Notice is hereby given that a Meeting of the Policy Review Committee will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Wednesday, 1 April 2015 10.30am Council Chambers |
Policy Review Committee Agenda
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Rodney Dobson |
|
|
|
|
Councillors |
Lyall Bailey |
|
|
Stuart Baird |
|
|
Brian Dillon |
|
|
John Douglas |
|
|
Paul Duffy |
|
|
Bruce Ford |
|
|
George Harpur |
|
|
Julie Keast |
|
|
Ebel Kremer |
|
|
Gavin Macpherson |
|
|
Neil Paterson |
|
|
Mayor Gary Tong |
|
IN ATTENDANCE
Chief Executive |
Steve Ruru |
|
Committee Advisor |
Debbie Webster |
|
|
Contact Telephone: 0800 732 732 Postal Address: PO Box 903, Invercargill 9840 Email: emailsdc@southlanddc.govt.nz Website: www.southlanddc.govt.nz
Full agendas are available on Council’s Website |
|
Terms of Reference for Policy Review Committee
This committee is a committee of Southland District Council and has responsibility to:
· Review Council policies on a regular basis as to their relevancy and appropriateness.
· Recommend new policies or changes to existing policies as required.
· Ascertain the impact of proposed Government legislation on Council policies or activities and make responses/submissions on regional matters, SOEs, etc.
· Review Asset Management Plans (including the renewal policy) for Council's infrastructural assets such as roading, water and sewage schemes and other Council property.
Policy Review Committee 01 April 2015 |
ITEM PAGE
Procedural
1 Apologies 5
2 Leave of absence 5
3 Conflict of Interest 5
4 Public Forum 5
5 Extraordinary/Urgent Items 5
6 Confirmation of Minutes 5
Reports for Resolution
7.1 Alfresco Type Dining Policy 13
Reports for Recommendation
8.1 Venture Southland - Community Development Update 29
8.2 Venture Southland Update on World War One Commemoration Projects 43
8.3 Continuation of Southland District Council Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008 - Submissions 51
8.4 Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005 53
8.5 Camping Control Bylaw 2012 81
1 Apologies
At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.
2 Leave of absence
At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
3 Conflict of Interest
Councillors are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a councillor and any private or other external interest they might have. It is also considered best practice for those members in the Executive Team attending the meeting to also signal any conflicts that they may have with an item before Council.
4 Public Forum
Notification to speak is required by 5pm at least two days before the meeting. Further information is available on www.southlanddc.govt.nz or phoning 0800 732 732.
5 Extraordinary/Urgent Items
To consider, and if thought fit, to pass a resolution to permit the Council to consider any further items which do not appear on the Agenda of this meeting and/or the meeting to be held with the public excluded.
Such resolution is required to be made pursuant to Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, and the Chairperson must advise:
(i) The reason why the item was not on the Agenda, and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of this item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”
6 Confirmation of Minutes
6.1 Meeting minutes of Policy Review Committee, 18 February 2015
Policy Review Committee
OPEN MINUTES
|
Minutes of a meeting of Policy Review Committee held in the Council Chambers, 15 Forth Street, Invercargill on Wednesday, 18 February 2015 at 10.37am.
present
Chairperson |
Rodney Dobson |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
|
|
Councillors |
Lyall Bailey |
|
|
Stuart Baird |
|
|
Brian Dillon |
|
|
John Douglas |
|
|
Paul Duffy |
|
|
Bruce Ford |
|
|
George Harpur |
|
|
Julie Keast |
|
|
Gavin Macpherson |
|
|
Neil Paterson |
|
|
Mayor Gary Tong |
|
IN ATTENDANCE
Chief Executive Steve Ruru, Group Manager Environment and Community Bruce Halligan, Group Manager Services and Assets Ian Marshall, General Manager Policy and Community Rex Capil, Human Resources Manager Janet Ellis, Strategy and Policy Manager Susan Cuthbert, Communications and Governance Manager Louise Pagan, Chief Information Officer Damon Campbell, Committee Advisor Debbie Webster.
1 Apologies
An apology for absence was received from Crs Paterson, Duffy and Harpur.
Moved by Cr Dillon, seconded by Cr Keast and resolved that the apologies be accepted. |
2 Leave of absence
No requests for leave of absence had been received.
3 Conflict of Interest
There were no conflicts of interest noted and declared.
4 Public Forum
There was no Public Forum.
5 Extraordinary/Urgent Items
There were no Extraordinary/Urgent items.
6 Confirmation of Minutes
Moved by Cr Macpherson, seconded by Cr Keast resolved that: That the Meeting minutes of Policy Review Committee, 28 January 2015 be confirmed as a true and correct record. |
Reports for Resolution
7.1 |
Continuation of Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008 Record No: R/15/2/2392 |
|
1 This report was to consider the recommendation for continuation of the current Southland District Council Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008. 2 The purpose of the Roading Bylaw was to put into effect legal means of controlling activities that were of a nuisance to the general public in use of or within the roading environment. 3 The
existing Bylaw focused on stock droving, speed limits, parking restrictions,
|
|
Mr Marshall introduced Mr McCallum and spoke to the report.
Cr Dobson queried the use of the word perambulator under point 5 Definitions in the Roading Bylaw Revision, noting he thought the use of it was outdated.
Cr Douglas queried if the Southland District Council was using the same classifications that NZTA were using? Mr Marshall responded that Council will look at adopting the one level of classification or refining what SDC currently used.
Cr Dillon queried where did road margins
and reserves sit in the document?
Cr Baird asked if a report could be generated on how much Council spends on tree / flax replanting. It was responded that this report could be generated and bought back for information.
Cr Bailey noted that the reference on page 120 to Downer EDI Works Ltd needed to be updated.
|
|
Resolution Moved by Cr Douglas, seconded by Cr Baird And resolved that the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Continuation of Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008” dated 18 February 2015. b) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter. c) That Council determines, pursuant to the provisions of Section 155 (1) of the Local Government Act 2002, that a bylaw is the most appropriate way to put into effect legal means of controlling activities that are of a nuisance to the general public in use of or within the roading environment. d) That pursuant to the provisions of Section 155 (2) (a) of the Local Government Act 2002, Council determines that the Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008 is the most appropriate form of Bylaw. e) That pursuant to the provisions of Section 155 (2) (b) of the Local Government Act 2002, Council determines that the Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008 does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand bill of rights Act 1990.
f) That for the purposes of Section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008, shall be the statement of proposal and the summary of information and that the special consultative procedure in terms of Sections 82A, 83, 83AA and 86 of the Local Government Act 2002 shall be followed.
g) That public notice be given that the Bylaw is available for inspection at all offices of Council and any person may make submissions in respect to this Bylaw and Policy with submissions closing 20 March 2015.
h) That submitters may appear before Council’s Policy Review Committee and speak in support of their submissions at the meeting of the Policy Review Committee on 1 April 2015.
|
7.2 |
District Plan Review Project Update February 2015 Record No: R/15/2/2540 |
|
1 The purpose of the report was to update the Policy Review Committee on the status of the District Plan review process, which has now reached the appeal stage. 3 The report provided information to the Committee on the indicative timing for progression of the nine appeals lodged in relation to decisions issued by Council following the hearing of submissions and further submissions.
|
|
Mr Halligan spoke to the report, acknowledging the work the Resource Management team had undertaken to date around the District Plan review process. He noted that the mediation process on submissions to the District Plan will begin in early March. Mr Moran will speak to the Resource Management Committee in more detail around the mediation process.
He noted the next step of the process was for the appeals to process to the mediation stage as per the schedule in the report. Mr Halligan commented biodiversity has been a common issue raised in the appeals.
|
|
Moved by Cr Bailey, seconded by Cr Keast resolved that the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “District Plan Review Project Update February 2015” dated 9 February 2015.
|
Reports for Recommendation
8.1 |
Community Development Activity Profile Record No: R/15/2/2511 |
|
1 The purpose of the report was to ask the Policy Review Committee to review the attached Activity Profile and recommend to Council that it be adopted. As part of the process of preparing the draft Southland District Council 2015-2025 Long Term Plan (LTP), a draft Community Development Activity Profile has been prepared. The Policy Review Committee was asked to review the activity profile. |
|
Ms Cuthbert spoke to the report on the
draft Community Development Activity Profile which had been prepared and
would be included in the process of preparing the draft 2015 - 2025 Long Term
Plan. She noted they were waiting for
Cr Baird queried if the SDC flat lined its funding over 10 years or with the view of reviewing it annually? Ms Cuthbert responded it was reviewed after three years however that didn’t limit Venture Southland requesting further funding.
|
|
Resolution Moved by Cr Dillon, seconded by Cr Macpherson That the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Community Development Activity Profile” dated 18 February 2015. b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002. c) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter. d) Recommends to the Council to adopt the Community Development Activity Profile as a basis for preparing the draft 2015-2025 Long Term Plan.
|
8.2 |
SDC Holiday Programme 2015 Report to Southland District Council Record No: R/15/1/1756 |
|
1 The report provided an evaluation of the Southland District Council 2015 Holiday Programme and identifies areas to consider for the 2016 programme.
|
|
It was noted that the numbers were slightly down on this year’s holiday programme than the previous year however the programme continues to be successful and very well received by the communities in the district.
|
|
Moved by Cr Baird, seconded by Cr Keast resolved that the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “SDC Holiday Programme 2015 Report to Southland District Council” dated 18 February 2015. b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002. c) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.
|
8.3 |
Venture Southland - Community Development Update Record No: R/15/2/2530 |
|
Ms Thornton spoke to her report updating on the regional and ward projects including: the Curio Bay Natural Heritage Centre; Around the Mountains Cycle Trail; War Memorials and WW1 Commemorations; Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy; Cruise Ships; Rakiura Heritage Centre Trust; Stewart Island Promotions; Stewart Island Community Centre; Small Communities Fund and Senior Housing options.
She noted the work being undertaken between the Southland District Council and Environment Southland on a Southland Cruise Strategy with a focus of Stewart Island. To that end, was work underway with Stewart Island Promotions to establish a ‘Cruise Ambassador’ role to assist visitors when they disembarked in accessing what was available on the Island.
Ms Thornton commented they had been successful with a Lotteries Regional Community funding application for $20,000 to help fund the role of a Promotions Officer to help market Stewart Island and bring events to the Island.
Ms Thornton highlighted the visitor levy
for the year from 1 October 2013 -
Cr Ford noted that the community was very pleased with the work being supported by the visitor levy highlighting the William Wharf upgrade as a good example of how the money was being spent.
Cr Douglas queried if one ship stopped three times at Stewart Island and what was the number of people disembarking? Ms Thornton said the same ships came through up to three times with 90% of the passengers coming onto the Island. She also noted that Stewart Island rated highly in the cruise ship satisfaction surveys.
|
|
Resolution Moved by Cr Keast, seconded by Cr Douglas That the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Venture Southland - Community Development Update” dated 5 February 2015. b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002. c) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.
|
Public Excluded
Moved by Cr Dillon, seconded by Cr Keast and resolved that the public be excluded from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows: |
C9.1 Public Excluded Minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting dated 28 January 2015
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution |
Public Excluded Minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting dated 28 January 2015 |
s48(1)(d) - Check to make report confidential.
|
That the exclusion of the public from the part of the meeting is necessary to enable the local authority to deliberate in private on its decision or recommendation. |
The public were excluded at 11.25am.
Resolutions in relation to the confidential items are recorded in the confidential section of these minutes and are not publicly available unless released here. There were no items to be recorded in open session.
The meeting was closed at 11.30am.
CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE
Policy Review Committee HELD ON
18 FEBRUARY 2015.
DATE:...................................................................
CHAIRPERSON:...................................................
Policy Review Committee 01 April 2015 |
Record No: R/15/3/4480
Author: Tamara Dytor, Policy Analyst
Approved by: Rex Capil, Group Manager, Policy and Community
☐ Decision ☒ Recommendation ☐ Information
Purpose
1. The
Alfresco Type Dining Policy has been reviewed and updated to reflect the
practise of Council, and the new fees that are proposed in the Schedule of Fees
and Charges
2015-2025 (currently under consultation in parallel to the LTP).
Executive Summary
2. The
draft Alfresco Type Dining Policy (attached) has been developed based on a
review of the Alfresco Type Dining Policy 2003, to more accurately reflect the
practise of Council.
To ensure that the Alfresco Type Dining Policy package is ready to be put in
place prior to the Schedule of Fees and Charges being implemented on 1 July
2015, a licence, application and internal procedure have also been developed.
That the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Alfresco Type Dining Policy” dated 19 March 2015. b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002. c) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter. d) Provides guidance as to whether the Alfresco Type Dining Policy should apply to the whole District or just Winton/Te Anau. e) Recommends the draft Alfresco Type Dining Policy to Council for adoption. f) Recommends to Council to delegate the approval and revocation of Alfresco Type Dining licences to Area Engineers, with advice from the relevant Community Board/Community Development Area Subcommittee. |
Content
Background
3. Alfresco type dining is a regulated activity, as it involves restaurateurs placing outdoor furniture and serving food/drink (trading) on Council footpaths. Regulating this activity minimises hazards to the public, and ensures that restaurateurs are responsible for their actions on Council property.
4. The Alfresco Type Dining Policy was adopted in 2003 and has not been reviewed until recently. In recent years, the alfresco type dining fees have not been included in the Schedule of Fees and Charges; therefore, have not been charged. As the fees have been updated in the Schedule of Fees and Charges 2015-2025, it is pertinent that a reviewed version of the Alfresco Type Dining Policy (with the new fees structure) is adopted before the implementation of the Schedule of Fees and Charges on 1 July 2015.
5. Both Te
Anau and Winton are areas in which alfresco dining commonly occurs.
However, Council has the option of applying the policy throughout the entire
Southland District or just to these areas.
6. The fees proposed in the draft policy have been set so as to not inhibit economic development, and are lower than the alfresco dining fees of many other councils. Council also has the option of resolving that a Community Board or Community Development Area Subcommittee can decide to remit the license fees and associated annual fees, while continuing to apply the policy details, if they decide that paying Alfresco Type Dining Licence fees will inhibit economic development. Alternatively, Council could decide to apply the policy only in the Winton and Te Anau areas, since this is where alfresco dining most commonly occurs.
7. The review has also focussed on internal processes and ensuring that all the documents associated with the 2003 policy remain relevant. The internal processes have been agreed upon, and a procedure has been attached to this policy to ensure that the internal processes are clear.
Issues
8. Council should consider the following:
· Whether Council wishes to continue regulating alfresco type dining activity;
· Whether the policy should apply to the whole district or only the Te Anau and Winton areas where alfresco dining mainly occurs;
· Whether Community Boards and Community Development Area Subcommittees should have discretionary authority to remit fees (while still applying the policy) if the policy is applied across the district. The intention of discretionary authority to remit would be to allow Community Boards and Community Development Area Subcommittees to encourage economic growth.
Factors to Consider
Legal and Statutory Requirements
9. In dealing with alfresco licensing, Council should be aware of the following laws and regulations:
· Building Act (1991) and amendments;
· Food Hygiene Regulations (1974) and amendments;
· Health and Safety in Employment Act (1992) and amendments;
· Litter Act (1979) and amendments;
· Local Government Act (2002) and amendments;
· Public Works Act (1981) and amendments;
· Resource Management Act (1991) and amendments;
· Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act (2012) and amendments;
· Southland District Council Trading in Public Places Bylaw (2012).
10. It is suggested that the Trading in Public Places Bylaw (2012) is reviewed in future, so as to provide genuine enforcement opportunities in relation to this policy. Currently the Trading in Public Places Bylaw does not refer to the Alfresco Type Dining Policy.
11. The Policy states that there is a “three strike” policy, where written warnings are sent out to non-compliant licence holders. However, genuine enforcement would be challenging as there is no way to stop restaurateurs carrying on without a license, eg, no ability to remove tables and chairs. It is encouraging that Council has never had to undertake this sort of measure; however, a review of the bylaw would give Council leverage in the event that there were concerns regarding compliance with the policy.
Community Views
12. Affected
stakeholders will be sent a letter from Council advising them of proposed
changes to the Alfresco Type Dining Policy and fee changes. The Te Anau
Community Board have also been consulted with in the development of the policy,
as Te Anau is the area in which the most alfresco dining occurs in the
District.
This discussion with the Te Anau Community Board has resulted in charges
regarding regulations around litter, and a policy option to either remit fees
to areas with low economic development, or to not apply the policy
District-wide.
Costs and Funding
13. The costs of the Alfresco Dining Licenses have been increased slightly to reflect more accurately the costs incurred by Council to administer and monitor the licencing of Alfresco Type Dining. This is minor, and is expected to bring in revenue of ~$1,440 per annum (based on 12 restaurants currently known as undertaking Alfresco Type Dining - 10 in Te Anau and two in Winton). The initial administration fees cover the Area Engineer’s time to check the premise, as well at the financial costs of invoicing the restaurant; the annual fees will provide revenue for local footpaths and also cover the invoice costs.
14. The fees in the Schedule of Fees and Charges (2015-2025) have been set at:
· Administration/Application fee: $120.00 (one off);
· Occupation fee calculated on the area used: $20.00 per m2 / per year.
By comparison some fees from other cities in New Zealand are:
· Auckland: $69.00 per m2 / per year;
· Wellington (CBD): $85.00 per m2 / per year;
· Taupo: $43.35 per m2 / per year;
· Queenstown: $185.00
per m2 / per year (highest fee per m2 in
New
Zealand);
· Gisborne: $0.00 - no fees at all.
Policy Implications
15. There is a concern that the policy will be unable to be genuinely enforced, because the Trading in Public Places Bylaw (2012) does not refer to the Alfresco Type Dining Policy. Therefore, it is recommended that Council review the Trading in Public Places Bylaw within the next year to align with the Alfresco Type Dining Policy. It is recommended that this occur after the review of the policy, due to the number of public consultation processes currently occurring around policies and bylaws, and the limited number of problems that Council has had with alfresco licence enforcement in the past. If the policy is not updated, Council will not be able to charge the fees set out in the draft fees and charges schedule.
Analysis
Options Considered
16. The options are to:
(a) Recommend the draft Alfresco Type Dining Policy as a District-wide policy to Council for adoption.
(b) Recommend the draft Alfresco Type Dining Policy to only apply to Te Anau and Winton to Council for adoption.
(c) Do not recommend the draft Alfresco Type Dining Policy to Council.
Analysis of Options
Option 1: Recommend the draft Alfresco Type Dining Policy as a District-wide policy to Council for adoption
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
· Council documents would align. · Council would be able to charge fees for licensing and annual fees under the Schedule of Fees and Charges. · Council can start obtaining revenue to cover the administration costs of Alfresco Type Dining. · Creating a District-wide policy will future-proof the policy so that if there is sudden growth in an area and Alfresco Type Dining occurs, the policy will cover it. |
· The Trading in Public Places Bylaw (2012) has not been reviewed at the same time and therefore there are no genuine enforcement measures able to be conducted under the policy. · Areas that have low economic growth will have to decide (in line for the 1 July invoicing) to not apply the fee. |
Option 2: Recommend the draft Alfresco Type Dining Policy to only apply to Winton and Te Anau to Council for adoption
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
· Council documents would align. · Council would be able to charge fees for licensing and annual fees under the Schedule of Fees and Charges. · Council can start obtaining revenue to cover the administration costs of Alfresco Type Dining in Winton and Te Anau. · Areas without current Alfresco Type Dining will not have to meet prior to 1 July to decide whether to remit fees, because the policy would automatically not apply to areas other than Winton and Te Anau. |
· The Trading in Public Places Bylaw (2012) has not been reviewed at the same time and therefore there are no genuine enforcement measures able to be conducted under the policy. · Areas that have low economic growth will have to decide (in line for the 1 July invoicing) to not apply the fee. · It will not cover areas that suddenly begin to have Alfresco Type Dining, and the policy would have to be reviewed again; therefore, this would not future-proof the policy. |
Option 3: Do not recommend the draft Alfresco Type Dining Policy to Council
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
· The policy and bylaw could be reviewed together later in 2015. |
· The Alfresco Type Dining licence and annual fees stated in the Schedule of Fees and Charges for Alfresco-Type Dining cannot be applied if the policy does not align with the Schedule of Fees and Charges. · Council’s documents would contradict one another. |
Assessment of Significance
17. As this affects very few people in the District and is not financially significant, it is not deemed significant. However, those affected (such as the business community and restaurateurs) would be alerted to the changes through a letter from Council. If Option One was selected, Community Boards and Community Development Area Subcommittees would also be alerted to the change so that they could make a decision as to whether to remit the licence fees or not.
Recommended Option
18. Option One - recommends the reviewed Alfresco Type Dining Policy and associated documents to Council for adoption, is recommended to ensure that the policy is future-proofed and that Council’s polices are in line with Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charge (once the Fees and Charges have been consulted on, adopted and implemented).
Next Steps
19. The next step is for Policy Review Committee to recommend the policy and associated documents to Council for adoption. A letter would be sent to all restaurant owners in the District letting them know about the changes to the Alfresco Type Dining Policy. The Fees and licensing charges will be applied from 1 July 2015, when the Schedule of Fees and Charges is implemented.
a DRAFT Alfresco Type Dining on Public Land Policy View
b DRAFT Application for Alfresco Type Dining Licence View
c DRAFT Alfresco Type Dining Procedure View
d DRAFT Alfresco Type Dining Licence View
Policy Review Committee |
01 April 2015 |
SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL
ALFRESCO DINING POLICY
This policy applies to:
DOCUMENT CONTROL
Policy owner: Area Engineers |
TRIM reference number: r/14/12/18441 |
Effective date: «type date» |
Approved by: «type date» |
Date approved: «type date» |
Next review date: «type date» |
CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE
2. DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
3. POLICY DETAILS
3.1 Background
3.2 Regulations
3.3 Licensing and Applications
3.4 Operational Details
3.5 Fees
3.6 Enforcement
3.7 Transitional Procedures
4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
5. REVISION RECORD
Policy Review Committee |
01 April 2015 |
1. PURPOSE
Alfresco dining in public spaces brings vibrancy to towns within the District, suggesting street life and energetic towns. Outdoor seating areas for food service provide a space for social interaction and the opportunity to rest and observe street activity. They also increase the sense of safety and security in the streets, due to increased occupancy.
These areas also provide restaurant and café owners with the opportunity of extending business and promoting patronage with a more visible presence, promoting economic development in our townships.
The Alfresco Dining Policy (the Policy) has been developed to regulate the use of street dining furniture so as to keep our streets clean, safe and not hindering pedestrian flow while encouraging our towns to be dynamic.
For regulations regarding sandwich boards, please see the District Plan.
2. DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Term |
Meaning |
Alfresco Dining |
The serving and eating of food in a public space, namely footpaths, in open air or under a tent, marquee or other temporary shelter. |
3. POLICY DETAILS
3.1 Background
Principles by which decisions regarding the Policy are made are:
· Licensing activities on footpaths should be reflective of Council’s vision and mission
· Pedestrian priority should be enhanced to facilitate efficient and safe walking routes in our townships and encourage people to walk as their primary mode of transport through townships
· Streetscapes of our townships should be vibrant, safe and attractive, and when setting any rebate, Council will consider how a proposed activity might positively contribute to achieving this principle
· Our townships should provide opportunities for pedestrians to participate in the public environment through leisure, retail, recreation and entertainment activities
· Businesses and groups that use footpaths should do so in a fair and balanced way, that does not impair safe and efficient pedestrian movement. Footpaths shall be managed in accordance with
o Relevant Council guidelines and the District Plan
o NZ standard 4121:2001 Design of Access and Mobility - Buildings and Associated Facilities (NZS4121) for accessible journeys and design elements.
o Relevant legislation and standards for health and safety and advertising.
3.2 Regulations
To be able to have street furniture for use in alfresco dining, restaurateurs must hold a current license for alfresco dining, obtained from Council.
A minimum of 1.5 metres of footpath will be available for pedestrian use at all times.
Umbrellas shall be confined to the area and not encroach onto the pedestrian way, and shall be at a height that is safe for pedestrians.
Alfresco dining and associated street furniture must be confined to the area of footpath directly outside the premises. Any other locations will be determined on a case-by-case basis through the relevant Area Engineer on advice from the Community Board or Community Development Area Sub-Committee.
This policy will apply to each town across the District unless a Community Board or Community Development Area Sub-Committee has advised Council that they do not wish to charge fees in their area. In this case, the policy will still apply; however, the fees will be remitted.
3.3 Licensing and Applications
An initial application to have alfresco dining is to be made in writing and approval will be granted by the appropriate Area Engineer after consultation with the Community Board/Community Development Area Sub-Committee and inspection of the premise by an Area Engineer.
All applications must contain:
· A map of the location of any street plantings/trees and Council-owned street furniture.
· A sketch showing the location of any proposed chairs, umbrellas, outdoor heating devices and any other furniture that will be used in this activity.
· Proposed hours of operation
· Letters of support from the adjoining (on either side of the location and the same side of the street) business owners or lessees will be obtained. Council staff can request other nearby business/lessees’ opinions if the alfresco dining furniture is likely to have an effect on them.
· Proof of building consent (if applicable)
· Proof of valid Alcohol Premise Licence (if applicable)
· Proof of public liability (refer to Section 3.4)
Any building as defined in Section Three of the Building Act (1991) that is required for this activity shall require a building consent unless it is exempted by the Third Schedule of the Building Act (1991)
If the restaurateur holds an Alcohol Premise License, they must show that they intend to either obtain a new Alcohol Premise License for this area, or how they will not serve alcohol in that area
Once granted, licenses will be placed on property files as an advice for all Council staff dealing with the property.
Individual licences shall be issued by the local Area Engineer in consultation with the Property department and relevant elected body, and shall be valid for a maximum period of three years, before renewal is necessary.
3.4 Operational Details
Licensees will hold public liability for a minimum of $1,000,000 and shall take full responsibility for indemnifying Council against any claims, demands, or actions made upon Council arising out of licensees’ operations
Licensees will be responsible for keeping their licenses areas clean and tidy. All stained or damaged pavement surfacing must be cleaned or replaced promptly by licensees at no cost to Council.
Licensees must control all litter arising from their activities and shall not use Council provided street litter bins for this purpose.
Licensees are not able to assign or sublet the licensed area without the approval of Council
Licensees will comply with all statutory requirements, Acts, Regulations, Bylaws, Ordinances, Rules and lawful directions of Council, including but not limited to, the following:
· Building Act (1991) and amendments
· Food Hygiene Regulations (1974) and amendments
· Health and Safety in Employment Act (1992) and amendments
· Litter Act (1979) and amendments
· Local Government Act (2002) and Amendments
· Public Works Act (1981) and amendments
· Resource Management Act (1991) and amendments
· Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act (2012) and amendments
· Southland District Council Trading in Public Places Bylaw (2012)
Where the applicant for a licence to occupy a public place is the holder of an on-license, then the occupation of the public place may not commence until such time as the applicant has sought and obtained an Alcohol Premise License before the sale and consumption of liquor can occur in the alfresco dining specified area.
3.5 Fees
Fees are to be set by Council (inclusive of GST) and will consist of an administration fee and annual fees (or part thereof), as set out in the Schedule of Fees and Charges. Annual fees for the first year of a licence are pro rata.
3.6 Enforcement
If a licence holder does not comply with the conditions of this policy, the Council will, on the first occasion:
· Provide information to ensure all parties know what is required
· Verbally notify the business, individual or group of the issue and provide a warning to the business, individual or group of the issue and provide a warning of the consequences of future violation of the policy.
For a second violation of the policy, the Council will provide a written second warning to the business, group or individual identifying the issue(s), required remedy and timeframe, and consequences of future violation of the policy.
For a third violation of the policy, the Council will take appropriate action, selecting from such options as revocation of the license.
3.7 Revocation of Licence
The Area Engineer, as directed by the local Community Board, Community Development Area Sub-Committee, and/or Council, may revoke an Alfresco Type Dining Licence. This would be for significant breaches of the policy that are unable to be resolved by other means (such as verbal or written warnings).
3.8 Transitional Procedures
This policy will take effect from 1 July 2015. Current license-holders will not be required to re-apply for licences, but will be required to pay their annual fees from this date. Any restaurants currently operating alfresco dining without a license will be required to apply for a license and pay the license application fee.
4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Party/Parties |
Roles and Responsibilities |
Area Engineer |
Receive, process and finalise license applications based on advice from the relevant Community Board/Community Development Area Sub-Committee, including the inspection of the location during application.
Enforce the policy, including revoking the licence if necessary. |
Environmental Health |
To report any offenses of the policy to the Area Engineer, if seen during regular restaurant inspections. |
Property department |
Invoice for fees and require that fees be paid to Council. |
Community Board / Community Development Area Sub-Committee |
Give advice to the Area Engineer as to whether to approve and/or revoke an Alfresco Type Dining Licence.
|
5. REVISION RECORD
Date |
Version |
Revision Description |
24/7/03 |
r/09/9/13466 |
Alfresco Type Dining on Public Land |
01 April 2015 |
|
TRIM Reference: Container: |
Contact Area Engineers for enquiries: 0800 732 732 |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
The purpose of this application is for the local Community Board or Community Development Area Subcommittee to make a decision regarding the allocation of an Alfresco Type Dining Licence. As part of the application, an Area Engineer will be required to assess the site and plans.
An Alfresco Type Dining Licence is valid for three years, until a renewal of the licence is necessary. |
|||||||||||||||||||
RESTAURANT/APPLICANT DETAILS |
|||||||||||||||||||
Restaurant Name: |
|
||||||||||||||||||
Applicant(s) |
First Names: |
Surname: |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
Full Address: |
Physical: |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Postal (if different) |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
Phone: |
Home: |
Mobile: |
|||||||||||||||||
RESTAURANT OPERATION |
|||||||||||||||||||
Q1: |
Do you have an Alcohol Premise Licence? |
YES |
NO |
||||||||||||||||
Q2: |
What are your hours of operation? |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Mon |
|
Tues |
|
Wed |
|
Thurs |
|
Fri |
|
Sat |
|
Sun |
|
|||||
Q3: |
What is the area (m2) of the Alfresco Type Dining space you wish to use? |
||||||||||||||||||
PAYMENT DETAILS |
|||||||||||||||||||
The restaurant using the area described in this application is required to be registered as using Alfresco Type Dining with the Southland District Council The application fees must be paid within SEVEN DAYS after this date: / / |
TOTAL FEE PAYABLE: $ |
||||||||||||||||||
NOTE: Please check Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charges for the set Alfresco Type Dining Fees. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Applicant |
|||||
I understand the purpose and requirement of this application and believe that the contents are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. |
|||||
SIGNED: |
|
|
Date |
|
|
|
Applicant |
|
|
I have inspected the site and I verify that this application for a licence should be considered by the local Community Board or Community Development Area Subcommittee. |
|||||
SIGNED: |
|
|
Date |
|
|
|
Area Engineer |
|
|
The Community Board or Community Development Area Subcommittee approve/decline this application for an Alfresco Type Dining Licence. |
|||||
SIGNED: |
|
|
Date |
|
|
|
Chair, Community Board or CDA |
|
|
TO INCLUDE IN THE APPLICATION |
Each application should incorporate: · Map of location of street plantings/trees and Council-owned furniture, property boundary showing entrance, and which indicates the location of proposed chairs, umbrellas, outdoor heating devices and any other furniture to be used in this activity (see next page). · Letters of support from the adjoining (on either side of the location and the same side of the street) business owners or lessees. · Proof of building consent [unless exempted by Schedule 3 of the Building Act (1991)]. · Proof of public liability for a minimum of $1,000,000 (please see below for details). · Any applicable Alcohol Premise Licence held (please seen note below). |
ALCOHOL PREMISE LICENCE |
If the restaurateur holds an Alcohol Premise License, they must show that they intend to either obtain a new Alcohol Premise License for this area, or how they will not serve alcohol in that area.
That where the applicant for a licence to occupy a public place is the holder of an on-license, then the occupation of the public place may not commence until such time as the applicant has sought and obtained an Alcohol Premise License before the sale and consumption of liquor can occur in the alfresco dining specified area |
|
OPERATIONAL DETAILS |
Licensees must hold public liability for a minimum of $1,000,000 and shall take full responsibility for indemnifying Council against any claims, demands, or actions made upon Council arising out of licensees’ operations
Licensees will be responsible for keeping their licenses areas clean and tidy. All stained or damaged pavement surfacing must be cleaned or replaced promptly by licensees at no cost to Council.
Licensees must control all litter arising from their activities within a 15 metre radius of their licensed area and shall not use Council provided street litter bins for this purpose.
Licensees are not able to be assigned or sublet the licensed area without the approval of Council.
Licensees will comply with all statutory requirements, Acts, Regulations, Bylaws, Ordinances, Rules and lawful directions of Council, including but not limited to, the following: · Building Act (1991) and Amendments. · Food Hygiene Regulations (1974) and Amendments. · Health and Safety in Employment Act (1992) and Amendments. · Litter Act (1979) and Amendments. · Local Government Act (2002) and Amendments. · Public Works Act (1981) and Amendments. · Resource Management Act (1991) and Amendments. · Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act (2012) and Amendments. |
PROPOSED LOCATION (MAP/SKETCH) |
Map should include location of street plantings/trees and Council-owned furniture, property boundary showing entrance, and indicates the location of proposed chairs, umbrellas, outdoor heating devices and any other furniture used in this activity. |
|
01 April 2015 |
[insert name here]
COMMUNITY BOARD/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AREA SUBCOMMITTEE
ALFRESCO TYPE DINING LICENCE
Licence is hereby granted to [insert restaurant name here] to occupy street frontage or road reserve adjacent to the business premises known as [insert restaurant name here] for the purposes of providing an alfresco dining facility in accordance with the site plan attached to this licence. This licence is also based on standard operating conditions.
Authorised pursuant to the [insert name here] Community Board/Community Development Area Sub-Committee meeting, dated [insert date here].
This licence shall remain in force to 30 June _____ [insert year 3 years from application].
An annual licence fee is required to be paid to Southland District Council,
pursuant to Council’s Alfresco Type Dining Policy, unless the licence is
otherwise revoked.
Dated at _____________ [place], _____________ Date.
|
[name] AREA ENGINEER |
Policy Review Committee 01 April 2015 |
Venture Southland - Community Development Update
Record No: R/15/3/5235
Author: Diana Zadravec, Community Development Planner
Approved by: Bobbi Brown, Community Development Team Leader
☐ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☒ Information
Purpose
1 The purpose of this report is to update the Southland District Council on Venture Southland community development activities. The accompanying power point presentation provides information about both regional projects and local initiatives.
That the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Venture Southland - Community Development Update” dated 24 March 2015. b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002. c) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter. |
a Community Development presentation to SDC Policy Review Meeting 1 April 2015 - Western Southland View
01 April 2015 |
Venture Southland Update on World War One Commemoration Projects
Record No: R/15/3/5317
Author: Tina Harvey, Community Development Planner
Approved by: Bobbi Brown, Community Development Team Leader
☐ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☒ Information
World War One Commemoration Projects
1. The purpose of this report is to provide the Southland District Council with an update on various projects relating to World War One commemorations, which Venture Southland has been involved with. There has been significant interest in recent times and this is expected to continue to grow with the 100 year anniversary of the Gallipoli landing due to be commemorated on the ANZAC Day (25th April 2015). http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/war/the-gallipoli-campaign/landing-plans
While Venture Southland has assisted local communities and organisations with their initiatives, we have also aimed to coordinate a regional approach. This is demonstrated with such projects as development of the Southland Online War Memorial Inventory, Southland Commemoration Flag Project, “Dawn to Dusk Train Journey” and the war memorial condition assessments project. The most recent project is the “Keeping the Home Fires Burning” initiative which looks to have a lantern (with a candle burning in it) situated on each war memorial in Southland or at each RSA facility, along with a poem or text commemorating the soldiers who went off to war and the people who were left behind.
External Funding Secured
Venture Southland has independently secured or has worked alongside other organisations to secure approximately $435,625 in external funding to support a range of projects. This has been a significant commitment in terms of overall regional coordination and staff time to prepare a number of funding applications. It has also required a high level of consultation with local funders. Two consultants have been engaged to undertake two specialised projects (researching and developing the Southland Online War Memorial Inventory and the condition assessments of war memorials) and Julie Russell has been employed as the War Memorial Coordinator (a position which has now ceased).
A snapshot of various funding amounts and sources is detailed below:
LOTTERIES WORLD WAR ONE ENVIRONMENT & HERITAGE |
Total Secured: $282,000 |
|
Project |
Amount Secured |
|
Four commemoration projects (Gallipoli Exhibition Southland Museum, war stories ICC library and Southland Gallipoli Heritage Trail. |
$154,000 |
|
Condition assessments of war memorials in Southland (x30) |
$85,000 |
|
Gore War Memorial restoration (Gore RSA) |
$43,000 |
|
|
|
|
SOUTHLAND REGIONAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE |
Total Secured: $72,900 |
|
Overall coordination of war memorial projects |
$20,000 |
|
Development of WW1 uniform replicas |
$25,000 |
|
Southland Gallipoli Heritage Trail |
$15,000 |
|
Pine Bush War Memorial |
$3,000 |
|
Limehills and Riverton War Memorial restoration |
$1,200 |
|
Southland Commemorative Flag Project |
$3,000 |
|
Wyndham War Memorial Restoration |
$3,000 |
|
Mossburn War Memorial restoration |
$700 |
|
Te Anau RSA commemorations |
$1,000 |
|
Dipton War Memorial panel |
$1,000 |
|
|
|
|
COMMUNITY TRUST OF SOUTHLAND |
Total Secured: $55,000 |
|
Venture Southland Investigation and Assessment Fund overall coordination, war inventory project |
$20,000 |
|
Dawn to Dusk Train Journey |
$5,000 |
|
War Memorial Restoration |
$30,000 |
|
|
|
|
SDC COMMUNITY INITIATIVES FUND |
Total Secured: $11,700 |
|
Te Anau RSA commemorations |
$800 |
|
Pine Bush War Memorial |
$3,000 |
|
Limehills and Riverton War Memorial restoration |
$1,200 |
|
Southland Commemorative Flag Project |
$2,000 |
|
Wyndham War Memorial Restoration |
$2,000 |
|
Dawn to Dusk Train Journey |
$2,000 |
|
Mossburn War Memorial restoration |
$700 |
|
|
|
|
OTHER FUNDING |
Total Secured: $11,025 |
|
ILT (Dawn to Dusk Train Journey) |
$5,000 |
|
ICC Events Fund (Dawn to Dusk Train Journey) |
$5,000 |
|
Meridian (Te Anau RSA commemoration) |
$500 |
|
Northern Southland Development Fund (Mossburn war memorial) |
$525 |
|
|
TOTAL |
$435,625 |
Southland Online War Memorial Inventory
2. With the support of the Community Trust of Southland, Venture Southland and the Southland Regional Heritage Committee, funding was secured to develop an online inventory of Southland War Memorials. There are almost 400 memorials throughout Southland ranging from roll of honour boards to larger monuments. It was thought that because many were not documented, there was a risk some would disappear and the history associated with them. Ann Robbie undertook the research for this project and the information is available online and at www.kiamatetoa.com. Venture Southland has also partnered with the Southland Museum and Art Gallery on a shared exhibition relating to this project.
Kia Mate Toa
3. Venture Southland has assisted Kia Mate Toa (a community organisation specialising in Southland Military History) to develop a website www.kiamatetoa.com. This website is the main portal for military history in Southland. Kia Mate Toa utilises the information gathered in the War Memorial Inventory to provide a digital platform for public access alongside previous historical knowledge of soldiers departing for war.
War Memorial Condition Assessments
4. Venture
Southland secured $85,000 from Lottery World War One Commemorations,
Environment and Heritage, to undertake condition assessments on war memorials
in Southland. This will enable the assessment and condition reporting of
25-30 memorials.
To date 18 condition reports have been undertaken and at least a further 7 are
still to be completed. Following on from these condition assessments,
Venture Southland staff are working with individual groups to assist with
accessing funding to undertake the restoration work. To date Wyndham,
Edendale and Woodlands memorials are being worked on alongside others such as
Waikaia and Wendonside.
Dawn to Dusk Train Journey
5. Venture Southland coordinated the Taieri Gorge train to be chartered to undertake a journey to commemorate the embarkation of soldiers to World War One. On 28 September 2014, 389 passengers travelled from Invercargill to Dunedin return. On arrival in Dunedin, passengers were able to join other commemoration activities. Venture Southland Community Development staff provided passengers with free Polaroid souvenirs and a magnet frame. The train journey was supported by the Community Trust of Southland, Invercargill Licensing Trust, Southland District Council Community Initiatives Fund and the Invercargill City Council Events Fund.
Centennial Street Flags
6. Venture Southland has coordinated the design and distribution of over 200 street banner flags. The aim is to display these in every town in Southland which will reflect a ‘Southland’ commemorative approach. Flags are being made now and are due to arrive early April. Venture Southland staff have worked closely with SDC Area Engineers and the Gore District and Invercargill City Councils to coordinate the distribution of these flags throughout all Southland communities. The designs of the banners and landscape flag are below.
Gallipoli Exhibition Southland Museum and Art Gallery
Venture Southland prepared a successful application to Lotteries sourcing $140,000 towards the development of this exhibition. Currently the exhibition is being constructed and it will be open in time for ANZAC Day 2015. The exhibition aims to interpret the experience of war in a visually evocative manner and has a number of displays including a real trench experience. Using photography, interactive displays and re enactments, the hope is that this exhibition will appeal to a younger generation who know little of war as well as appeal to an older generation who are well aware of it.
It is a significant achievement that Southland has a world class interpretative exhibition such as this.
Gallipoli Heritage Trail
This is a collaborative project alongside SDC. The aim is to develop a heritage trail specialising in Gallipoli and World War One heritage. Ten museums were given an opportunity to have a single artefact featured and special conservation of each artefact was undertaken by Jo Massey. Interpretation panels will accompany the displays and people will be able to visit these rural museums. The image below is of the display currently at the Wyndham and Districts Museum.
Conclusion
It was the purpose of this report is to provide the Southland District Council with an update on various projects relating to World War One commemorations, which Venture Southland has been involved with. Venture Southland is proud of the projects we have been able to initiate and implement. It has also been rewarding to work alongside our local communities, stakeholders and funders on a range of projects. To date $435,625 has been secured from generous external funders and this has assisted us to implement a range of projects.
It has been our objective to not only preserve and look after our physical military heritage, but also to commemorate it with the 100 year centenary of World War One high in the public’s interest as well.
That the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Venture Southland Update on World War One Commemoration Projects” dated 23 March 2015. b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002. c) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter. |
Policy Review Committee 01 April 2015 |
Continuation of Southland District Council Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008 - Submissions
Record No: R/15/3/5328
Author: James McCallum, Roading Engineer
Approved by: Ian Marshall, GM - Services and Assets
☐ Decision ☒ Recommendation ☐ Information
Introduction and Background
1 This report is to consider the submissions received for the continuation of the current Southland District Council Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008.
2 The purpose of the Roading Bylaw is to put into effect legal means of controlling activities that are of a nuisance to the general public in use of or within the roading environment.
3 The
existing Bylaw focuses on stock droving, speed limits, parking restrictions,
one-way roads, vehicular accessways and heavy traffic prohibitions. It
also contains supporting appendices with tables.
4 At the Policy Review Committee meeting dated 18 February 2015, the committee resolved that the Bylaw and Policy be subject to public inspection at all offices of Council and any person may make submissions in respect to this Bylaw and Policy with submissions closing 20 March 2015.
Submissions
5 At the submission closing date of 20 March 2015, there were no submissions received from the public and one submission received from an affected stakeholder.
6 As part of the consultation process mentioned above, the Strategic Transport Department single submission of support was received support from Environment Southland for the continuation of the current Bylaw and Policy.
That the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Continuation of Southland District Council Roading Bylaw 2008 and Roading Policy 2008 - Submissions” dated 23 March 2015. b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002. c) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter. d) That the continuation of the Southland District Council Roading Bylaw 2008 and the Roading Policy 2008 be confirmed at the Council meeting dated 22 April 2015. |
Policy Review Committee 01 April 2015 |
Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005
Record No: R/15/3/5086
Author: Michael Sarfaiti, Environmental Health Manager
Approved by: Bruce Halligan, GM - Environment and Community
☐ Decision ☒ Recommendation ☐ Information
Purpose
1 To seek feedback from the Committee concerning the proposed review of the “Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005 ”.
Executive Summary
2 The Council is required to review the Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005 by 28 September 2015, if it wishes to continue to have an alcohol ban bylaw. Due to a legislative amendment in 2012, the criteria for review for this bylaw has become more onerous. The Committee is invited to give staff feedback concerning the proposed review process.
That the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005 ” dated 24 March 2015. b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002. c) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter. d) Gives feedback to staff concerning the proposed review of the “Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005 ”. |
Content
Background
Review Required
3 Council’s Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005 is required to be reviewed by 28 September 2015.
4 While the bylaw is district-wide, its practical effect has been limited to Te Anau only.
5 Due to a legislative amendment in 2012, the criteria for review has become more onerous, and this is discussed below.
About Alcohol Bans and the 2012 Legislative Amendment
6 The following is an extract from the website of the Health Promotion Agency, a Crown Health Entity:
“Alcohol bans are usually introduced because of concern about disorderly behaviour and criminal offending linked to the consumption of alcohol in public places. This is seen as detrimental to businesses and visitors as people think the area is not a safe place to visit.
An alcohol ban prohibits the possession or consumption of alcohol in certain locations and at certain times.
Territorial authorities are able to make alcohol control bylaws under Section 147 of the Local Government Act 2002 following a full community consultation process.
The Local Government (Alcohol Reform) Amendment Act 2012 has made changes to the way alcohol bans can be imposed in response to recommendations from the Law Commission.
The area where an alcohol ban may be imposed includes any public place. This means, for example, that an alcohol ban can be imposed in a private car park if drinking is causing problems. Previously alcohol bans could be imposed only in a public place under the control of the territorial authority.
There is now a greater responsibility on the territorial authority to justify the alcohol ban. A ban must be a reasonable limitation on rights and freedoms and there must be evidence of a high level of crime or disorder that was caused or made worse by alcohol consumption. Any bylaw must be appropriate and proportionate in the light of that crime or disorder. (Previously the territorial authority had only to prove alcohol would be present in a public place on a specified day and that it was likely to lead to disorder or offensive behaviour, fighting or assault.)
There is also provision for regulations to be made to require signage to ensure people know where the limits of the alcohol ban area are.”
History of the Te Anau Alcohol Ban
7 A history of the Te Anau alcohol ban is in Attachment A.
Views of the Police
8 Acting Inspector Maggie Windle has submitted to Council that Police support the bylaw continuing as is. Her letter is in Attachment B.
Review options that will be available to the Council
9 The options that will be available to the Council when it is reviewing the bylaw:
(a) Not review the bylaw and allow it to lapse.
(b) Rollover the current bylaw.
(c) Amend the bylaw to enable temporary alcohol bans only, such as the New Year’s celebrations in Te Anau.
(d) Amend the bylaw so that the Te Anau ban area is reduced in size.
(e) Amend the bylaw so that the Te Anau ban hours and/or dates are reduced, for example carrying over the hours of darkness from the outer ban area to the whole ban area, and/or restricting the ban to the summer season.
(f) A combination of options (c) to (e); for example a bylaw that continues to provide for temporary bans, and reduces both the boundaries of the existing alcohol ban area and also reducing the existing hours and dates of the ban area.
Issues
10 The Committee is invited to give feedback on the following matters:
(a) Whether the bylaw should be reviewed or not.
(b) Whether the views of the TACB along with the Police provide sufficient information for the Council to draft a bylaw, without informal pre-draft public feedback being sought.
(c) The possible timeline for the review process below:
Factors to Consider
Legal and Statutory Requirements
11 The Council is required to review this Bylaw by 28 September 2015, if it wishes to continue to have an Alcohol Ban Bylaw.
12 If the community and the Police want to continue with the current Liquor Ban Bylaw in downtown Te Anau, then the Bylaw can continue without amendment under s.147A(2) of the Local Government Act 2002, and Council would be required to consult in accordance with the special consultative procedure (s.160(3)(b)).
13 The Act requires Council to be satisfied that crime and disorder will return to the area if the bylaw does not continue and alcohol can be consumed there in public again (s.147A(1)). Council’s solicitor has reviewed the submission from the Police in Attachment B, and believes that this letter is sufficient for Council to be satisfied in terms of s.147A(1).
Community Views
14 This report proposes to seek feedback from the TACB. The bylaw review process would then require the special consultative procedure.
Costs and Funding
15 There are not funding implications.
Policy Implications
16 There are no policy implications.
Analysis
Options Considered
17 The options are whether or not to provide feedback to staff on the matters in paragraph 9 above.
Analysis of Options
To give feedback to staff concerning the proposed review of the “Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005”.
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
· Staff will be able to proceed with the review in a manner that will be endorsed by Council. |
· Nil. |
To not give feedback to staff concerning the proposed review of the “Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005”
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
· Nil. |
· Staff may proceed in a direction that Council would not endorse. |
Assessment of Significance
18 This issue is considered to be not significant in accordance with Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
Recommended Option
19 To give feedback to staff concerning the proposed review of the “Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005 ”.
Next Steps
20 The next steps are outlined in the proposed timeline above.
a History of the Te Anau alcohol ban View
b Letter from Police View
Policy Review Committee |
01 April 2015 |
History of the Te Anau Alcohol Ban
Prior to 2003
For some years prior to 2003, Council was able to impose an annual alcohol ban each year under Section 709A of the Local Government Act 1974 by Council resolution, for the duration of New Year’s celebrations at Lions Park. This was on the request of the Police, organisers, and the Te Anau Community Board (TACB).
Experience proved that the bans had been a successful way of improving the behaviour of people attending the New Year’s celebrations.
Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2003
The power to impose bans by Council resolution was repealed under the Local Government Act 2002, and bans could only be implemented under a bylaw.
The TACB considered a request from the Te Anau Police (attached as Schedule 1) for a liquor ban in various parts of Te Anau for a specified period. The Board subsequently met with Sergeant Payne of the Te Anau Police to discuss the parameters of a proposed liquor ban. These discussions formed the basis of the proposed 'Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw' to be considered by the Council.
In 2003 Council resolved to create a bylaw that would place controls on drinking at identified events. The enforcement of such a bylaw would help reduce opportunities for drunkenness in specified public places where people gather, and reduce the incidence of violence and vandalism.
Council was advised that there had been a behaviour problem by some revellers associated with the consumption of alcohol at New Year’s Eve celebrations at Lions Park.
Council made the Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2003. The bylaw applied between 7.00 pm on 27 December to 7.00 am on 2 January the following year, to the Te Anau alcohol ban area, indicated by the bold line in the map in Schedule 2.
Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005
At the request from the TACB to consider the introduction of a permanent liquor ban in certain parts of the Te Anau township, Council resolved to create a new bylaw to allow the establishment of permanent alcohol bans in designated public places as well as alcohol controls for other specified periods or events.
The alcohol ban area was slightly expanded from the 2003 boundaries, indicated by the bold line in the map in Schedule 2.
The TACB had initially discussed the possibility of introducing the alcohol ban following discussion with Te Anau Police. Staff requested the Police to advise Council of the reasons for their support of the introduction of the proposed alcohol ban, and the affect the ban is likely to have within the area liquor is not to be consumed or possessed.
The Police confirmed to Council at the time that they "would fully support the introduction of a permanent liquor ban in the Town Centre and Lakefront areas of Te Anau for the following reasons:
· Reduction of disorder and violence in the Main Street.
· Reduction of damage to public and private property.
· Reduction of noise complaints from carloads of youths drinking and cruising the Lakefront and Town Centre.
· Discouragement of anti-social behaviour from visiting carloads of youths cruising the Town Centre, drinking and yelling at pedestrians.
· Difficult to detect minors consuming liquor in public in cars."
The letter from the Police, and a research paper they provided, are attached in Schedules 3 and 4.
No other Community Board or Community Development Area Subcommittee wanted any part of their townships included in the proposed ban.
During the process, some Councillors expressed concern that the ban proposed would apply to those wishing to have a bottle of wine with their lunch, while enjoying a picnic on the lakefront. The TACB considered the concerns of Councillors and as a result requested that the alcohol ban proposed for the lakefront, Memorial and Lions Parks only take effect during the hours of darkness.
Schedule 1
Letter from Police dated 25 August 2003
Schedule 2
Te Anau Alcohol Ban Boundaries in 2003 and 2005
2003 Alcohol Ban Boundaries [Extract from 2003 Bylaw]
|
2005 Alcohol Ban Boundaries [Extract from 2005 Bylaw] |
Schedule 3
Letter from Police dated 2 February 2005
Schedule 4
01 April 2015 |
Record No: R/15/3/5244
Author: Michael Sarfaiti, Environmental Health Manager
Approved by: Bruce Halligan, GM - Environment and Community
☐ Decision ☒ Recommendation ☐ Information
Purpose
1 To seek feedback from the Committee concerning issues relating to the “Camping Control Bylaw 2012”.
Executive Summary
2 The Waikawa community is seeking an amendment to the Camping Control Bylaw 2012 to further restrict freedom camping in the town. There are a number of issues that have arisen since the adoption of the bylaw, and now is a good time to resolve these issues if the bylaw is to be amended concerning Waikawa. The Committee is invited to give staff feedback concerning the way forward.
That the Policy Review Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Camping Control Bylaw 2012” dated 24 March 2015. b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002. c) Determines that it has complied with the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter. d) Gives feedback to staff concerning the issues relating to the “Camping Control Bylaw 2012. |
Content
Background
3 Council’s Camping Control Bylaw was updated in 2012 to align with the Freedom Camping Act 2011 (the Act). There are issues arising since the adoption of the bylaw that need attention.
Issues
Waikawa
4 There is a need to amend the Camping Control Bylaw 2012 with regard to the overnight only freedom camping designated site in the Waikawa Recreation Reserve. There has been concern that the use of the site is causing rubbish and effluent disposal problems due to large volumes, and associated costs are increasing.
5 Supporting information that confirms that freedom camping is a key issue for the Catlins is attached in Attachment A. The attachment contains the summary of the stakeholder consultation, prepared for Venture Southland in relation to the Catlins Tourism Strategy.
6 Further relevant matters are that the Slope Point cell tower is ‘opening’ up the area; and if Haldane Road is sealed then this could result in more traffic. Venture Southland Group Manager Tourism, Events and Community, Bobbi Brown, advises that visitor numbers are up this season and more growth is expected especially when an internationally appealing product like Curio Bay Natural Heritage Centre is complete, and so the freedom camping problem is expected to worsen.
7 Ms Brown advises that the local community wants tourists who stay longer and spend, not just travel through using the local infrastructure for free. The area is a through route rather than a destination, and so she recommends that this issue is looked at from a wider perspective of all of Catlins.
Release of a model bylaw
8 In November 2013, the New Zealand Motor Caravan Association (NZMCA) prepared a Model Freedom Camping Bylaw in consultation with Local Government New Zealand, Department of Conservation and Department of Internal Affairs, and is available for download from the LGNZ website.
9 I have consulted with Council’s lawyer, who advised that the model bylaw is well written, and the proposed Waikawa amendment would be a good opportunity to standardise Council’s camping bylaw.
District wide prohibition in other Districts
10 There are a number of councils that prohibit non-self-contained camping, locally including Clutha and Queenstown. Other examples are Hastings, Kapiti, Thames Coromandel, Tararua, and Tasman. Rotorua appears to prohibit all freedom camping, including for self-contained vehicles.
11 By comparison, the approach taken in Southland District Council’s Camping Control Bylaw 2012 is permissive. While it designates freedom camping sites, the bylaw generally permits freedom camping except where it is prohibited (in the designated townships).
12 Note importantly that a District wide prohibition of freedom camping does not legally prohibit freedom camping on all Council controlled public land. Freedom camping is defined in the Act as follows:
“In this Act, freedom camp means to camp (other than at a camping ground) within 200 m of a motor vehicle accessible area or the mean low-water springs line of any sea or harbour, or on or within 200 m of a formed road or a Great Walks Track, using 1 or more of the following:
(a) a tent or other temporary structure:
(b) a caravan:
(c) a car, campervan, house-truck, or other motor vehicle.”
13 Therefore, back country freedom camping cannot be regulated under Council’s camping control bylaw. The kiwi (and local) tradition of taking a tent to a remote area is not regulated under freedom camping bylaws.
Standardisation with neighbouring Councils
14 Tourists are subject to very different rules and signage as they cross Southern Council boundaries.
15 This is not necessarily an issue of concern. The Camping our Way website (www.camping.org.nz) is the standard national reference source, which clearly advises:
16 And so while local councils have very different bylaws, tourists in New Zealand effectively are directed to designated sites in one way or another, for example:
· In Gore - Self-contained vehicles encouraged to camp in designated sites (though you can camp anywhere).
· In Southland - campers encouraged to camp in designated sites (but you can’t camp in some prohibited areas).
· In Queenstown - Self-contained vehicles required to camp in designated sites (and you don’t have any other options).
17 And so whatever decisions Council might make, campers viewing the Camping Our Way regional map are going to be directed to designated sites.
18 There is a case for standardisation of regional signage, it would be best to standardise with NZS 8603:2005 and NZS 5465:2001, rather than other Councils signage.
Motorhome friendly status for some SDC towns
19 Some of our communities such as Riverton and Otautau communities have expressed interest in being designated as motorhome friendly towns by the NZMCA. The NZMCA has advised that for Southland District Council towns to achieve motor home friendly status, Council would need to resolve NZMCA concerns with the current SDC bylaw, in particular the extent of the Te Anau prohibited area.
20 The NZMCA has created a new website promoting motorhome friendly towns - www.mhftowns.com. The only town designated as a motorhome friendly town south of Waimate is Gore. From the Gore District Council website:
“At the end of 2014, Gore officially became New Zealand’s southernmost Motorhome Friendly Town.
There are five locations for overnight camping in and around Gore, four dump stations and four locations with laundry facilities available.
To make it easy to get into town, there are also two sites for daytime parking within 5 minutes walk of the town centre.”
21 Gore District Council has no camping bylaw, and has areas designated for self-contained vehicles, refer Attachment B.
22 Hastings and Tararua are examples of motorhome friendly towns that prohibit non-self-contained freedom camping, unlike Gore.
23 The NZMCA may not have set criteria for a motorhome friendly town, and if Council wishes to have some of its towns designated this way it will want to have some assurance from the NZMCA that a bylaw review will be successful in achieving this goal.
24 The NZMCA has bypassed the bylaw process by establishing its own member camping sites in the District, though Riverton is an example of an area where Council could have a win-win arrangement with the NZMCA.
The incidence of problem freedom camping in the Te Anau basin has decreased
25 The Te Anau Basin has been the freedom camping hot spot in the District, however the incidence of illegal freedom camping is markedly decreasing, as can be seen from the graph below in my memorandum to the Activities Performance Audit Committee in June 2014. There has been a further decrease over the 2014/2015 season.
26 DOC is hinting that the shared patrol service may be discontinued following this season given this reduction, and revert back to using their own rangers.
Cost benefit analysis
27 In
New Zealand, most councils do not commission comprehensive cost benefit
analytical reports as part of their public regulatory policy development
process. These reports are costly, though perhaps if the Southern
councils pooled their resources they would be affordable. An example of
an interesting Australian freedom camping study is in
Attachment C.
28 On the other hand the government completes thorough analysis when drafting legislation, which councils then use to make local laws.
29 Decisions
to restrict freedom camping in our district have a range of economic impacts.
The economic concerns are likely to be consistent with those raised in other
areas. Issues include:
· Costs to ratepayers to maintain facilities and pay for rubbish collection.
· Reduction in demand for the services of local accommodation providers.
· As well as owners of commercial accommodation sites, others in the local community can benefit. Commercial accommodation sites employ local people, pay local rates, and buy goods and services locally. This creates a flow on effect into the broader business community in the local area through the purchase of supplies and services.
· Concerns that users of free camping areas contribute far less to the local community than users of commercial caravan parks. Such users may come with supplies purchased in other areas and may not contribute to the local economy at all.
· Conversely, there is an argument that although commercial accommodation providers may benefit from additional restrictions to freedom camping, communities may benefit from being designated as motorhome friendly towns, and businesses may benefit from the camper expenditure.
30 In proposing further restrictions in the Waikawa area or even District wide, Council will have the opportunity to hear community views through consultation and consider the costs and benefits of freedom camping. As well as the economic costs, social impacts should also be considered. Social impacts include the limited use of reserves and facilities for locals as a result of fouling and other camping related activities.
Funding
31 The Te Anau Basin freedom camping
patrol service is the only one in the District.
In 2013/2014 it was funded as follows:
Department of Conservation $24,000
Te Anau Community Board $8,500
Southland District Council $15,500
Total $48,000
32 If a patrol service is provided for the Waikawa area, funding will have to be decided. This will need to include whether the current tourist friendly approach is also appropriate for Waikawa; in contrast to QLDC that issued 794 $200 infringements in the 2013/2014 season, down from 1064 in 2012/2013.
33 It should also be noted that this area needs to be looked at in totality, as taking an action specific to Waikawa only is likely to shift the issue to another location.
34 This leads to the issue of funding of any future freedom camping patrol service that may be requested, and if Council should have an agreed funding model.
35 If
Council went down the prohibition path, then Council should expect to get many
more complaints of freedom campers from accommodation providers across
the District.
Those campers that knowingly camp in contravention of the bylaw create the
demand for the service, and so it would be a legitimate option to recover costs
of the service from them via infringement fees.
36 If a more prohibitive bylaw is proposed, then consideration should be given to District funding of the maintenance of any freedom camping designated areas, as possibly it is the District that will be benefit rather than locals.
Freedom camping on the cycle trail
37 An issue to consider is the possible need to permit freedom camping in places along the cycle trail. Senior Resource Management Planner, Marcus Roy, advises that if the cycle trail will be subject to a freedom camping prohibition, then provision should be made for users of the cycle trail, in addition to those sites that may be available for camping on Department of Conservation land.
38 This could also be achieved by designating sites, or some general permission (subject to conditions) for bona fide users in the bylaw. Unless the designated areas are 200 m from a vehicle accessible area, in which case there is no offence anyway (refer definition of freedom camping in the Background section of this report).
Factors to Consider
Legal and Statutory Requirements
39 The Camping Control Bylaw is not required to be reviewed until 19 September 2022.
As mentioned above, Council’s solicitor advises that any amendment with regard to Waikawa would be a good opportunity to standardise the SDC bylaw with the recent NZMCA model bylaw.
Community Views
40 This report requests feedback on how to seek community views.
41 Council has received information through Venture Southland Community Development Officers and members of the Waikawa community raising concerns about freedom camping. A review of the Southland District Council’s Camping Control Bylaw 2012 would allow Council to consult with the community regarding freedom camping across the district.
Costs and Funding
42 Discussed in “Cost Benefit Analysis” in the issues section above.
Policy Implications
43 There are no policy implications.
Analysis
Options Considered
44 The options are whether or not to provide feedback to staff on the way forward with the issues in this report.
45 The Committee is invited to give feedback on the following matters:
(a) Amending the bylaw to prohibit or further restrict freedom camping in Waikawa.
(b) Standardising the bylaw with the recent NZMCA model bylaw.
(c) Seeking motorhome friendly status for some of our towns, and whether dialogue with the NZMCA be at the political or staff level. This also may require Council to consider designating sites in Te Anau for self-contained vehicles.
(d) Should non-self-contained camping be prohibited, or confined to certain existing designated areas.
(e) Is a cost benefit study warranted to assist Council with its decisions.
(f) Is a funding model needed for future freedom camping patrol services.
(g) A possible timeline for the review process below:
46 In my opinion, in the absence of a cost benefit study, combining the approaches of Gore and Clutha may be a good option for the way forward:
· Review the bylaw with a view to generally prohibiting non-self-contained freedom camping, to reduce costs on local communities and boost accommodation providers and local businesses. The basic economic principle of supply and demand would fill any shortage of accommodation providers.
· Standardise our bylaw with the NZMCA model bylaw, and obtain motorhome friendly status for our towns that desire this.
· Change our existing designated sites for the exclusive use of self-contained vehicles, and designate park over sites within some towns for these vehicles, and consider retaining some designated sites for non-self-contained camping with District funding of maintenance.
· From next summer season adopt an instant fine approach for freedom camping offenders, to fund the expected District wide demand for enforcement services from the accommodation sector.
Analysis of Options
To give feedback to staff concerning the proposed review of the “Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005”
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
· Staff will be able to proceed with the review in a manner that will be endorsed by Council. |
· Nil. |
To not give feedback to staff concerning the proposed review of the “Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2005”
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
· Nil. |
· Staff may proceed in a direction that Council would not endorse. |
Assessment of Significance
47 This issue is considered to be not significant in accordance with Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
Recommended Option
48 To give feedback to staff concerning the proposed review of the “Camping Control Bylaw 2012”, in relation to the matters in (a) to (g) in paragraph 45.
Next Steps
49 The next steps are outlined in the proposed timeline above.
a Attachment A - Catlins Key Stakeholder Feedback View
b Attachment B - Gore Designated Sites View
c Attachment C - Australian Analysis View