on an effectively landlocked (from a boundary perspective) block of land.
· This option does not give effect to the principles of the remission policy in that there is an anomaly in our rating.
6. Compliance
|
Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions |
This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by ensuring anomalies in the rating system are dealt with while maintaining a contribution to the business of Council coupled with the ability to participate in Local Elections.
|
|
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc. |
Yes. The decision gives effect to the principles contained in the rates remission policy
|
|
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts |
N/A
|
|
Risks Analysis |
Due to the specific circumstances of the decision it is considered low risk.
|
|
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external) |
N/A
|
7. Next Steps
The ratepayer will be informed of the Council’s decision.
Nil
|
|
24.14.12 Manuherekia Valley Community Hub
Doc ID: 2000424
|
Report Author: |
Tara Bates, Property Officer |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure |
1. Purpose of Report
To consider additional Council funding support for the Manuherekia Valley Community Hub project.
|
That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves additional Council funding in 2025-34 Long-term Plan for the Manuherekia Valley Community Hub to cover the shortfall of up to $1,600,000 in order to complete the project. The shortfall to be funded either through debt or from reserves. C. Agrees that another report come back to the Board and Council, once construction costs and shortfall for the Hub project have been confirmed.
|
2. Background
Project Update
A report was presented to the Vincent Community Board in October 2023 and to Council in December 2023 to provide an update on progress with the Hub. A copy of the report is attached as Appendix 1 which gives a more detailed background of the project.
The design for the building has now progressed and plans are ready for tender and building consent. A copy of the completed floor plan and elevations are attached as Appendix 2.
An updated quantity surveyors estimate was obtained in 2023 and the estimated total cost of the project including landscaping and internal fit out is $5,200,000.
The Manuherekia Valley Community Trust (MVCT) has to date secured $1,735,000 confirmed funding for the project including a $600,000 grant from the Bob Turnbull Trust and a contribution from Council of $1,000,000.
Central Lakes trust (CLT), Otago Community Trust (OCT) and Lotteries have indicated they will support the project up to about $1,900,000 which leaves a total shortfall of around $1,600,000.
Tenders for a construction partner for the project are due to be released in December 2024 which will confirm construction costs. This will allow funding applications to major funders CLT, OCT and Lotteries to be submitted in February 2025.
Construction is scheduled to start in late 2025 with any further delay likely to result in price escalation.
Additional funding
A report was presented to the Vincent Community Board in December 2024, to consider additional Council funding support for the project to allow the building to be completed at the end of 2026.
The Board resolved the following:
24.11.3
That the Vincent Community Board
A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.
B. Recommends to Council to support additional Council funding for the Manuherekia Valley Community Hub to cover the shortfall of up to $1,600,000 in order to complete the project. The shortfall to be funded either through debt or from reserves.
3. Discussion
The current shortfall for the project is expected to be reduced significantly over the next six months as further fundraising initiatives are progressed by the MVCT.
The MVCT are very committed to continue with their fundraising efforts with applications to other funders, securing more corporate sponsorship and community donations and holding multiple fundraising events.
Proceeds from the sale of the old Omakau Hall will also go towards the Hub project and the Hall is expected to go on the market in the next few weeks.
4. Financial Considerations
A capital budget of $4,700,000 for the construction cost of the Hub building is currently included in year one of the Draft Long-term Plan 2025-34 which will be offset by capital donations of $3,700,000. Council’s budget contribution is currently $1,000,000 which was approved in the Long-term Plan 2021-31 after public consultation.
The Vincent Community Board recommends to Council to support the proposal for an additional financial contribution of up to $1,600,000 to the Hub to be either debt funded over 25 years or funded from general reserves.
If Council approves the Board’s recommendation additional funding will be included in the 2025-34 Long-term plan draft consultation document.
5. Options
Option 1 – (Recommended)
1. Approve additional funding for the Manuherekia Valley Hub to cover the shortfall of up to $1,600,000 in order to complete the project, to be either funded through debt or from general reserves.
2. Agrees that another report come back to the Board and Council, once construction costs and shortfall for the Hub project have been confirmed.
Advantages:
· If Council approve funding to cover the shortfall for the Hub project this will prevent further delay due to lack of funding and prevent additional construction price increases.
· The MVCT will continue to fundraise for the project and reduce any projected shortfall.
Disadvantages:
· Additional budget
Option 2
Decline to support additional funding for the Manuherekia Valley Hub to cover the shortfall of up to $1,600,000 in order to complete the project, to be either funded through debt or from general reserves.
Advantages:
· With no further funding from Council no further debt will be required or use of general reserves.
Disadvantages:
· The Hub project may be delayed due to lack of funding which is likely to result in construction price increases.
· The deterioration of current facilities in Omakau and the need for a multipurpose facility ion Omakau was identified in the Needs Assessment and Feasibility Study for Omakau and Manuherikia Community Spaces and the Hub project is supported by Council.
· Declining any further Council funding may jeopardise the future of the Hub project and risk reputational damage to Council considering what funding has been approved for other facilities in the district.
6. Compliance
|
Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions |
This project promotes the social and cultural wellbeing of the community, in the present and for the future by: - developing a multi-use facility that will bring interest groups together and better utilise an existing community space (the reserve), and rationalise separate exclusive-use facilities into one - the development of this concept has been community-led, and the proposed management structure provides opportunity for the community to invigorate use.
|
|
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc. |
This project is consistent with the Reserves Act 1977; Sustainability Strategy (ensuring our community facilities are fit for purpose and cost effective); Community Outcomes; and the 2014 Omakau Community Plan.
|
|
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts |
Collaboration of individual community facilities saves on the duplication of both structures and volunteer load. - A newly constructed building will be better insulated and designed to maximize efficient resource use and energy-efficient systems. - This community has grown in recent years and a multi-use facility in their own town will enable the development of locally-focused events and initiatives.
|
|
Risks Analysis |
There is a risk that potential contractors pricing may be influenced by Council’s support for more funding for the project.
|
|
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external) |
This decision has no current financial implications so does not meet any significance thresholds.
If the Board and Council support the proposal for additional funding for the Hb project then a second report will be presented in February 2025 once construction costs have been confirmed. A decision will then be made whether to approve additional budget for the Hub project in the LTP 2025-34. At that time the level of funding approved may mean it will be required to be included in the LTP consultation document.
|
7. Next Steps
· 10 Dec 2024 Tender released for Hub construction partner
· 18 Dec 2024 Council considers approval of the Board’s recommendation to support additional Council funding for the project
· If Council approve the additional funding it will be included as an item in the LTP consultation document.
· LTP consultation commences mid 2025
· Late Jan 2025 Tenders close and preferred construction partner identified
· LTP consultation closes mid April 2025
Appendix 1 - VCB20231017 Report.pdf ⇩
Appendix 2 - Manuherekia Valley Community Hub 2024.pdf ⇩
|
|
8 Mayor’s Report
Doc ID: 2004506
|
Report Author: |
Tamah Alley, Mayor |
1. Purpose
To consider an update from Her Worship the Mayor.
|
That the Council receives the report.
|
First up – Mayors Taskforce For Jobs, or MTFJ. Tim was a huge advocate of this and I have used the resources and funding from him in my previous role to give some local young people a leg up in the world. I am lucky enough now to be able to support Craig Gilchrist, (and Nick Lanham) in his mahi as he seeks to connect young people and employers in our area. For many school leavers and people in their early 20’s, finding work is easy. For some it is not, due to a variety of factors, many beyond their control. Things like – how do you learn how to drive if you don’t have a parent who can teach you or access to a car? How do you organise a CV if English wasn’t your strong point? And where do you go for advice and help when it feels like everyone else has their life path mapped out and you’ve got no clue? It is awesome to have this programme here connecting some dots, and I will remain a huge advocate for it into the future.
I have had the delight of hosting not one but TWO citizenship ceremonies. They are an amazing celebration of welcoming new Kiwis to our fair shores. For many people it has been quite the journey, and I love reading their stories of how they came to be in Central Otago. I’ve also received quite a bit of feedback, including third hand, of just how special of an occasion it is for our new citizens and how much they loved the whole event. I think having local primary school kids along to help us all sing the national anthem is the cream on the pikelets.
After over a decade of work we finally got to open the new Alexandra Library. What an incredibly fresh, modern feel it has to it now. I love the little details, like the book nooks, work of art lampshades and the power points on the couches, that make this a standout space and I’m sure many people will be making the most of the new air con there over the summer. Thanks so much to the team for their work on this – what an achievement.
I attended a public meeting in Ranfurly where information was presented on the proposed solar farm. This was incredibly interesting – I learnt so much from the presenter. This is a very hot topic in the Maniototo currently and I suspect when submissions close tomorrow we will have received a lot – for, against or otherwise.
We held a workshop last week looking at what the finances were starting to shape up for into the LTP consultation, and needless to say they don’t necessarily make for spectacular reading. There will be some very difficult decisions coming for Council (including today) as to what our priorities are going into the next Long Term Plan, and what might have to wait or not proceed. We signed up to make the best decisions with and on behalf of the community, weighed against the cost and this will not be an easy time ahead.
And on that note, I would like to say thank you to our entire Council team for your efforts this year. To Peter and his team, I recognise the time, enthusiasm, extra hours, possibly quite a bit of extra stress and dedication you have all given to council business over the last 12 months. You have all earned a well deserved break with family and friends, though I acknowledge many of you won’t actually get this as you will be busy writing the document and crunching the numbers for the LTP.
To you all, our team. Thank you so much for the fun we have had over the past 12 months, and especially for the support you have all given me since I stepped into this role. You are the best team to work with. I enjoy your passion, commitment, and energy you bring to the role, even when it’s hard and we are choosing the best option out of a bunch of impossible ones. There has probably never been a more challenging time to be involved in local government politics, and just when we get a steer on somethings, the rules from above change. I hope you all manage to get some R&R in over the festive season, god knows you’re going to need it heading into the LTP.
Merry Christmas, be safe, I can’t wait to see you all again. (Some of you next year and some of you tomorrow!)
Nil
|
|
9 Community Board Minutes
24.14.14 Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 9 December 2024
Doc ID: 2004441
|
Report Author: |
Sarah Reynolds, Governance Support Officer |
|
Reviewed and authorised by: |
Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Business Support |
|
That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 9 December 2024 be noted.
|
Appendix 1 - Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 9 December 2024
|
9 December 2024 |
MINUTES OF A mEETING OF THE
Cromwell Community
Board
HELD IN THE Cromwell Service
Centre, 42 The Mall, Cromwell
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Monday, 9 December 2024 COMMENCING AT
2.06 pm
PRESENT: Ms A Harrison, Mr B Scott, Cr S Browne, Cr C Laws, Mr W Sanford, Cr Gillespie (via Microsoft Teams)
IN ATTENDANCE: T Alley (Mayor), P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), S Righarts (Group Manager - Business Support), D Rushbrook (Group Manager - Community Vision), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), L Webster (Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure), A Mason (Media and Marketing Manager), R Williams (Community Development Advisor), G Bailey (Parks and Recreation Manager), M Burnett (Parks Officer – Strategy/Planning), H Giles (Property and Facilities Officer - Cromwell), A Crosbie (Senior Strategy Advisor), A Rodgers (Principal Policy Planner), P Morris (Chief Financial Officer), J Remnant (Asset Management Team Leader), P Penno (Community and Engagement Manager), P Quinn (Project Manager), M Tohill (Communications Officer), W McEnteer (Governance Manager), S Reynolds (Governance Support Officer)
1 Apologies
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Laws Seconded: Sanford That apologies for lateness from Cr N Gillespie and Ms M McConnell be received and accepted. Ms McConnell did not join any part of the meeting. Carried |
2 Public Forum
Lisa Lowrey - Cromwell Early Learning Centre Inc. - potential property purchase
Ms Lowrey spoke about the opportunity offered to the Cromwell Early Learning Centre Inc. to purchase the adjacent property which would allow the centre to expand their facilities and to offer childcare for children under two, in order to better serve the current and future needs of the community. She outlined that they had undertaken a feasibility study and had approached external funders but requested some funding from council in order to complete the purchase of the site.
Ms Lowrey then responded to questions.
Paula Clark - Cromwell sports club
Ms Clark noted that the sports clubs position had not changed since they last presented to the board in February 2023. She stated that plans had not been updated since this presentation and that the club did not want to incur costs by requesting a requote on the building costs previously indicated.
Ms Clark then responded to questions.
Stephen Carruth - Lake Dunstan east side trail grant
Mr Carruth thanked the board members and Councillors for their service to the community and for the work that they undertake. However, he noted that he believed the board had made an error in giving a grant to part fund a feasibility study for a proposed bike trail along the east side of Lake Dunstan. He stated that in the current economic climate such developments should be funded by private enterprise who would benefit from such initiatives.
Note: Cr Gillespie joined the meeting at 2.31 pm.
3 Confirmation of Minutes
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Browne Seconded: Sanford That the public minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 5 November 2024 be confirmed as a true and correct record. Carried |
4 Declarations of Interest
Members were reminded of their obligations in respect of declaring any interests.
5 Reports
|
24.11.2 Cromwell and Districts Promotion Group Accountability Report 2023-2024 year activities |
|
To receive the accountability report from Cromwell and Districts Promotions Group for the 2023-2024 year activities that received a promotions grant from the Board. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Browne Seconded: Scott That the report be received. Carried |
Note: The meeting returned to public forum to allow an additional speaker to be heard.
Note: Cr Gillespie declared a conflict of interest in this item due to his membership of the Cromwell RSA.
Peter Svennson, from the Cromwell RSA
Mr Svennson spoke on behalf of the President Dennis Ryan and noted disappointment from members on some of the design features proposed in the design of the Cromwell Memorial Hall memorial gardens. He stated that they requested an inscription panel with the ‘Ode of Remembrance’ in English. He also asked with urgency that the RSA received written confirmation that this is part of the final design and asked that the group were kept informed through the remainder of the build.
|
24.11.3 Grant Budget Recommendations |
|
To consider the provision of Community Board grants and confirm the value of relevant grant budgets. It was noted that conversations with supercars are underway and are looking favourable, but there is not any further information on this proposed event that could be shared. Discussion followed on the possible inclusion of the Cromwell Sports Club development and the Cromwell Early Learning Centre Inc. purchase as consultation items in the 2025/34 draft Long-term Plan. It was noted that these items should be recommended to Council in order for them to be considered for the consultation documents that were being produced in early 2025. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Browne Seconded: Scott That the Cromwell Community Board A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Recommends to Council a total of $50,000 be allocated through the LTP budget process for Community Grants in 2025/26. C. Recommends to Council a total of $106,210 be allocated through the LTP budget process for Promotions & Event Grants in 2025/26. D. To recommend to Council that a district grant of $250,000 is included for the Cromwell Sports Club as part of the draft 2025/34 Long-term Plan. E. To recommend to Council that a potential ward grant of up to $500,000 is included for Cromwell Early Learning Centre, subject to further information around time frames and funding options, be considered as part of the draft 2025/34 Long-term Plan. Carried with Cr Gillespie abstaining on parts D and E. |
|
24.11.4 Update to the Register of Delegations for Community Boards |
|
To consider changes to the Register of Delegations as they apply to community boards. The document was approved with minor wording changes that would be edited before the report went to Council. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Gillespie Seconded: Sanford That the report be received. Carried |
|
24.11.5 Naming of Reserve in Bannockburn |
|
To consider the naming of a Local Purpose (Recreation) reserve in Bannockburn. It was noted that there had been strong community support for this naming and that from the submission period there were only two submissions received and both were favourable. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Browne Seconded: Scott That the Cromwell Community Board A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves that the local purpose (recreation) reserve land legally described as: · Lot 1 DP 452123 · Lot 2 DP 452123 · Lot 3 DP 452123 · Lot 4 DP 452123; and · The land and covered by easement instrument 10062755.1 is to be formally named “Campbell Lane”. Carried |
|
24.11.6 Cromwell Aerodrome - Medical Helipad |
|
To inform the Community Board regarding the proposal from the Cromwell Lions Club to establish a medical helipad at the Cromwell Aerodrome. It was discussed that there was a zero cost implication for council as funds had been externally raised by the Cromwell Lions Club. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Laws Seconded: Browne That the report be received. Carried |
Note: Mr Scott left the meeting at 3.26 pm and returned at 3.28 pm.
|
24.11.7 Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct |
|
To update the Board on the Unreasonable Complainant Conduct workstream and seek feedback before finalising the relevant policies in early 2025. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Sanford Seconded: Laws That the report be received. Carried |
|
24.11.8 Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024 |
|
To inform the Board of the process regarding applications submitted for the Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024 within the Central Otago district. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Sanford Seconded: Gillespie That the report be received. Carried |
Note: With permission of the meeting item 24.11.11 was heard first.
6 Mayor’s Report
|
24.11.11 Mayor's Report Her Worship the Mayor gave an update on the following: · Noted that she had enjoyed her six weeks in the role. · Attended a CODC Emergency Management exercise, and observed that it was an excellent opportunity to practise what council and external agencies might be required to undertake in a major event. · Spoke with community members and groups on the proposed developments from Santana Minerals, and on the fast-track application process and encouraged all to be informed on the matter. · Gave a report from the LGNZ conference in Wellington, noting there does seem to be more willingness from Central Government to listen to alternative ideas and promote collaboration. She also gave an update on the latest developments in water services delivery. · Noted the big topics on the table for community boards, namely the potential divestment of halls and the consultation items for the Long-term plan. · She thanked the Cromwell Community Board for their service to the community in 2024 in challenging economic times and wished all members and the Cromwell community a happy Christmas. She also encouraged everyone to do their Christmas shopping locally this year. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Sanford Seconded: Laws That the Cromwell Community Board receives the report. Carried |
|
24.11.9 Level of Service - Cromwell Buildings |
|
To consider the level of service for Cromwell buildings as part of the Long-Term Plan 2025/34 process. It was discussed that some hall bookings were not recorded as a formal hire and therefore the booking numbers recorded could be conservative. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Laws Seconded: Sanford That the Cromwell Community Board A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Recommends to Council that the following buildings are retained as budgeted in the draft Long-Term Plan 2025/34: · Tarras Hall · Cromwell Museum building Carried |
|
24.11.10 Cromwell Financial Report for the Period Ending 30 September 2024 |
|
To consider the financial performance overview as at 30 September 2024. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Laws Seconded: Browne That the report be received. Carried |
7 Chair's Report
|
24.11.12 Chair's Report |
|
The Chair gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting. · Met with members of the Tarras Community to hear an update from Sustainable Tarras and noted the communities concerns around the proposed mining activity, and their work in gathering information and reviewing the environmental impacts of the development. · Attended the AGM and end of year function for the Central Otago Principals' Association and acknowledged Wendy Bamford for her notable career in education. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Harrison Seconded: Scott That the report be received. Carried |
8 Members' Reports
|
24.11.13 Members' Reports |
|
Members gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting. Cr Gillespie reported on the following: · Gave an update on the November Council meeting and workshop. · Attended a Hearings Panel meeting. · Attended a community meeting in Tarras and commented on the problem of the fast track application process that disempowers the community to have a say. Mr Sanford reported on the following: · Attended four Christmas parties and a couple of fishing competitions. · Attended the opening for Paterson Pitts new office space in the Cromwell mall. Cr Laws reported on the following: · Attended Council Long-term Plan workshops. · Attended an Old Cromwell Meeting. · Gave an update on the November Council meeting, particularly noting the investigations underway to explore the formation of a regional entity to provide water services. · Attended the Council Christmas lunch at Orchard Gardens. · Was an regrettably an apology for the Cromwell Community House Christmas lunch for pensioners. Mr Scott reported on the following: · Noted that unfortunately he had been in Dunedin hospital for some weeks over the last few months and reported on the lack of resourcing at the hospital, stated that he believes there should not be funding cuts to the new hospital and that we should be advocating for a hospital in Central Otago. Cr Browne reported on the following: · Attended a AF8 simulation training day · Attended a Sports field workshop looking at development options for the Racecourse reserve in Cromwell. · Attended an Alexandra athletics club country meet at Molyneux Park. · Attended the Dunstan Zone Triathlon Anderson Park and noted the great facility. · Had attended many Christmas catch ups and had communicated with members of the community on a number of matters. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Laws Seconded: Browne That the report be received. Carried |
9 Status Reports
Note: Mr Sanford left the meeting at 4.39 pm and returned at 4.44 pm
Note: Edward Jolly from Jasmax joined the meeting for item 24.11.14 (via Microsoft teams) to give an update on the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve Recreation Plan.
|
24.11.14 December 2024 Governance Report |
|
To report on items of general interest, receive minutes and updates from key organisations and consider the status report updates. An update on the draft proposal on the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve was given. |
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Scott Seconded: Laws That the report be received. Carried |
|
Attachments 1 CCB Presentation - Cromwell Racecourse Reserve.pdf |
10 Date of The Next Meeting
The date of the next scheduled meeting is 14 January 2025.
Note: Mr Scott left the meeting at 5.01pm
11 Resolution to Exclude the Public
|
Committee Resolution Moved: Browne Seconded: Laws That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject matter of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
Carried |
The public were excluded at 5.01 pm and the meeting closed at 5.03 pm.
|
18 December 2024 |
10 Date of the Next Meeting
The date of the next scheduled meeting is 29 January 2025.
|
18 December 2024 |
11 Resolution to Exclude the Public
