Agenda of Council - 29 June 2016

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM PAGE

Procedural

1 Apologies 7

2 Leave of absence 7

3 Conflict of Interest 7

4 Public Forum 7

5 Extraordinary/Urgent Items 7

6 Confirmation of Council Minutes 7

Reports - Policy and Strategy

7.1 Adoption of the Annual Plan 2016/2017 9

7.2 Rates Resolution - Setting Rates for the Financial Year 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017 147

7.3 Draft Signs and Objects on Footpaths and Roads Bylaw 157

7.4 Draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and draft Cemetery Policy 181

7.5 Gambling Venue Policy and TAB Venue Policy 209

7.6 Ashton Flats Road Bylaw 227

Reports - Operational Matters

8.1 Bridge Weight Restriction Postings 2016/2017 235

8.2 Approval of Unbudgeted Expenditure for Southland Warm Homes Trust for 2016/2017 245

8.3 Unbudgeted Expenditure - Riverton Skate Park Shelter 253

8.4 Proposed Amendments to Resource Management Act Delegations 259

8.5 Building Consents and Values for April 2016 267

Reports - Governance

9.1 Haast-Hollyford Highway 275

9.2 Minutes of the Council Meeting dated 27 October 2015 285

9.3 Minutes of the Council Meeting dated 7 April 2016 287

9.4 Minutes of the Activities Performance Audit Committee Meeting dated 18 May 2016 289

9.5 Minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting dated 26 August 2015 291

9.6 Minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting dated 7 October 2015 293

9.7 Minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting dated 18 November 2015 295

9.8 Minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting dated 9 March 2016 297

9.9 Minutes of the Edendale-Wyndham Community Board Meeting dated 28 July 2015 299

9.10 Minutes of the Edendale-Wyndham Community Board Meeting dated 29 September 2015 301

9.11 Minutes of the Edendale-Wyndham Community Board Meeting dated 24 November 2015 303

9.12 Minutes of the Edendale-Wyndham Community Board Meeting dated 26 January 2016 305

9.13 Minutes of the Wallacetown Community Board Meeting dated 11 June 2015 307

9.14 Minutes of the Edendale-Wyndham Community Board Meeting dated 22 March 2016 309

9.15 Minutes of the Riverton/Aparima Community Board Meeting dated 2 May 2016 311

9.16 Minutes of the Wallacetown Community Board Meeting dated 16 July 2015 313

9.17 Minutes of the Wallacetown Community Board Meeting dated 17 September 2015 315

9.18 Minutes of the Wallacetown Community Board Meeting dated 26 November 2015 317

9.19 Minutes of the Wallacetown Community Board Meeting dated 21 January 2016 319

9.20 Minutes of the Wallacetown Community Board Meeting dated 17 March 2016 321

9.21 Minutes of the Gorge Road and Districts Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 10 February 2015 323

9.22 Minutes of the Gorge Road and Districts Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 22 June 2015 325

9.23 Minutes of the Lumsden Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 11 April 2016 327

9.24 Minutes of the Tokanui Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 16 March 2015 329

9.25 Minutes of the Tokanui Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 20 July 2015 331

9.26 Minutes of the Tokanui Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 23 November 2015 333

9.27 Minutes of the Lumsden/Balfour Water Supply Subcommittee Meeting dated 13 April 2016 335

9.28 Minutes of the Venture Southland Joint Committee meeting dated 16 May 2016 337

9.29 Minutes of the Southland Regional Heritage Committee meeting held 6 May 2016 343

Public Excluded

Procedural motion to exclude the public 351

C10.1 Public Excluded Minutes of the Activities Performance Audit Committee Meeting dated 18 May 2016 353

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Adoption of the Annual Plan 2016/2017

Record No: R/16/5/7916

Author: Katherine McDonald, Corporate Planning and Performance Advisor

Approved by: Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

☐ Decision ☒ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1. This report recommends that Council adopt the Annual Plan 2016/2017.

Executive Summary

2. The Annual Plan is a legislatively required document under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA). Year Two of the Council’s 10 Year Plan 2015-2025 (LTP) serves as the base for the Annual Plan 2016/2017. Some changes are required to the LTP budgets and work plan to reflect revised economic and business conditions and to schedule projects to better meet the needs of the District.

3. The Annual Plan has been developed over a ten month period and the views of the communities in the Southland District have been taken into account. A separate report has been prepared to set the rates for 2016/2017. A copy of the Annual Plan is attached as a separate document for Council’s review and approval.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Adoption of the Annual Plan 2016/2017”

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) Confirms in accordance with Section 100 of the Local Government Act 2002 that the Annual Plan 2016/2017 has been prepared based on reasonable judgement and assumptions and that it considers the projected financial results, including the projected operating deficit for 2016/2017, to be financially prudent given its financial position.

e) Adopts the Annual Plan including the Funding Impact Statement for the 2016/2017 financial year (attached).

f) Delegates authority to the Chief Executive to approve any final edits required to the Annual Plan in order to finalise the document for distribution.

Content

Background

4. All councils are required by legislation to prepare and adopt an Annual Plan for each financial year before the start of the new financial year.

5. The purpose of an Annual Plan is to:

· Detail the proposed annual budgets and Funding Impact Statement.

· Identify any variation from the financial statements and Funding Impact Statement included in the Long Term Plan (LTP) in respect of the year.

· Provide integrated decision-making and co-ordination of the resources of the local authority.

· Contribute to the accountability of the local authority to the community.

6. The Annual Plan is not audited.

7. As part of developing the Annual Plan, Council’s Community Boards, Community Development Area Subcommittees and Water Supply Subcommittees were provided with the opportunity at their estimates meetings to highlight any planned changes for the 2016/2017 financial year.

8. The budgets for the Annual Plan were based on year two of the 10 Year Plan 2015-2025 and were reviewed and updated as necessary by the activity managers. Finance staff as well as the Executive Leadership Team undertook a high level review of updated budgets.

9. The Consultation Document is the process by which Council consults with the community on these matters. The Statement of Proposal (incorporating Council’s Consultation Document) was considered and adopted by Council on 27 January 2016. It was available for public consultation from 29 January 2016 to 29 February 2016.

10. Oral Submissions were heard at a Council meeting on 7 April 2016. At this meeting, 25 submitters spoke to their submissions. The submission hearings were an opportunity for submitters to speak to the Council directly on their submissions as part of the special consultative procedure for the Annual Plan. Following the oral submissions, Councillors then considered the information heard and at the Council meeting on 27 April 2016, made a decision on the key issues and funding requests as a result of the consultation process.

11. Pursuant to the Local Government Act 2002, the Council is required to prepare and adopt its Annual Plan 2016/2017 before 1 July 2016.

Summary of the Annual Plan

12 Following the public consultation process and hearing of submissions, Council made a number of decisions in regards to the raised issues. These decisions included:

· Agreement to seal the Catlins Road which includes the Slope Point Road to the first carpark and the road leading to the Waipapa Point Lighthouse subject to funding from NZTA.

· Setting Uniform Targeted Rate at 25.63%

· Setting the District Rate increase at 3.30%

· Inclusion of a one off $5.00 (GST inclusive) increase per household to the Regional Heritage rate - a total of $77,095 for the District.

· Removal of the Edendale Community Centre project from the Annual Plan budget.

· Forwarding submitters’ project suggestions to the relevant Community Board or Community Development Area Subcommittee for their follow up and investigation if considered viable.

· Preparing the Annual Plan 2016/2017 on the basis that it will not include the costs of investigating alternative options for the Te Anau Wastewater Scheme at this stage as the Te Anau Wastewater Project Committee is yet to make a recommendation to Council. If the Te Anau Wastewater Project Committee makes a recommendation then this will be considered as unbudgeted expenditure at that time.

· Agreement to prepare the Annual Plan to include the Around the Mountains Cycle Trail project as previously planned. Council agreed to complete the Deloitte review and wait for the decision from the Environment Court prior to making any decisions on the future of the project and its funding.

· Inclusion of the Curio Bay project as currently scoped.

· To proceed with the development of a ‘high level’ community consultation process that will enable the Council to develop an understanding of the range of community views that might exist in relation to the concept of developing a Haast Hollyford Road via a public private partnership.

· Increasing the Mabel Bush Hall Rate from $28.64 to $38.64 per unit (GST inclusive).

· Increasing the Riverton Pool rate from $20.68 to $23.68 per unit (GST inclusive).

· Approval of a $5,000 grant to the Gore Kids Hub.

· The Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board resolves to decrease the fixed monthly rate for commercial users decreases from $207.15 to $76.13 (GST exc), and the standard unit rate remain at $0.5125 (GST exc), the night rate at $0.4457 (GST exc).

Issues

13 There are no further issues to resolve around the Annual Plan unless Councillors have questions they wish to raise.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

14 The Annual Plan is a statutory requirement under the Local Government Act 2002 (section 95).

15 All councils are required by legislation to prepare and adopt an Annual Plan before the commencement of the financial year to which it relates.

Community Views

16 Consideration of the communities views were included as part of preparing the Annual Plan and compiling the supporting information. The consultation document and supporting information were made available on Council’s website during the Annual Plan consultation period. Council held submission hearings on 27 April 2016 and considered and deliberated on the issues raised.

Costs and Funding

17 There are various costs incurred in compiling the Annual Plan including staff costs and budgets. These are included in Council’s annual budgets and funded accordingly.

Policy Implications

18 The changes set out in the Annual Plan are consistent with Council’s current Financial Strategy, Infrastructure Strategy and policies, including the Revenue and Financing Policy.

19 No policies have been amended as part of the Annual Plan development process.

Financial Considerations

20 The specific financial impacts of the various decisions made by Council subsequent to the deliberations on the submissions on 27 April are noted above in Paragraph 12 of the Background Section. The financial implications noted below relate to Council overall:

21 Rating Impact

· Rates Increases - Eighteen submissions were received on this topic. After considering the submissions, Council decided to maintain an overall rate increase of 3.30% for the 2016/2017 year as proposed in the consultation document.

· The Funding Impact Statement has been updated to show the current District and Local Area Rates. Rates will be set as either a rate in the dollar on land value or capital value or a Uniform Targeted Rate (UTR).

22 30% Maximum Uniform Targeted Rate (UTR)

· Uniform Targeted Rate - The maximum amount Council can collect under the UTR is 30% of total rates. Council has directed that the UTR for the 2016/2017 financial year be 25.63%.

23 Impact on Financial Reports

· The changes noted above and in Paragraph 12 are reflected in the relevant activity Funding Impact Statements.

· The consolidated impacts of the changes are shown in the forecast financial statements on pages 59 to 62 of the Annual Plan attached.

· The Consultation Document forecast a deficit for the 2016/2017 financial year of $238,690, this has increased to a forecast deficit of $929,489 in the Annual Plan, predominantly as a result of the removal of the revenue associated with the Edendale Community Hall Project.

· In comparing the Annual Plan forecast deficit to year two of the 10 Year Plan 2015 - 2025 ($894,000), the change is minimal (approximately $35,000).

· The prospective statement of financial position in the Annual Plan has been revised to incorporate 30 June 2015 actual balances (as opening balances) as well as changes from amendments made in 2016/2017.

24 Compliance with Financial Strategy

· The various changes above have not resulted in Council exceeding key financial indicators outlined in the financial strategy, being specifically:

(i) Rates increases to be no more than LGCI + 2.0%.

(ii) Total debt not to exceed 100% of total revenue.

· Benchmarks are outlined on page 14 of the Annual Plan and show that five of the six benchmarks have been achieved. The balanced budget benchmark, which is not forecast to be achieved in 2016/2017, is as a result of increased forestry harvesting costs not being met by associated revenue. This is consistent with what was forecast for 2016/2017 in the 2015-2025 10 Year Plan.

Analysis

Options Considered

25 Adopt the Annual Plan with amendments as required.

26 Not adopt the Annual Plan.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Adopt the Annual Plan with amendments as required

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Comply with statutory requirements

· Is consistent with the overall direction set through the 2015 Long Term Plan

· Is consistent with the feedback received via the community consultation process

· Will enable rates to be set for the 2016/17 financial year.

· There are no disadvantages

Option 2 – Not adopt the Annual Plan

Advantages

Disadvantages

· There are no advantages to this option

· Not comply with statutory requirements

· Rates will not be able to set for the 2016/17 financial year until an Annual Plan is adopted.

Assessment of Significance

27 Adoption of the Annual Plan is a significant decision as it is the primary way Council provides information on what it plans to deliver for the 2016/2017 year and how it proposes to fund the delivery of these services. It is one of the primary ways Council is held accountable for public expenditure.

Recommended Option

28 That Council adopt the Annual Plan 2016/2017 inclusive of the changes highlighted in the report and subject to minor wording changing arising from Council’s deliberations with amendments as required.

Next Steps

29 Following Council’s adoption of the Annual Plan it will be made available on the Council’s website www.southlanddc.govt.nz. Hardcopies will be available on request.

Attachments

a Southland District Council Annual Plan 2016/2017 View

Council

29 June 2016

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Rates Resolution - Setting Rates for the Financial Year 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017

Record No: R/16/1/589

Author: Shelley Dela Llana, Accountant

Approved by: Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 Council is required to formally set its rates, due dates for the payment of rates, and any details of penalties the Council wishes to add in accordance with the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.

Executive Summary

2 This report lists the various rates that have been calculated for the financial year 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017. These rates are included in the Council’s 2016/2017 Annual Plan.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Rates Resolution - Setting Rates for the Financial Year 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017” dated 21 June 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as significant in terms of its significance and engagement policy.st

d) Sets the following rates under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, on rating units in the district for the financial year commencing on 1 July 2016 and ending on 30 June 2017.

Uniform Annual General Charge

Pursuant to Section 15(1)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform annual general charge of $379.44 per rating unit on every rateable rating unit within the Southland District.

General Rate

Pursuant to Section 13(2)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a general rate of $0.00040203 in the dollar on the capital value of all rating units within the Southland District.

Targeted Rates

Community Facilities Rates

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, the following uniform targeted rates in respect of each separately used or inhabited part of a rateable rating unit situated in the following Community Facility Areas:

Community Facility Areas	Charge	Community Facility Areas	Charge
Aparima Hall	$40.10	Mossburn Hall	$60.00
Athol Memorial Hall	$79.41	Myross Bush Hall	$26.09
Balfour Hall	$34.78	Nightcaps Hall	$67.00
Blackmount Hall	$50.00	Ohai Hall	$50.07
Browns Hall	$26.37	Orawia Hall	$51.10
Brydone Hall	$43.48	Orepuki Hall	$58.11
Clifden Hall	$43.66	Oreti Plains Hall	$62.61
Colac Bay Hall	$47.78	Otahuti Hall	$26.09
Dacre Hall	$37.39	Otapiri-Lora Gorge Hall	$130.00
Dipton Hall	$43.10	Otautau Hall	$24.39
Dunearn-Avondale Hall	$8.70	Riversdale Hall	$42.02
Eastern Bush Hall	$65.22	Ryal Bush Hall	$36.73
Edendale Hall	$10.49	Seaward Downs Hall	$36.10
Fiordland Community Event Centre	$34.78	Stewart Island Hall	$62.38
Five Rivers Hall	$43.48	Thornbury Hall	$68.18
Fortrose Domain	$25.00	Tokanui-Quarry Hills Hall	$61.48
Glenham Hall	$40.00	Tuatapere Hall	$35.70
Gorge Road Hall	$42.23	Tussock Creek Hall	$26.09
Heddon Bush Hall	$60.00	Tuturau Hall	$37.14
Hedgehope-Glencoe Hall	$60.00	Waianiwa Hall	$60.00
Hokonui Hall	$57.88	Waikaia Recreation Hall	$47.15
Limehills Hall	$53.38	Waikawa Community Centre	$25.83
Lochiel Hall	$30.43	Waimahaka Hall	$50.00
Lumsden Hall	$30.72	Waimatuku Hall	$31.59
Mabel Bush Hall	$33.60	Wairio Community Centre	$32.00
Manapouri Hall	$31.56	Wallacetown Hall	$42.00
Mandeville Hall	$40.00	Winton Hall	$19.64
Mataura Island Hall	$23.70	Wreys Bush Hall	$81.22
Menzies Ferry Hall	$35.00	Wrights Bush Hall	$27.15
Mimihau Hall	$50.00	Wyndham Hall	$36.85
Mokoreta-Redan Hall	$78.26

Roading Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(a) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $58.92 per rateable rating unit within the Southland District; and

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(a) and 16(4)(b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a differential rate in the dollar of capital value for all rateable rating units:

Commercial	$0.00130241
Dairy	$0.00082363
Farming non-dairy	$0.00048350
Forestry	$0.00606691
Industrial	$0.00120263
Lifestyle	$0.00042720
Mining	$0.01630021
Other	$0.00012816
Residential	$0.00042720

Regional Heritage Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(a) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $34.02 in respect of each separately used or inhabited part of a rateable rating unit situated in the Southland District.

Waste Management Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $75.56 per rating unit on every rating unit within the Southland District excluding Stewart Island; and

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a rate of $0.00003122 in the dollar of capital value across all rating units within the Southland District excluding Stewart Island.

Local Targeted Rates (Ward, Community Board, Community Development Area, Town)

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b), 16(4)(a) or 16(4)(b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, the following rates per rateable rating unit/rate in the dollar on the land value of all rateable rating unit within the below areas:

Local Targeted Rates	Targeted Rate per rating unit	Rate in the dollar on land value
Mararoa Waimea Ward		$0.00003043
Waiau Aparima Ward		$0.00003856
Waihopai Toetoes Ward		$0.00002691
Winton Wallacetown Ward		$0.00001925
Edendale-Wyndham Community Board	$134.15
Otautau Community Board Residential		$0.01471391
Otautau Community Board Commercial		$0.02942782
Otautau Community Board Rural		$0.00001471
Riverton/Aparima Community Board (excludes Rural)		$0.00359643
Riverton/Aparima Community Board Rural		$0.00035964
Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board		$0.00129899
Te Anau Community Board Residential	$289.68
Te Anau Community Board Commercial	$579.35
Te Anau Community Board Rural	$72.42
Tuatapere Community Board (excludes Rural)	$176.35
Tuatapere Community Board Rural	$35.27
Wallacetown Community Board	$134.93
Winton Community Board	$212.97
Athol Community Development Area	$60.63
Balfour Community Development Area	$206.77
Browns Community Development Area	$183.26
Colac Bay Community Development Area	$77.32
Dipton Community Development Area	$78.86
Garston Community Development Area	$56.16
Gorge Road Community Development Area	$27.52
Limehills Community Development Area	$70.00
Lumsden Community Development Area	$272.55
Manapouri Community Development Area	$223.32
Mossburn Community Development Area		$0.01103799
Nightcaps Community Development Area	$155.95
Ohai Community Development Area	$188.83
Orepuki Community Development Area	$85.45
Riversdale Community Development Area	$150.89
Thornbury Community Development Area	$98.30
Tokanui Community Development Area	$170.39
Waikaia Community Development Area		$0.00279266
Woodlands Community Development Area	$174.70
Drummond Village Local	$46.24

Swimming Pool Targeted Rates

Swimming Pool Area	Charge	Swimming Pool Area	Charge
Edendale	$4.35	Takitimu	$20.46
Fiordland	$14.95	Tuatapere Ward	$13.42
Otautau	$19.43	Winton	$10.00
Riverton	$20.59

Te Anau-Manapouri Airport Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $111.30 per rateable rating unit within the Te Anau Manapouri Airport Area.

Stewart Island Waste Management Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $291.37 in respect of each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated in the Stewart Island Waste Management Area.

Rubbish Bin Collection Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $123.95 per bin where the collection service is actually provided.

Recycling Bin Collection Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $123.95 per bin where the collection service is actually provided.

Te Anau Rural Water Scheme Targeted Rates

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) and (b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, the rates as outlined below:

A connection charge by way of a uniform targeted rate of $501.30 per restricted connection.

In regards to the supply of water, the following rates or combination of below will apply to each rating unit:

• Pursuant to Section 19(2)(b), a uniform targeted rate of $334.19 for each unit supplied to the rating unit.

• For rating units with an allocation of multiples of 7.7 units, a uniform targeted rate of $2,573.30 for every 7.7 units allocated.

• For rating units allocated half a unit, a uniform targeted rate of 50% of a unit being $167.10. For this to apply, the rating unit must already receive at least 1 unit.

Matuku Rural Water Scheme Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $203.22 for each unit made available to the rating unit.

Metered Property Water Supply Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Section 19 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a rate for actual water consumption of $0.93 per cubic metre.

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a fixed charge of $147.83 per meter.

District Water Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, the rates are assessed on a differential basis:

• For all rating units without meters that are connected to a water supply scheme or are within the scheme rating boundary but are not connected, a uniform targeted rate of $372.66 for each SUIP of the rating unit for residential properties and for each rating unit for non-residential properties.

• For rating units with water troughs with direct feed from Council’s water mains, a uniform targeted rate of $74.53 per trough.

• For vacant non-contiguous rating units within the scheme rating boundary, a uniform targeted rate of $186.33 being half of one unit rate for the provision of the service due to the ability to connect to the scheme.

Wastewater Targeted Rates

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(b) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, the following rates:

• For all residential rating units either connected or are within the scheme rating boundary and able to be connected, a uniform targeted rate of $364.97 for each SUIP of the rating unit.

• For vacant non-contiguous rating units within the scheme rating boundary, a uniform targeted rate of $182.49 being half of one unit rate for the provision of the service due to the ability to connect to the scheme.

• All other properties either connected or able to be connected, a uniform targeted rate of $364.97 for each pan/urinal.

Woodlands Septic Tank Cleaning Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $35.71 in respect of each separately used or inhabited part of a rating within the Woodlands Septic Tank Cleaning Area.

Water Supply Loan Targeted Rates

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate per rating unit on the option that the ratepayer has previously chosen to pay either a one-off capital contribution for a new scheme or pay it over a selected period as below:

Water Supply Loan Rates	Charge
Edendale Water Loan Charge - 10 years	$238.81
Edendale Water Loan Charge - 15 years	$180.00
Edendale Water Loan Charge - 25 years	$134.55
Wyndham Water Loan Charge - 10 years	$237.03
Wyndham Water Loan Charge - 15 years	$208.75
Wyndham Water Loan Charge - 25 years	$134.93

Sewerage Supply Loan Targeted Rates

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate per unit on the option that the ratepayer has previously chosen to pay either a one-off capital contribution for a new scheme or pay it over a selected period as below:

Sewerage Supply Loan Rates	Charge
Edendale Sewerage Loan - 10 years (incl connection cost)	$1,039.48
Edendale Sewerage Loan - 15 years (incl connection cost)	$783.56
Edendale Sewerage Loan - 25 years (incl connection cost)	$590.30
Edendale Sewerage Loan - 10 years (excl connection cost)	$861.67
Edendale Sewerage Loan - 25 years (excl connection cost)	$488.57
Gorge Road Sewerage Loan - 15 years	$415.11
Oban Sewerage Loan Charge Extension - 15 years	$560.70
Tuatapere Sewerage Loan Charge - 15 years	$568.40
Tuatapere Sewerage Loan Charge - 25 years	$429.63
Wallacetown Sewerage Loan Charge - 15 years	$410.83
Wallacetown Sewerage Loan Charge - 25 years	$316.40
Wyndham Sewerage Loan - 10 years (incl connection cost)	$948.08
Wyndham Sewerage Loan - 15 years (incl connection cost)	$715.67
Wyndham Sewerage Loan - 25 years (incl connection cost)	$539.57
Wyndham Sewerage Loan - 10 years (excl connection cost)	$770.33
Wyndham Sewerage Loan - 15 years (excl connection cost)	$581.50
Wyndham Sewerage Loan - 25 years (excl connection cost)	$438.81

Sandy Brown Road Utility Loan Targeted Rate

Pursuant to Sections 16(3)(b) and 16(4)(a) of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, a uniform targeted rate of $122.77 per rating unit.

e) Resolves that the rates, detailed in recommendation (d) of this paper for the year commencing 1 July 2016 and concluding on 30 June 2017 are expressed exclusive of Goods and Services Tax (GST). GST will be applied when rates are assessed for 2016/2017.

f) Resolves under Section 24 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 that all rates will be payable in four equal instalments with the due dates for payment being:

• Instalment One - 26 August 2016.

• Instalment Two - 25 November 2016.

• Instalment Three - 24 February 2017

• Instalment Four - 26 May 2017.

The due date for metered water targeted rates will be the 20th of the month following invoice date. The due date will be clearly noted on the water invoice.

g) Resolves under Sections 57 and 58 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 to apply penalties to unpaid rates as follows:

• A penalty of 10% on the amount of any instalment remaining unpaid after the relevant due date in recommendation (f) above, to be added the next working day following the due date.

• A further penalty of 10% on any amount of rates assessed and penalties added in previous years and remaining unpaid at 6 July 2016.The penalty will be added on 7 July 2016.

h) Has delegated authority to remit penalties to the Chief Financial Officer.

i) Resolves that under Section 54 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 where rates charged on a rating unit are less than or equal to ten dollars, Council will not collect these as it believes it to be uneconomic.

j) Agrees that valuation roll and rate records for the District of Southland are open for inspection by ratepayers at all District offices (as listed below), during normal office hours:

- Invercargill Office

15 Forth Street, Invercargill 9810

- Te Anau Office

116 Town Centre, Te Anau 9600

- Lumsden Office

18 Diana Street, Lumsden 9730

- Winton Office

1 Wemyss Street, Winton 9720

- Otautau Office

174 Main Street, Otautau 9610

- Wyndham Library

41 Balaclava Street, Wyndham 9831

- Riverton Office

117 Palmerston Street, Riverton 9822

- Mobile Bookbus

- Stewart Island Office

Ayr Street, Oban, Stewart Island 9846

k) Agrees to not collect rates where the rates assessment is for amounts less than $10 GST inclusive.

l) Agrees the following options be available for payment of rates shall be payable:

• Direct Debit.

• Credit card (Visa or Mastercard).

• Internet banking, telephone.

• By cash, cheque or Eftpos.

Content

Background

3 Council has adopted the 2016/2017 Annual Plan. This paper provides for the Council to set rates for the year commencing on 1 July 2016 and ending on 30 June 2017.

4 Rates for the 2016/2017 year are set out on a GST exclusive basis. GST will be added when rates are assessed for 2016/2017 to provide the total amount due.

5 Where a targeted rate applies to a particular area, reference is made within the
Funding Impact Statement (Rates Section) of Council’s 2016/2017 Annual Plan to the land map detailing this. These maps can be viewed at www.emap.southlanddc.govt.nz.

6 Definitions of rating terminology and applicability are explained at the beginning of the Funding Impact Statement (Rates Section) of Council’s 2016/2017 Annual Plan.

7 Under Section 54 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, Council has the option to not collect small amounts, if Council is of the opinion that it is uneconomic to do so.

8 Rates are calculated annually on all rateable rating units, deductions are then made to those rating units that apply for remissions under Council’s Remission and Postponement of Rates Policy. The smallest balance to be collected for 2016/2017 is 18 cents. Council is required to send assessments for these balances unless it deems it uneconomic to collect. Where a Council resolves not to collect these balances, Council must still notify the ratepayer that it will not collect the rates on the related rating unit.

9 Last year for the first time Council resolved not to collect rates where the rates assessment was for amounts less than $10 GST inclusive. This was recommended by staff as typically most rates were on vacant contiguous residential section with no services. The cost of staff time reallocating payment (as most assessment had more than one property), printing and stationery was not cost effective. Last year 304 assessments totalling $1,418 were not collected. This year there would be 322 assessments totalling $1,670 that would not be collected if Council agreed.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

10 Under Section 23(1) of the Local Government (Rating) Act (LGRA), the Council is required to set its rates by resolution.

11 Section 24 of the LGRA requires that the Council state the financial year for which the rates relate and the due date for payment of the rates in its resolution setting rates.

12 Section 57 of the LGRA states that a local authority may, by resolution, authorise penalties to be added to rates that are not paid by the due date. The resolution must state how the penalty is calculated and the date the penalty is to be added to the amount of unpaid rates. Section 58 of the LGRA sets out the penalties that may be imposed.

13 Pursuant to Section 23(5) of the LGRA, a copy of this rates resolution will be sent to the Secretary of Local Government within 20 working days.

Community Views

14 The information in this report has been out for public consultation as part of the 2016/2017 Annual Plan process.

Costs and Funding

15 Financial considerations have been dealt with by the preparation of the 2016/2017
Annual Plan and the budgeting process used to determine District and Local Area Rates.

Policy Implications

16 The rates resolution is to set the rates as detailed in the Rates Funding Impact Statement from Council’s 2016/2017 Annual Plan that has been the subject of consultation.

Analysis

Options Considered

17 Considered all options as part of the preparation of the 2016/2017 Annual Plan and revised during the submission process.

Analysis of Options

18 Option 1 - Adopt the rates, penalties and due dates

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Adhering to LGRA requirements.

· The rates have been consulted on as part of the Annual Plan.

· The rates reflect the Funding Impact Statement in the Annual Plan.

· None.

19 Option 2 - Make changes as required by Council

Advantages

Disadvantages

· None.

· Timing issues on work being completed within statutory deadlines.

· Will not match Annual Plan as adopted.

Assessment of Significance

20 That under Council’s significant and engagement policy the resolution to set the rates has a major effect on the community.

21 Consultation on the proposed rates occurred as part of the 2016/2017 Annual Plan. The rates are formulated on the basis of the Funding Impact Statement.

Recommended Option

22 It is recommended that Council set the rates for the financial year 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017 (Option 1).

Next Steps

23 Rates will be assessed with the recommendation in the report.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Draft Signs and Objects on Footpaths and Roads Bylaw

Record No: R/16/6/9003

Author: Tamara Dytor, Policy Analyst

Approved by: Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 This report seeks approval from Council to engage with the public on the draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw.

Executive Summary

2 The attached draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw aims to regulate the placement of signs and objects on roads and footpaths. The purpose of this bylaw is to maintain public safety and protect the public from nuisance.

3 The draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw sets general criteria for the placement of signs and objects on roads and footpaths and establishes a permit system for any more than one sign or object.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Draft Signs and Objects on Footpaths and Roads Bylaw” dated 16 June 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Determines that it is satisfied that -

(i) the draft Signs and Objects on Footpaths and Roads Bylaw is necessary for one or more of the following purposes:

(1) to protect the public from nuisance;

(2) to protect the health and safety of the public.

(ii) the bylaw is the most appropriate and proportionate way of addressing the issue; and

(iii) the bylaw is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

e) Endorses the draft Signs and Objects on Footpaths and Roads Bylaw for public consultation using the special consultative procedure from 30 June 2016 to 30 July 2016.

Content

Background

4 The Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw has not been amended since its adoption in 2008. A review of the bylaw is proposed to:

· Align the bylaw with the District Plan;

· Provide clarity for the public;

· Address issues across the District which relate to signs and objects on footpaths and roads; and

· Broaden the scope of the bylaw so it is not limited only to advertising signs.

5 The draft Bylaw would address the placement of signs and other objects in the road reserve, for example sandwich boards on footpaths. Signs on private land would be covered in the District Plan.

6 Changes to the bylaw are intended to increase the ease of doing business with Council and provide clarity and consistency.

Issues

7 The Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw deals with the placement of signs and objects on footpaths and roads. It is intended to mitigate potential for nuisance and the risk to public health and safety.

8 The draft bylaw does not address signage content. This is regulated by the Advertising Standards Authority for advertising signs or by the police for other forms of signs. Controlling the number and nature of signs and objects on roads and footpaths would reduce the safety risks and potential nuisance.

9 The draft Bylaw proposes a system where one sign or object for each premise would be permitted provided it met certain criteria. Any additional signs or objects would require a permit from the Council.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

10 Although the Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008 is not legally required to be reviewed at this stage, a review is recommended to align the bylaw with the District Plan. Officers have also identified potential risk to public safety and nuisance resulting from the placement of signs and objects on roads and footpaths.

11 Section 145 of the Local Government Act 2002 states that:

A territorial authority may make bylaws for its district for 1 or more of the following purposes:

(a) protecting the public from nuisance,

(b) protecting, promoting, and maintaining public health and safety,

(c) minimising the potential for offensive behaviour in public places.

12 The draft bylaw meets these conditions because it is intended to protect the public from nuisance and to protect, promote, and maintain public health and safety.

13 When making a bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002 the Council must comply with the matters in section 155 of that Act. This section requires that the Council must determine whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem. The Council must then determine whether the bylaw is in the most appropriate form, and that it does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

14 Officers have considered options for regulating the placement of signs and objects on roads and footpaths through other mechanisms (including other existing bylaws and the District Plan) but recommend the draft bylaw as the most clear and appropriate way to address the issue.

15 Officers have also considered the form of the bylaw and have identified it as clear and appropriate for the public. Drafting a separate bylaw to address this issue is intended to increase the ease of doing business with Council by making conditions and criteria clear and easily accessible.

16 The Council has developed the draft bylaw to be flexible and has not identified any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Community Views

17 If endorsed by Council, the draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw 2016 would be released for public consultation from 30 June to 30 July 2016.

Costs and Funding

18 Since the draft bylaw recommends that a permit is required only where more than one object or sign is displayed per premises, a significant amount of additional work is not predicted. Enforcement would occur on an as required basis and would be conducted by Community Engineers, funded from local roading budgets.

19 A permit system will involve some costs for those people and businesses that currently have more than one sign or object placed on a road or footpath. However, it is not intended that the cost of obtaining a permit will be high.

Policy Implications

20 It is intended duplicated content from this bylaw would be removed from the District Plan.

Analysis

Options Considered

21 In order for the Council to determine whether the draft Bylaw is the best way of addressing the perceived problem, the Council considered the following options:

(a) Retain the current Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008;

(b) Revoke the Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008 and have no bylaw to regulate these issues;

(d) Consult on the draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw 2016.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Retain the current Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· There is no legislative requirement to review the bylaw at this stage.

· The Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008 is not aligned with the District Plan following its recent review.

· The current bylaw only deals with advertising signs but does not address other objects on footpaths and roads or signs not related to advertising.

Option 2 – Revoke the Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008 and have no bylaw to regulate these issues.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· There are no clear advantages to this approach because it would not address potential issues relating to public nuisance or safety.

· The District Plan currently regulates signs on private property but does not regulate signs or objects on roads or footpaths. This would mean that this activity would be unregulated.

· If an issue were to arise relating to signs or objects on roads or footpaths, Council would not be able to effectively manage it.

Option 3 – Use other, existing regulatory tools to address these issues.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Council could consider regulating these issues through bylaws on roading or trading in public places or through its District Plan.

· This would limit the number of regulatory tools maintained by the Council.

· However, to include regulation of these issues in a roading bylaw may not be clear and easy for the public to locate and interpret. Southland District Council’s Roading Bylaw was also reviewed in 2015.

· Including this issue in a bylaw relating to trading in public places would not address items which are not solely placed on roads and footpaths for the purposes of trading (e.g. braziers, decorative plants etc.).

· Currently, the District Plan regulates activities which occur on private land. Amending the plan to include signs and objects on roads and footpaths would not be as flexible as the approach proposed in the draft Bylaw. Applications to place additional signs and objects on roads and footpaths would need to be made through the resource consent process. This is likely to be more expensive and time consuming than a permit system.

Option 4 – Consult on the draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths

Advantages

Disadvantages

· The draft Bylaw would allow Council to permit and regulate signs and objects on footpaths in a flexible manner.

· Addressing these issues through a distinct bylaw means that it is easy for the public to find this information.

· A bylaw allows Council to have a flexible approach to enforcement and to remove items where there is a breach of the bylaw that is unable to be resolved.

· A permit system will involve some costs for those people and businesses that currently have more than one sign or object placed on a road or footpath. However, it is not intended that the cost of obtaining a permit will be high.

Assessment of Significance

22 The draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw 2016 is not assessed as significant.

Recommended Option

23 It is recommended that Council approve the release of the draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw 2016 for public consultation.

Next Steps

24 If Council decides to release the draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths 2016 for public consultation, the submission period would be open from 30 June to 30 July 2016. Submitters would have the opportunity to speak to their submissions at hearings in August and Council would deliberate on submissions in September.

Attachments

a Draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw 2016 View

b Draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Administration Manual View

c Statement of Proposal - Draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw 2016 View

Council

29 June 2016

Pursuant to Section 145 Local Government Act 2002 the Southland District Council makes this Bylaw:

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL SIGNS AND OBJECTS ON ROADS AND

FOOTPATHS BYLAW 2016

CONTENTS

1 TITLE.. 1

2 PURPOSE.. 1

3 COMMENCEMENT AND APPLICATION.. 1

4 REPEAL. 2

5 INTERPRETATION.. 3

6 GENERAL CONTROL OF SIGNS.. 4

7 SIGNS AND FLAGS ON FOOTPATHS.. 4

8 GENERAL CONTROL OF OBJECTS ON FOOTPATHS.. 5

9 STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR PERMITS.. 6

10 FEES AND CHARGES.. 7

11 DELEGATIONS.. 7

12 PERMITS.. 8

13 OFFENCES AND PENALTIES.. 8

PART 1

PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS

1 TITLE

1.1 The title of this Bylaw is “THE SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL SIGNS AND OBJECTS ON ROADS AND FOOTPATHS BYLAW 2016”.

2 PURPOSE

2.1 This Bylaw is made for the purposes of:

a) Protecting the public from nuisance.

b) Protecting, promoting, and maintaining public health and safety.

c) Regulating, controlling, or prohibiting the placement of signs or objects on roads and footpaths.

3 COMMENCEMENT AND APPLICATION

3.1 This Bylaw will come into force on {date to be determined}.

3.2 This Bylaw applies to all Roads under the control of the Southland District Council. This includes footpaths and berms.

3.3 This Bylaw does not regulate the placement of signs or objects in parks, reserves or open spaces owned or controlled by Southland District Council.

3.4 Signs and objects on private land are regulated under the Southland District Plan, and not this Bylaw.

4 REPEAL

4.1 The Southland District Council Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008 is repealed at midnight {date to be determined}.

5 INTERPRETATION

5.1 In this Bylaw:

Advertising	means using words or any pictorial or other representation to notify the availability of or to promote the sale of an object, a product, a service or business.
Authorised Officer	means a person appointed or authorised by the Council to act on its behalf in relation to this Bylaw.
Council	means the Southland District Council.
District Plan	means the operative Southland District Plan.
Display	means place, erect, construct or fix.
Flag Sign	means a flag with advertising.
Footpath	means that portion of any road laid out or constructed for the use of pedestrians and includes the edging and kerbing and includes any footbridge.
Footpath Sign	means a sign containing advertising displayed on a footpath but does not include a flag sign.
Pedestrian	A person travelling on foot, in a wheelchair or a mobility scooter or using a buggy, pushchair or perambulator.
Permit	means any approval or consent required or given by the Council under this Bylaw.
Road	means the whole of any land which is within a district, and which— (a) immediately before the commencement of this Part was a road or street or public highway; or (b) immediately before the inclusion of any area in the district was a public highway within that area; or (c) is laid out by the Council as a road or street after the commencement of this Part; or (d) is vested in the Council for the purpose of a road as shown on a deposited survey plan; or (e) is vested in the Council as a road or street pursuant to any other enactment;— and includes— (f) except where elsewhere provided in this Part, any access way or service lane which before the commencement of this Part was under the control of any council or is laid out or constructed by or vested in any council as an access way or service lane or is declared by the Minister of Works and Development as an access way or service lane after the commencement of this Part or is declared by the Minister of Lands as an access way or service lane on or after 1 April 1988: (g) every square or place intended for use of the public generally, and every bridge, culvert, drain, ford, gate, building, or other thing belonging thereto or lying upon the line or within the limits thereof;— but, except as provided in the Public Works Act 1981 or in any regulations under that Act, does not include a motorway within the meaning of that Act or the Government Roading Powers Act 1989
Sign	means words or any pictorial or other representation or notice on any material or object. This does not include any illuminated sign, which will be assessed under the provisions of the District Plan.
Temporary Sign	means a sign that is portable and not fixed to land or buildings.

5.2 Any term not defined in this bylaw but which is defined in the Local Government Act 2002 shall have the meaning given to it by the Act.

PART 2

CONTROL OF SIGNS

6 GENERAL CONTROL OF SIGNS

6.1 No person may display a sign on a Road or Footpath without a Permit from the Council, unless:

a) The display of the Sign is authorised by this Bylaw; or

b) It is a Temporary Sign associated with a cultural, social, sporting or educational activity and is removed after the activity ceases.

6.2 No person may display a Sign in a location or manner that impedes the safe and efficient flow of pedestrian or vehicular traffic on a Footpath or Road.

7 SIGNS AND FLAGS ON FOOTPATHS

7.1 To be authorised under this Bylaw a Sign must comply with all of the following:

a) A Footpath Sign is only authorised if it complies with the following specifications:

Minimum height	0.5 metres
Maximum height	1.0 metres
Maximum width	0.6 metres
Maximum base spread	0.6 metres

b) A Flag Sign on a Footpath is only authorised if it complies with the following specifications:

Maximum height	3.0 metres
Maximum width	0.9 metres
Maximum base spread	0.6 metres
Minimum clearance height to the footpath	2.1 metres

c) A Footpath Sign or Flag Sign on a Footpath must:

(i) Advertise a business or relate to the business activity; and

(ii) The Sign is located adjacent to the business to which it relates; and

(iii) The Sign is removed when the business is not open to the public; and

(iv) There is not more than one Footpath Sign or Flag Sign for the business; and

(v) There is a minimum width of Footpath free of objects adjacent to the Footpath Sign or Flag Sign of 1.5 metres; and

(vi) The Footpath Sign or Flag Sign is placed immediately adjacent to the Footpath kerb; and

(vii) The Footpath Sign or Flag Sign does not protrude onto the vehicle carriageway of a road.

(viii) The Footpath Sign does not alone or with other Footpath Signs unreasonably impede safe and efficient pedestrian flow.

d) A Flag Sign fixed to a building must:

(i) Relate to a business in that building; and

(ii) The maximum height of the Flag Sign does not exceed 3 metres above the ground; and

(iii) The Flag Sign does not protrude onto the vehicle carriageway of a road; and

(iv) The Flag Sign does not protrude into any Footpath more than 0.6 metres.

PART 3

OBJECTS ON FOOTPATHS

8 GENERAL CONTROL OF OBJECTS ON FOOTPATHS

8.1 Other than Signs permitted by this Bylaw no person may place any other objects on a Footpath or Road without a permit from the Council.

8.2 If the Council issues a permit to a person to leave objects on a Footpath or a Road then the permit holder must comply with all conditions on the Permit.

PART 4

STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR PERMITS

9 STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR PERMITS

9.1 All Permits

9.1.1 Permits are issued under the Southland District Council Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw 2016.

9.1.2 The permit holder must present the permit if requested by any officer of the Southland District Council.

9.1.3 The permit may be reviewed by the Council at any time and may be revoked on 48 hours written notice or earlier if necessary to prevent harm to any person or damage to any private or public property.

9.1.4 The permit is only valid if all applicable fees have been paid and funds have cleared.

9.1.5 Signs or objects must be placed on the footpath outside the premises to which they relate.

9.1.6 Signs or objects must not be placed outside adjoining premises without written permission from the adjoining premises.

9.1.7 Generally, signs or objects should be placed on the footpath only when the premises to which they relate are open to the public.

9.1.8 Pedestrians using the footpath must not be impeded by the signs or objects placed on the footpath.

9.1.9 Signs or objects placed on the footpath must be placed to ensure a minimum 1.2 metres continuous, straight-line width of the footpath remains clear for pedestrian access.

9.2 Displaying a sign in a public place

9.2.1 The sign must correspond with the specifications and description in the permit application, including but not limited to the construction and dimensions of the sign.

9.2.2 Any sign, including any structure attached to the sign, must be maintained in good repair. If it is damaged for any reason it must be removed, repaired or replaced within 24 hours of sustaining damage, if there is a safety issue otherwise within 72 hours.

9.2.3 The sign must be removed by the date stated in the permit. If no date is stated, then the permit is deemed to terminate within 21 days of the date the permit was issued.

9.2.4 The permit holder is responsible for any damage to the public place or any other property of the Southland District Council caused by the sign, the permit holder, the permit holder’s contractors or the permit holder’s employees.

9.3 Placing objects on or use of the footpath

9.3.1 Objects other than tables and chairs may not occupy more than one quarter of the footpath width or 0.6 metres, whichever is the lesser.

9.3.2 Objects including but not limited to umbrellas, canopies or shades must be secured in such a way that they will not fall or be blown over.

9.3.3 The lower edge of the canopy of any umbrella or shade must be at least 2.1 metres above the footpath.

9.3.4 Access to fire exits, fire hydrants, shop doorways, parking meters, rubbish receptacles, street furniture and bicycle stands must be kept clear at all times.

9.3.5 All braziers or heating devices must be securely fixed so as to not fall over.

9.3.6 A brazier or heating device must not present a danger to any pedestrian or building.

9.3.7 The permit holder must keep the footpath area where objects are placed clean from litter at all times.

PART 5

ADMINISTRATION

10 FEES AND CHARGES

10.1 The Council may set fees and charges for any Permit granted under the Bylaw. Fees will be set each year in the Council's Annual Plan.

11 DELEGATIONS

11.1 The Chief Executive may appoint Authorised Officers of Southland District Council.

11.2 The Chief Executive and Authorised Officers may exercise any power, function or duty under this Bylaw or carry out any act in order to achieve its effective administration including:

a) Process, grant or refuse permits;

b) Specify the conditions that apply to a permit;

c) Specify forms and procedures for the effective administration of the Bylaw;

d) Make any decision or determination required in this Bylaw in order to administer it;

e) Make any decisions regarding suspension, withdrawal or removal of a Permit;

f) Remove, store or dispose of Signs or objects in breach of this Bylaw;

g) Determine the costs of the removal, storage or disposal of Signs or objects in breach of this Bylaw; and

12 PERMITS

12.1 Where an activity under this Bylaw requires a permit from the Council, the person seeking a permit must:

a) Complete the required application form;

b) Pay the applicable fee; and

c) Comply with the conditions of that Permit.

12.2 The Council may grant a Permit for any activity that would otherwise contravene this Bylaw.

12.3 A Permit is personal to the applicant and is not transferable.

12.4 An Authorised Officer may revoke or suspend any Permit issued under this Bylaw at any time, or suspend for such periods of time, on such terms and conditions as the Authorised Officer may consider appropriate in the event the Permit issued is breached, or to protect Council property, public health and safety or to minimise nuisance.

PART 6

ENFORCEMENT

13 OFFENCES AND PENALTIES

13.1 Every Person or Permit holder who:

a) Fails to comply with any provision of this Bylaw; or

b) Breaches the conditions of any permit granted pursuant to this Bylaw

commits an offence under Section 239 of the LGA 2002 and is liable to a fine as specified in Section 242 of the LGA 2002.

13.2 The Council may issue infringement notices, in such forms and for such amounts as are authorised in any regulations made under Section 259 of the LGA 2002.

13.3 In accordance with Section 163 of the Act, Council may remove or alter any sign or other work or thing that is or has been constructed in breach of this Bylaw.

13.4 Council may recover the cost of removing or altering the Sign or other work or thing that is in breach of this Bylaw from the person who committed the breach. Payment of this cost does not relieve the person of liability for the breach of this Bylaw.

13.5 In accordance with Sections 164 and 165 of the Act, Council may seize and impound property if it is used in breach of this Bylaw.

13.6 In accordance with Sections 167 and 168 of the Act, Council may return or dispose of property seized and impounded. The person in breach of this Bylaw is responsible for any costs associated with disposal of seized property.

Council

29 June 2016

The draft Bylaw proposes a system where one sign or object for each premise would be permitted provided it met certain criteria. Any additional signs or objects would require a permit from the Council.

Options Considered

When making a bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002 the Council must comply with the matters in section 155 of that Act. This section requires that the Council must determine whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem. The Council must then determine whether the bylaw is in the most appropriate form, and that it does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The Council has developed the draft bylaw to be flexible and has not identified any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

In order for the Council to determine whether the draft Bylaw is the best way of addressing the perceived problem, the Council considered the following options:

1. Retain the current Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008;

2. Revoke the Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008 and have no bylaw to regulate these issues;

3. Use other, existing regulatory tools to address these issues; and

4. Draft a replacement bylaw.

Option 1 – Retain the current Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· There is no legislative requirement to review the bylaw at this stage.

· The Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008 is not aligned with the District Plan following its recent review.

· The current bylaw only deals with advertising signs but does not address other objects on footpaths and roads or signs not related to advertising.

Option 2 – Revoke the Control of Advertising Signs Bylaw 2008 and have no bylaw to regulate these issues.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· There are no clear advantages to this approach because it would not address potential issues relating to public nuisance or safety.

· The District Plan currently regulates signs on private property but does not regulate signs or objects on roads or footpaths. This would mean that this activity would be unregulated.

· If an issue were to arise relating to signs or objects on roads or footpaths, Council would not be able to effectively manage it.

Option 3 – Use other, existing regulatory tools to address these issues.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Council could consider regulating these issues through bylaws on roading or trading in public places or through its District Plan.

· This would limit the number of regulatory tools maintained by the Council.

Option 4 – Draft a replacement bylaw.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· The draft Bylaw would allow Council to permit and regulate signs and objects on footpaths in a flexible manner.

· Addressing these issues through a distinct bylaw means that it is easy for the public to find this information.

· A bylaw allows Council to have a flexible approach to enforcement and to remove items where there is a breach of the bylaw that is unable to be resolved.

Making a submission

Submissions are invited from 30 June 2016 and closing at 5.00 pm on 30 July 2016. Council will consider all submissions from the public when making its final decisions on the bylaw.

Submissions can be made online, via post or by providing a written submission to staff at your local Southland District Council office. All submissions received by Southland District

Council will be made available to the public. If you lodge a submission, you can also request to be heard by Council during the hearings process.

Online submissions can be made using the submission form available at www.southlanddc.govt.nz.

The full statement of proposal is available for inspection at all Southland District Council offices (Invercargill Head Office (15 Forth Street, Invercargill); Lumsden; Otautau; Riverton/Aparima; Stewart Island/Rakiura; Te Anau; Winton; and Wyndham).

Written submissions must:

1. Be clearly labelled SUBMISSION – DRAFT SIGNS AND OBJECTS ON ROADS AND FOOTPATHS BYLAW 2016.

2. Contain the name, address and contact details of the submitter.

3. Indicate whether the submitter wishes to be heard by the Southland District Council in support of his/her submission. Submitters wishing to speak will be allocated a time by Southland District Council.

Submissions can be posted to:

Southland District Council

Submissions

PO Box 903

Invercargill 9840

For further information contact Jennifer Green, 0800 732 732.

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and draft Cemetery Policy

Record No: R/16/6/9010

Author: Tamara Dytor, Policy Analyst

Approved by: Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 This report seeks approval from Council to engage with the public on the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and Cemetery Policy.

Executive Summary

2 The Cemetery Bylaw 2006 is currently due for review. The draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and Cemetery Policy (attached) propose an approach for the regulation of Council controlled cemeteries.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and draft Cemetery Policy” dated 20 June 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Determines that it is satisfied that -

(i) the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 is necessary for one or more of the following purposes:

(1) to protect the public from nuisance;

(2) to protect the health and safety of the public.

(ii) the bylaw is the most appropriate and proportionate way of addressing the issue; and

(iii) the bylaw is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

e) Endorses the draft Cemetery Bylaw and draft Cemetery Policy for public consultation in accordance with the special consultative procedure from 30 June to 30 July 2016.

Content

Background

3 The Cemetery Bylaw 2006 is currently due for review, having been in force for a ten year period. A review is required by Section 159 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers have taken the opportunity to ensure that the bylaw remains appropriate and is supported by a robust and relevant policy.

Issues

4 The draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 takes a predominantly similar approach to the Cemetery Bylaw 2006. However, some clauses within the Cemetery Bylaw 2006 have been moved to the draft Cemetery Policy, since they were not of a regulatory nature.

5 A key change proposed in the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 relates to the period to which an exclusive right of burial would apply. Currently, an exclusive right of burial is allocated for a period of up to 60 years. The draft Cemetery Bylaw proposes that this is limited to a period of up to 20 years. The purpose of this change is to reflect the needs of today’s communities in which people are often more transient. This change would also allow Council greater flexibility and more efficient management of the cemeteries it controls.

6 Council has also clarified its position on disinterment in the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016. If the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 were adopted, any person wishing to be present at a disinterment (other than a Council officer, funeral director or Health Protection Officer) would require prior Council approval.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

7 The Cemetery Bylaw 2006 is currently due for review under Section 159 of the Local Government Act 2002.

8 Consistent with Section 145 of the Local Government Act 2002 the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and the draft Cemetery Policy is intended to protect the public from nuisance; protect, promote and maintain public health and safety and minimise the potential for offensive behaviour in public places.

9 The draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 also meets the criteria of Section 145 (b)(v) which allows a territorial authority to make a bylaw for the purpose of managing, regulating against, or protecting from, damage, misuse, or loss, or for preventing the use of, the land, structures, or infrastructure associated with cemeteries.

10 When making a bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002 the Council must comply with the matters in section 155 of that Act. This section requires that the Council must determine whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem. The Council must then determine whether the bylaw is in the most appropriate form, and that it does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

11 Officers have considered the form of the draft bylaw and submitted the draft for legal review. Officers recommend the draft bylaw and accompanying policy as the most appropriate form of bylaw.

12 The Council has not identified any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. Consideration has been given to cultural and religious needs and sensitivities relating to burial and has developed the draft bylaw to be flexible where required.

Community Views

13 If endorsed by Council, the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and draft Cemetery Policy would be released for public consultation from 30 June to 30 July 2016. The draft bylaw and policy would be publicly notified and would be available on the Southland District Council website, as well as at Council offices.

14 A targeted letter would be sent to notify potentially interested parties such as funeral directors and genealogical societies.

Costs and Funding

15 The draft Cemetery Bylaw and draft Cemetery Policy do not reflect significant changes to current operational practice. As such no additional costs have been identified.

Policy Implications

16 The draft Cemetery Policy has been prepared to support the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and is attached to this report.

Analysis

Options Considered

17 In order for the Council to determine whether the draft Bylaw is the best way of addressing the perceived problem, the Council considered the following options:

1. Retain the Cemetery Bylaw 2006 or

2. Draft a replacement bylaw.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Retain the Cemetery Bylaw 2006

Advantages

Disadvantages

· There are no clear advantages to retain the current bylaw, which is currently due for review.

· The Cemetery Bylaw 2006 is legally required to be reviewed.

· The current bylaw combines both bylaw and policy issues - it is preferable to separate policy from the content of the bylaw.

Option 2 – Endorse the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and Cemetery Policy for public consultation

Advantages

Disadvantages

· The draft bylaw is legally compliant and Council would meet requirements under the Local Government Act 2002 to review the current bylaw.

· The draft bylaw distinguishes between regulatory bylaw content and policy content.

· The draft bylaw clarifies Council’s position on disinterment

· No disadvantages to this approach have been identified and there is opportunity for amendments to the draft bylaw through the process of public consultation.

Assessment of Significance

18 Neither the draft Cemetery Bylaw nor the draft Cemetery Policy have been assessed as significant as substantial changes to operational practice are not recommended.

Recommended Option

19 It is recommended that Council approve the release of the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and Cemetery Policy for public consultation.

Next Steps

20 If Council decides to release the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 and the draft Cemetery Policy for public consultation, the submission period would be open from 30 June to 30 July 2016. Submitters would have the opportunity to speak to their submissions at hearings in August and Council would deliberate on submissions in September.

Attachments

a Draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 View

b Draft Cemetery Policy View

c Statement of Proposal draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 View

Council

29 June 2016

Pursuant to Section 145 of the Local Government Act 2002, and Section 16 of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 the Southland District Council makes the following Bylaw:

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL CEMETERY BYLAW 2016

CONTENTS

1 SHORT TITLE, COMMENCEMENT AND APPLICATION.. 1

2 REVOCATION.. 1

3 DEFINITIONS.. 2

4 BURIALS AND PLOTS.. 2

5 HOURS FOR BURIALS.. 2

6 FEES.. 2

7 HEADSTONES AND MEMORIALS.. 3

8 SHRUBS AND TREES.. 4

9 WREATHS.. 4

10 FLOWERS AND TRIBUTES.. 4

11 VEHICLES.. 4

12 SOLICITING OF ORDERS.. 5

13 MISCONDUCT. 5

14 DISINTERMENT. 5

15 OFFENCES.. 5

1 SHORT TITLE, COMMENCEMENT AND APPLICATION

1.1 This Bylaw shall be referred to as the "Southland District Council Cemetery Bylaw 2016” and shall come into force on {date to be determined}.

1.2 Nothing in this Bylaw shall derogate from any Act or Regulation for the time being in force concerning cemeteries and burials.

2 REVOCATION

2.1 The Southland District Council Cemetery Bylaw 2006 is revoked.

3
DEFINITIONS

3.1 For the purposes of this Bylaw:

“Beam Lawn Cemetery” means a cemetery or part of a cemetery in which the surface is laid down as a grass lawn with headstones plaques and tablets erected on the beam provided by Council at the head of the burial plots.

“Burial Plot” means a plot in a cemetery used for the burial of the dead.

“Burial Warrant” means a certificate issued by Council after application on the prescribed form and payment of any fees authorising the burial of the person named in it and prescribing the terms and conditions of burial.

“Cemetery” means any cemetery vested in or under the control of Council.

“Closed Cemetery” means a cemetery which has been closed by a closing order.

"Council" means the Southland District Council.

“Disinterment” means the removal of any body (or remains of any body) buried in any cemetery.

“Exclusive Right of Burial” means the purchase of a plot(s) for exclusive burial at a later date, in accordance with Section 10 of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.

“Existing plot” means a plot previously used for a burial.

“Manager” means the person appointed by Council to manage its cemeteries.

“Sexton” means any person approved by Council to manage the day to day activities of any cemetery and includes his or her assistants.

4 BURIALS AND PLOTS

4.1 No burial shall be made in any cemetery without a burial warrant.

4.2 Burials plots may be sold on such terms as Council decides. An exclusive right of burial may be granted under Section 10 of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.

4.3 Upon application being made and the prescribed fees paid to Council, an urn containing the ashes of a deceased person may be buried in any part of the Cemetery that Council generally or in any particular case authorises.

4.4 The minimum depth of soil cover over any coffin in a Burial Plot shall be one metre.

4.5 No person other than the Sexton, or a person under the Sexton’s direction, shall dig any grave, or open the ground for burial, in any part of any Cemetery.

5 HOURS FOR BURIALS

5.1 Burials shall only be held on the days and between the hours identified in the Southland District Council Cemetery Policy.

6 FEES

6.1 All fees and charges under this Bylaw shall be set from time to time by resolution of Council and will be included in the Southland District Council Schedule of Fees and Charges.

7 HEADSTONES AND MEMORIALS

7.1 All headstones and related works shall be constructed in accordance with New Zealand Standard 4242:1995 - Headstones and Cemetery Monuments or any subsequent New Zealand Standard. All foundations for kerbs, tombstones, headstones and monuments shall be constructed of permanent materials and be laid to the satisfaction of Council using the services of a qualified tradesperson approved by Council.

7.2 All headstones and memorials shall be kept in good repair by the holder of the Burial Plot or their personal representative. Subject to the provisions of the Burial and Cremation (Removal of Monuments and Tablets) Regulations 1967, all headstones or memorials which fall into a state of decay or disrepair, may at any time be removed by Council.

7.3 All vases or containers for flowers and other tributes shall be housed in insets into the base on which the memorial is placed, and shall be approved by Council. No glass vases or containers shall be permitted in the Cemetery.

7.4 In any Beam Lawn Cemetery no person shall:

a) erect any kerb, railing, fence, building, or other structure, on or around any Burial Plot or part of;

b) install or place any memorial plaque, memorial tablet, or other item on any Burial Plot without the prior permission of Council, and subject to compliance with the following conditions:

i) any memorial tablet, plaque or headstone shall consist of a permanent material as may be approved by Council; and

ii) such tablet, plaque or headstone shall be of an approved size and set in an approved position.

7.5 A temporary single grave marker may be placed at the head of the grave prior to a permanent memorial being installed.

7.6 Purchasers of Burial Plots in any Cemetery, other than a lawn cemetery, may surround the plots of ground allotted with kerbing in permanent materials. The highest part of such kerbing shall be not more than 300 mm above the ground level. Tombstones, headstones, or other monuments may be erected.

7.7 No person, without permission of Council, may remove any kerb, headstone, monument, or tablet from any Cemetery or any grave.

7.8 No person without authority will remove or take from any cemetery, or from any grave in any Cemetery, any vase, wreath, plant, flower or any other item.

7.9 No person erecting or repairing any headstone, monument, fence or other work in, or around any grave, in any Cemetery shall make use of any footpath or other part of such Cemetery for placing or depositing any tools or material in connection with the work for a longer time than is reasonably necessary for the purpose of completing such work. Any person who, after receiving notice in writing by Council requesting the removal thereof within a time specified in such notice, neglects or refuses to comply with the notice issued breaches this Bylaw.

7.10 No person shall make use of any footpath or roadway in the Cemetery for the purpose of mixing cement or mortar otherwise than upon a proper mixing board or in an approved manner.

7.11 Any person, business, or group wishing to provide or undertake services in the Cemetery, other than provided in this document, shall require the prior approval of Council.

7.12 A person who produces Power of Attorney documents relating to the Exclusive Right Holder(s) will have the same interment and monument works decision rights as the holder(s) would.

8 SHRUBS AND TREES

8.1 No tree or shrub shall be planted or removed in any cemetery by any person without the consent of Council being first obtained.

9 WREATHS

9.1 During a period of seven days, or such other period as Council decides following a burial, any wreath may be placed on a plot, but shall be removed at the expiration of that period.

10 FLOWERS AND TRIBUTES

10.1 Any floral tribute placed on a Plot shall be placed in a vase.

10.2 The vase, or any other tribute, shall be installed adjoining any tablet or plaque on the side nearest the head of the Plot.

10.3 Council may at any time remove damaged vases, or vases of a type not approved by Council, and he/she may also remove at any time dead flowers and dead foliage.

10.4 Council may at any time remove damaged tributes or tributes deemed unacceptable by Council.

11 VEHICLES

11.1 No person shall take a vehicle into any Cemetery except between the hours of sunrise and sunset, unless authorised by Council.

11.2 No person shall permit any vehicle under his/her control to remain in any Cemetery after sunset without the permission of Council.

11.3 No person shall operate any vehicle in a Cemetery except on the roads open for vehicular traffic, and in the direction indicated by traffic signs.

11.4 No person shall operate any vehicle in a Cemetery at a greater speed than 20 km/hr, or the speed that is signposted.

11.5 Every person operating any vehicle in a Cemetery shall stop or move the vehicle as directed by the Sexton or a Funeral Director.

12
SOLICITING OF ORDERS

12.1 No person shall advertise or solicit any order or custom for any work to be done in or in connection with any Cemetery,

12.2 No person shall, without the consent of the Funeral Director, or special permit in writing for the occasion from Council, take any photograph or moving image of a funeral.

13 MISCONDUCT

13.1 No person shall unreasonably prevent, interrupt, or delay a funeral service.

13.2 No person shall cause nuisance or inconvenience to any other visitor to a Cemetery.

14 DISINTERMENT

14.1 The disinterment of a body, or remains of a body, must be conducted in accordance with Section 51 of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.

14.2 The disinterment must be conducted in the presence of:

a) a Council officer(s); and

b) a Funeral Director; and

c) a Health Protection Officer designated under the Health Act 1956, as part of disinterment approval conditions;

14.3 Any other person may be present at a disinterment with prior approval of Council.

14.4 If a grave is rendered unused due to disinterment, and where there is no valid Exclusive Right of Burial still in existence, that plot will revert back to Council. Council will not use that plot other than in line with any valid Exclusive Right of Burial still in existence.

15 OFFENCES

15.1 Every person commits an offence against this Bylaw who by any act contravenes or fails to comply with any of the provisions of this Bylaw.

This Bylaw has been made and confirmed by a resolution passed at a meeting of the Southland District Council held on the __________.

THE COMMON SEAL of the }

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL }

was hereunto affixed in the presence of }

MAYOR

CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Council

29 June 2016

CEMETERY MANAGEMENT POLICY

1 PURPOSE

The Southland District Council Cemetery Management Policy aims to ensure:

• The effective and consistent management of Council controlled cemeteries throughout the Southland District;

• That there is certainty for all in relation to monuments at Council controlled cemeteries; and

• That remembrance can occur in the best possible surroundings.

2 DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Term	Meaning
Beam Lawn Cemetery	Means a cemetery or part of a cemetery in which the surface is laid down as a grass lawn with headstones plaques and tablets erected on the beam provided by Council at the head of the burial plots.
Burial Plot	Means a plot in a cemetery used for the burial of the dead.
Burial Warrant	Means a certificate issued by Council after application on the prescribed form and payment of any fees authorising the burial of the person named in it and prescribing the terms and conditions of burial.
Cemetery	Means any cemetery vested in or under the control of Council.
Closed Cemetery	Means a cemetery which has been closed by a closing order.
Council / SDC	Means the Southland District Council.
Disinterment	Means the removal of any body (or remains of any body) buried in any cemetery.
Exclusive Right of Burial	Means the allocation of a plot(s) for exclusive burial at a later date, in accordance with Section 10 of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.
Existing Plot	Means a plot previously used for a burial.
Funeral Director	Means a person whose business is, or includes, disposing of bodies.
Manager	Means the person appointed by Council to manage its cemeteries.
Service Person	Means a person who has been on operational service in Her Majesty’s Forces pursuant to Section 15 (a)(i) of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.
Sexton	Means any person approved by Council to manage the day to day activities of any cemetery and includes his or her assistants.

3 SCOPE

This policy applies to all cemeteries managed or controlled by Southland District Council.

This policy affects all members of the public; including Council employees, residents, visitors and contractors, who have an interest in or are undertaking work within Council managed or controlled cemeteries in the Southland District.

4 POLICY DETAILS

The Southland District Council Cemetery Management Policy outlines the overall principles that underpin how Council manages its cemeteries.

4.1 Interments

4.1.1 Burial Warrants

All requests for interments must be made to Council through an application for a burial warrant. The Funeral Director or person having the management or control of the burial shall make application to Council for a burial warrant.

No burial warrant shall be issued until the interment fee has been paid. In the case of a burial under the management or control of a Funeral Director, Council may, at its discretion, waive the requirement and charge the cost of the same to the Funeral Director concerned.

No burial will take place until the Sexton has received the burial warrant. Notification of an intended burial shall be given to the Sexton at least 16 working hours prior to the time arranged for the funeral or such lesser time as agreed with Council. Agreement will be subject to the payment of any additional costs incurred.

When a burial warrant is issued Council may, upon specific application made to it, authorise the digging and filling of the grave by relatives and associates of the deceased under the direction of the Sexton.

4.1.2 Authorisation

If the burial involves interment in a plot already used or allocated, any request for a burial warrant must detail the right to use the plot. Where there is doubt regarding the allocation of a plot, Council may require confirmation that the burial is authorised.

4.1.3 Hours of Burial

As a general rule, burials shall be held between the hours of 9.00 am to 4.00 pm Monday to Friday in the months of October to April, and 9.00 am to 3.30 pm in the months of May to September and 9.00 am to 1.00 pm on Saturday, or such other days or hours as Council may determine. Burials will not take place on public holidays or days that they are observed.

Council will consider requests for interment which for religious, cultural or any other reasons may be outside the scope of Council’s Policy, Bylaw or contract arrangements.

4.2 Exclusive Rights of Burial

4.2.1 General

An Exclusive Right of Burial may be either pre-allocated, or bought at the time of burial.

If a person wishes to have a plot pre allocated, they gain the Exclusive Right of Burial for that plot. This means that the individuals named in the allocation obtain the right to be buried in that plot; this does not mean they own the piece of land on which the plot sits.

The Exclusive Right of Burial is held by the individuals for a maximum of 20 years. After this time, if no burial has taken place in that plot, the Exclusive Right of Burial will revert back to Council with no entitlement for refund of any fees paid. Council may re-allocate the plot to the individuals in the first instance if the individuals wish to retain that plot. It is the responsibility of the holder of an Exclusive Right of Burial to ensure that the Exclusive Right of Burial is re-allocated. However, Council will endeavour to contact the holder of an Exclusive Right of Burial when the Exclusive Right of Burial is due to lapse. It is the responsibility of the holder to ensure that Council has the correct contact details. Re-allocation of an Exclusive Right of Burial shall incur a fee.

No memorials, plaques or headstones can be erected until such time as a burial has taken place in the grave and all fees have been paid, other than with the approval of Council.

4.2.2 Transfer of an Exclusive Right of Burial to Another Party

The person who is allocated the Exclusive Right of Burial of a plot may, with the consent of Council, transfer that right to another person, or entity, including a charitable organisation for example. This will incur the same fee as issue for an Exclusive Right of Burial. The original certificate must be presented to Council with the transfer section completed and signed by the person allocated Exclusive Rights.

4.2.3 Surrender of an Exclusive Right of Burial to Council

The holder or joint holders of an Exclusive Right granted by Council may surrender the Exclusive Right to Council.

Council will only accept the surrender of an Exclusive Right if:

a) Evidence of allocation of the Exclusive Right is supplied to Council.

b) The plot described in the Exclusive Right to be surrendered has not been used for burial of human remains, including the remains from a cremation or if it has previously been used, an exhumation has occurred and the plot is no longer required.

4.2.4 Transfer to Surviving Holder where Exclusive Right is held jointly

If jointly held, upon the death of one of the joint holders of an Exclusive Right, the remaining joint holder is, or joint holders are, entitled to the full allocation of the Exclusive Right.

4.2.5 Exclusive Right Bequeathed

The holder of a burial permit may bequeath the Exclusive Right as if it were the holder’s personal estate.

Upon application made by a person to whom a burial permit has devolved as a result of a bequest, Council will amend the register so as to indicate that the person has become the holder of the Exclusive Right. A new certificate will be issued and the original certificate will be retained at Council and recorded as cancelled.

Evidence in writing of a bequeath is required to be provided to Council in order to make any changes

4.3 Burial of Her Majesty’s Service Personnel

Southland District Council may:

a) Set aside areas specifically for the burial of deceased service personnel.

b) Allow the subsequent interment of the husband, wife, civil union partner or
de-facto partner of the deceased service personnel in the same plot.

c) On application consider the interment of the husband, wife, civil union partner or de-facto partner prior to the death of the service personnel.

4.4 Burials not managed by a Funeral Director

The following conditions apply for burials in cemeteries where a Funeral Director is not responsible for the organisation and management of the burial.

When an application is made for a burial warrant, the application shall provide:

a) The full name of deceased.

b) Evidence of death certified by a Registered Medical Practitioner.

c) The name of cemetery in which burial to take place.

d) The date and time for burial.

e) Any special services required for burial.

Payment of the burial fee is required at the time of the application for a burial warrant.

An adult person shall be nominated to oversee the burial. That person shall be responsible for liaison with Council staff and the Sexton at the cemetery and for directing the burial process.

By arrangement with the Sexton, digging and filling of graves by relatives and associates of the deceased may be permitted. Activities associated with this activity will be restricted to the immediate environs of the grave site.

4.5 Disinterment

A disinterment requires a licence from the Ministry of Health. The Ministry of Health is reluctant to issue a licence to disinter a body between one month and one year after interment because of the decomposition process.

Applications for a disinterment licence must be made through the Southern District Health Board and provided to Council when requesting a disinterment. Where an application for a disinterment of any deceased is received by Council, the applicant shall be liable for all costs associated with the disinterment.

Disinterring ashes does not need a disinterment licence but does need to be requested and managed through Council.

Human remains interred for more than 100 years are also subject to the jurisdiction of Heritage New Zealand.

No family members are to be present at the disinterment unless specifically authorised by Council.

4.6 Cemetery Standards

Council aims for all cemeteries within the District to be of a high quality and reflect the community’s standards. Council also has duties under statute with regard to public health and these are recognised within the standards.

Council will manage cemeteries in line with the requirements of the Bylaw. To help achieve this Council will:

a) Develop and maintain an asset management plan for its cemetery activity.

b) Maintain its obligation for safe and reasonable access to burial sites.

c) Maintain the surrounds to be attractive and representative of its nature.

d) Ensure allocated plots are maintained to acceptable standards.

4.7 Cemetery Maintenance

Council shall maintain lawn areas, trees and vegetation, roadways and paths adjacent to and within the monumental sections. All shrubs, plants, etc in the cemetery and gardens are planted and cared for by Council. Council may remove any trees, shrubs, or other vegetation from the cemetery.

The public are not permitted to plant flowers, shrubs, or trees in any area within the cemetery boundary without Council’s written consent. Council may remove any shrubs, trees, or other vegetation that have been planted on a burial site or within the Cemetery without Council’s written consent.

Council is not responsible for the erection, upkeep, maintenance, repair, restoration, or cleaning of any monument or structure at a burial site. Council will endeavour to contact any known family member if damage is caused to a grave or monument.

Council may act to remove any structure in a cemetery that has become dilapidated, unsightly, is crumbling, or deemed to be unsafe in a risk assessment carried out by Council. Council’s actions will be limited to making unsafe structures safe to ensure public and employee safety.

Where subsidence is evident, Council may fill and compact the ground.

Council is responsible for:

Individuals are responsible for:

· Maintaining adequate access to gravesites.

· Maintaining any communal spaces (such as lawns).

· Constructing and maintaining structures used by more than one burial plot (such as concrete beams or niche walls).

· Payment of fees for services and for the use of structures used by more than one burial plot (such as concrete beams or niche walls).

· Maintaining any private structures erected within the burial plot (vaults, headstones or fences).

Council will ensure that appropriate maintenance arrangements are in place to allow public access to all grave sites in closed cemeteries under the control of Council.

4.8 Funding, Fees and Charges

Cemetery fees are detailed in Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charges.

Council will review the interment fee on an annual basis using the following formula:

a) Adult interment fee determined by contractor, cost of burial plus staff time.

b) Interment one year old and up to five years old - 50% of adult interment fee.

c) Interment stillborn and up to one year old - 25% of adult rate.

d) Cremated ashes within an ashes beam - one hour of staff time.

e) Cremated ashes into existing plot - no charge.

f) Allocation of Exclusive Right of Burial - two hours of staff time.

g) Cremated ashes into new standard plot - including allocation of Exclusive Right of Burial - two hours of staff time.

Specific site preparation by the Sexton not covered by Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charges shall be at the cost of the applicant.

4.9 Burial Charges: Poor Persons

Where application is made to Council for the burial free of charge of any deceased poor person, the applicant will also furnish to Council an order signed by a Justice of the Peace in accordance with the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.

Burial will take place in a plot as determined by Council and no fence or headstone will be erected unless all fees have been paid and the plot allocated.

Any person may, within two years from the date of such burial or such extended time as Council shall approve, pay for allocation of the plot by paying all outstanding charges at current contract rates.

4.10 Non-Council Controlled Cemeteries

To meet Council’s statutory obligations to provide cemeteries within the District, Council will, if approached, by the administrators of non-Council controlled cemeteries, consider accepting the particular cemetery as a Council controlled one.

Any cemetery administration accepted by Council will only be on the basis that Council becomes the sole administrator.

4.11 Cemetery Records

In accordance with the Burial and Cremation Act 1964, Council maintains records of burials within cemeteries. All records are available to the public.

Burials are registered to meet the requirements of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Act 1995. A record of reservations or pre-death requirements is maintained for those with Exclusive Rights of Burial. Each burial is recorded from the date of issuing the Burial Warrant and the register is reviewed regularly for accuracy.

4.12 Public Use of Cemeteries

Public use of the cemetery is covered by the Southland District Council Cemetery Bylaw 2016. Activities detrimental to the value or detracting from the passive and contemplative nature of the cemetery will not be permitted.

Southland District Council accepts no responsibility for the effects of vandalism and intentional (wilful) damage to assets under Council ownership.

5 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Party/Parties	Roles and Responsibilities
«Party»	«Roles»
«Party»	«Roles»
«Party»	«Roles»

6 ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS

The following documentation is to be read in conjunction with this policy:

• Southland District Council Cemetery Bylaw 2016;

• New Zealand Standard 4242: 1995 Headstones and cemetery monuments;

• Burial and Cremation Act 1964.

• . Burial and Cremation (Removal of Monuments and Tablets) Regulations 1967.

7 REVISION RECORD

Date	Version	Revision Description
«Type Date»	«Version»	«Revision»
«Type Date»	«Version»	«Revision»
«Type Date»	«Version»	«Revision»

Council

29 June 2016

STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL

DRAFT SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL CEMETERY BYLAW 2016

Proposal

Council is proposing to review its Cemetery Bylaw 2006 with a revised Cemetery Bylaw 2016 (the draft Bylaw). The Cemetery Bylaw 2006 has not been amended since its adoption in 2006. A copy of the draft Bylaw being proposed by the Council is attached to this proposal.

The purpose of this Statement of Proposal is to describe the details of the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 (especially where it differs from the current Cemetery Bylaw 2006) and to explain the reasons for those differences.

Reasons for the Proposal

Council is reviewing the Cemetery Bylaw 2006. The bylaw is legally required to be reviewed and Council is taking the opportunity to ensure that the bylaw remains appropriate and there is a clear distinction between bylaw and policy content.

Changes to the bylaw are intended to increase the ease of doing business with Council and provide clarity and consistency.

Issues

This bylaw deals with cemeteries and burials. The current bylaw includes both bylaw and policy issues - the new bylaw will not include any policy issues. A new and separate policy is being created.

The key change proposed in the draft bylaw is to limit the length of time of an Exclusive Right of Burial from 60 years to 20 years. This would mean that if an Exclusive Right of Burial lapsed after a 20 year period, the holder would need to apply to Council to have this right renewed. Council would endeavour to contact the holder when the 20 year period was due to lapse however, it would be the responsibility of the holder to ensure that Council retained the correct details to make contact. The purpose of this change is to allow Council greater flexibility and more efficient cemetery management, whilst providing for changing lifestyle dynamics.

The draft bylaw also clarifies Council’s position on disinterment, which was not covered in the Cemetery Bylaw 2006. If the draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 were adopted, any person wishing to be present at a disinterment (other than a Council officer, funeral director or Health Protection Officer) would require prior Council approval.

The draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016 does not address daily operational requirements, which are covered by the Cemetery Manual.

Options Considered

When making a bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002 the Council must comply with the matters in Section 155 of that Act. This section requires that the Council must determine whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem. The Council must then determine whether the bylaw is in the most appropriate form, and that it does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The Council has developed the draft bylaw to be flexible and has not identified any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

In order for the Council to determine whether the draft Bylaw is the best way of addressing the perceived problem, the Council considered the following options:

1. Retain the duration of Exclusive Right of Burial at 60 years; or

2. Amend the duration of Exclusive Right of Burial to 20 years with the opportunity to renew.

Option 1 - Retain the duration of Exclusive Right of Burial at 60 years.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· This is the maximum time allowed under Section 10 (4) of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.

· A longer period of time would allow for people to plan well in advance if they wish to be buried in the Southland District.

· The maximum 60 year period outlined in the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 does not reflect changes in lifestyle dynamics. People are often more transient and mobile than they previously were. A 60 year duration for Exclusive Right of Burial may result in a number of allocated plots that may never be used as people move to different locations for work or to be closer to family as they age.

Option 2 – Amend the duration of Exclusive Right of Burial to 20 years with the opportunity to renew.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· A 60 year period is a maximum under the Act and Council could nominate a lesser time (such as 20 years) while remaining compliant.

· This change would reflect changes in demographics which mean that people are often a lot more mobile and transient.

· It would minimise the ongoing allocation of Exclusive Rights of Burial to parties that are no longer likely to use them and allow Council to be more flexible in the management of its cemeteries.

· There would be a cost associated with renewal of an Exclusive Right of Burial. However, this is currently set at $115 in the Schedule of Fees and Charges.

Making a submission

Submissions are invited from 30 June 2016 and closing at 5.00 pm on 30 July 2016. Council will consider all submissions from the public when making its final decisions on the bylaw.

Submissions can be made online, via post or by providing a written submission to staff at your local Southland District Council office. All submissions received by Southland District Council will be made available to the public. If you lodge a submission, you can also request to be heard by Council during the hearings process.

Online submissions can be made using the submission form available at www.southlanddc.govt.nz.

Written submissions must:

1. Be clearly labelled SUBMISSION - DRAFT CEMETERY BYLAW 2016.

2. Contain the name, address and contact details of the submitter.

Submissions can be posted to:

Southland District Council

Submissions - Draft Cemetery Bylaw 2016

PO Box 903

Invercargill 9840

For further information contact Jennifer Green, 0800 732 732.

Council

29 June 2016

Pursuant to the Local Government Act 2002, the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and any other Act or authority enabling the Southland District Council in that capacity, the Council makes the following Bylaw:

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL CEMETERY BYLAW 2016

CONTENTS

1 SHORT TITLE, COMMENCEMENT AND APPLICATION.. 1

2 REVOCATION.. 1

3 DEFINITIONS.. 2

4 BURIALS AND PLOTS.. 2

5 HOURS FOR BURIALS.. 2

6 FEES.. 2

7 HEADSTONES AND MEMORIALS.. 3

8 SHRUBS AND TREES.. 4

9 WREATHS.. 4

10 FLOWERS AND TRIBUTES.. 4

11 VEHICLES.. 4

12 SOLICITING OF ORDERS.. 4

13 MISCONDUCT. 5

14 DISINTERMENT. 5

15 OFFENCES.. 5

1 SHORT TITLE, COMMENCEMENT AND APPLICATION

1.1 This Bylaw shall be referred to as the "Southland District Council Cemetery Bylaw
[ ]” and shall come into force on {date to be determined}.

1.2 Nothing in this Bylaw shall derogate from any Act or Regulation for the time being in force concerning cemeteries and burials.

2 REVOCATION

2.1 The Southland District Council Cemetery Bylaw 2006 is revoked.

3
DEFINITIONS

3.1 For the purposes of this Bylaw:

“Beam Lawn Cemetery” means a cemetery or part of a cemetery in which the surface is laid down as a grass lawn with headstones plaques and tablets erected on the beam provided by the Council at the head of the burial plots.

“Burial Plot” means a plot in a cemetery used for the burial of the dead.

“Burial Warrant” means a certificate issued by the Council after application on the prescribed form and payment of any fees authorising the burial of the person named in it and prescribing the terms and conditions of burial.

“Cemetery” means any cemetery vested in or under the control of the Council.

“Closed Cemetery” means a cemetery which has been closed by a closing order.

"Council" means the Southland District Council.

“Disinterment” means the removal of any body (or remains of any body) buried in any cemetery.

“Exclusive Right of Burial” means the purchase of a plot(s) for exclusive burial at a later date, in accordance with Section 10 of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.

“Existing plot” means a plot previously used for a burial.

“Manager” means the person appointed by the Council to manage its cemeteries.

“Sexton” means any person approved by the Council to manage the day to day activities of any cemetery and includes his or her assistants.

4 BURIALS AND PLOTS

4.1 No burial shall be made in any cemetery without a burial warrant.

4.2 Burials plots may be sold on such terms as the Council decides. An exclusive right of burial may be granted under Section 10 of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.

4.3 Upon application being made and the prescribed fees paid to Council, an urn containing the ashes of a deceased person may be buried in any part of the Cemetery that the Council generally or in any particular case authorises.

4.4 The minimum depth of soil cover over any coffin in a Burial Plot shall be one metre.

4.5 No person other than the Sexton, or a person under the Sexton’s direction, shall dig any grave, or open the ground for burial, in any part of any Cemetery.

5 HOURS FOR BURIALS

5.1 Burials shall only be held on the days and between the hours as the Council may from time to time by resolution decide.

6 FEES

6.1 All fees and charges under this Bylaw shall be set from time to time by resolution of the Council and will be included in the Southland District Council Schedule of Fees and Charges.

7 HEADSTONES AND MEMORIALS

7.1 All headstones and related works shall be constructed in accordance with New Zealand Standard 4242:1995 - Headstones and Cemetery Monuments or any New Zealand Standard substituted for it. All foundations for kerbs, tombstones, headstones, monuments shall be constructed of permanent materials and be laid to the satisfaction of Council.

7.2 All headstones and memorials shall be kept in good repair by the purchaser of the Burial Plot or their personal representative. Subject to the provisions of the Burial and Cremation (Removal of Monuments and Tablets) Regulations 1967, all headstones or memorials which fall into a state of decay or disrepair, may at any time be removed by the Council.

7.3 All vases or containers for flowers and other tributes shall be housed in insets into the base on which the memorial is placed, and shall be approved by the Council. No glass vases or containers shall be permitted in the Cemetery.

7.4 In any Beam Lawn Cemetery no person shall:

a) erect any kerb, railing, fence, building, or other structure on or around any Burial Plot or part of;

b) install or place any memorial plaque, memorial tablet, or other thing on any Burial Plot without the prior permission of Council, and subject to compliance with the following conditions:

i) any memorial tablet, plaque or headstone shall consist of a permanent material as may be approved by Council; or

ii) such tablet, plaque or headstone shall be of an approved size and set in an approved position in an approved manner.

7.5 A temporary single grave marker may be placed at the head of the grave prior to a permanent memorial being installed.

7.7 No person, without permission of Council, may remove any kerb, headstone, monument or tablet from any Cemetery or any grave.

7.8 No person without authority will remove or take from any cemetery, or from any grave in any Cemetery, any vase, wreath, plant, flower or any other thing.

7.9 No person erecting or repairing any headstone, monument, fence or other work in, or around any grave, in any Cemetery shall make use of any footpath or other part of such Cemetery for placing or depositing any tools or material in connection with the work for a longer time than is reasonably necessary for the purpose of completing such work. Any person who, after receiving notice in writing by the Council requesting the removal thereof within a time specified in such notice, neglects or refuses to comply with the notice issued breaches this Bylaw.

7.10 No person shall make use of any footpath or roadway in the Cemetery for the purpose of mixing cement or mortar otherwise than upon a proper mixing board or in an approved manner.

8 SHRUBS AND TREES

8.1 No tree or shrub shall be planted or removed in any cemetery by any person without the consent of Council being first obtained.

9 WREATHS

9.1 During a period of seven days or such other period as the Council decides following a burial, any wreath may be placed on a plot, but shall be removed at the expiration of that period.

10 FLOWERS AND TRIBUTES

10.1 Any floral tribute placed on a Plot shall be placed in a vase.

10.2 The vase, or any other tribute, shall be installed adjoining any tablet or plaque on the side nearest the head of the Plot.

10.3 The Council may at any time remove damaged vases, or vases not of a type not approved by the Council, and he/she may also remove at any time dead flowers and dead foliage.

10.4 The Council may at any time remove damaged tributes or tributes deemed unacceptable by the Council.

11 VEHICLES

11.1 No person shall take a vehicle into any Cemetery except between the hours of sunrise and sunset, unless authorised by the Council.

11.2 No person shall permit any vehicle under his/her control to remain in any Cemetery after sunset without the permission of Council.

11.3 No person shall operate any vehicle in a Cemetery except on the roads open for vehicular traffic, and in the direction indicated by traffic signs.

11.4 No person shall operate any vehicle in a Cemetery at a greater speed than 20 km/hr, or the speed that is signposted.

11.5 Every person operating any vehicle in a Cemetery shall stop or move the vehicle as directed by the Sexton or a Funeral Director.

12 SOLICITING OF ORDERS

12.1 No person shall advertise or solicit any order or custom for any work to be done in or in connection with any Cemetery,

12.2 No person shall, without the consent of the Funeral Director, or special permit in writing for the occasion from the Council, take any photograph or moving image of a funeral.

13
MISCONDUCT

13.1 No person shall unreasonably prevent, interrupt, or delay a funeral service.

13.2 No person shall cause nuisance or inconvenience to any other visitor to a Cemetery.

14 DISINTERMENT

14.1 The disinterment of a body, or remains of a body, must be conducted in accordance with Section 51 of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964.

14.2 The disinterment must be conducted in the presence of:

a) a Council officer(s); and

b) a Funeral Director; and

c) a Health Protection Officer designated under the Health Act 1956, as part of disinterment approval conditions;

14.3 Any other person may be present at a disinterment with prior approval of the Council.

14.4 If a grave is rendered unused due to disinterment, and where there is no valid Exclusive Right of Burial still in existence, that plot will revert back to the Council. The Council will not use that plot other than in line with any valid Exclusive Right of Burial still in existence.

15 OFFENCES

15.1 Every person commits an offence against this Bylaw who by any act contravenes or fails to comply with any of the provisions of this Bylaw.

This Bylaw has been made and confirmed by a resolution passed at a meeting of the Southland District Council held on the __________.

THE COMMON SEAL of the }

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL }

was hereunto affixed in the presence of }

MAYOR

CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Gambling Venue Policy and TAB Venue Policy

Record No: R/16/6/9012

Author: Jenny Green, Senior Resource Management Planner - Consents

Approved by: Bruce Halligan, Group Manager Environmental Services

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 The Gambling Act 2003 requires that every territorial authority adopt policies regarding gaming machine venues. The Racing Act 2003 requires that every territorial authority adopt policies regarding TAB venues. Both of these policies must be reviewed every three years. This report seeks approval from Council to engage with the public on continuing its Gambling Venue Policy. It also seeks approval to engage on a draft TAB Venue Policy that is the same in substance but includes minor changes to state Council’s approach to TAB venues more clearly.

Executive Summary

2 This report seeks Council’s approval to consult with the public on continuing the Gambling Venue Policy and on an amended draft TAB Venue Policy. The policies were introduced in 2013 for the purpose of reducing gambling harm in our communities.

3 The Gambling Venue Policy is based on a soft sinking lid approach to electronic gambling machines (pokies) that allows for transfer or changes of consent in some circumstances. A sinking lid policy allows venues to continue operating existing machines, but means no licences for new machines will be granted; and if a venue closes, the licence to have pokies can be transferred to another venue. The TAB Venue Policy requires only that any new stand-alone TAB venue to comply with the provisions of the Southland District Plan.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Gambling Venue Policy and TAB Venue Policy” dated 21 June 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Endorses consultation to occur regarding the continuation of the existing Gambling Venue Policy and the draft amended TAB Venue Policy from 30 June to 30 July in accordance with the special consultative procedure.

e) Resolves that the Statement of Proposal for these policies is made available on the Southland District Council website and at Southland District Council offices.

Content

Background

4 The Gambling Act 2003 requires that every territorial authority adopt a Gambling Venue Policy and the Racing Act 2003 requires that every territorial authority adopt a TAB Venue Policy. Both Acts require that these policies are reviewed every three years. Southland District Council’s policies were adopted in 2013 and are now due for review.

5 In 2013 Council decided to develop two policies: a Gambling Venue Policy and a TAB Venue Policy (attached). Previously, both gambling venues and TAB venues had been covered in one policy. The split occurred to reflect the different legislation for each issue.

6 The Gambling Venue Policy is based on a soft sinking lid approach to electronic gambling machines (pokies) that allows for transfer or changes of consent in some circumstances. A sinking lid policy allows venues to continue operating existing machines, but means no licences for new machines will be granted; and if a venue closes, the licence to have pokies can be transferred to another venue. The TAB Venue Policy requires only that any new stand-alone TAB venue to comply with the provisions of the Southland District Plan.

Issues

7 The Gambling Venue Policy has been drafted to control the growth of gambling, to prevent and minimise the harm caused by gambling, including problem gambling, and to facilitate community involvement in decisions about the provision of gambling.

When these policies were adopted in 2013, the following issues were raised during public consultation and engagement:

· The extent of problem gambling was raised by most submitters with stakeholders citing statistics.

· Submitters raised the issue of whether there is a link between the number of pokie machines and harm. Health agencies submitted that there was a link, and other interest groups such as gaming machine trusts submitted that there was no link.

· Submitters noted that expenditure at electronic gaming machines remained high. Although a gradual decline of pokie machines had been identified, expenditure followed a significant incline.

· Submissions also raised both the community benefit which arises from the distribution of community funding from pokie machines and community harm arising from problem gambling.

· Other issues included whether pokies were socially desirable, whether there is a migration to online gambling and the effectiveness of efforts of organisations to reduce the incidence and impact of problem gambling.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

8 Both policies are required by legislation: the Gambling Venue Policy under the Gambling Act 2003 and the TAB Venue Policy under the Racing Act 2003. These Acts require that the policies are reviewed every three years and consultation occurs using the Special Consultative Procedure outlined in Section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Community Views

9 If endorsed by Council, the proposal to continue the Gambling Venue Policy and amend the TAB Venue Policy would be released for public consultation from 30 June to 30 July 2016. The policies would be advertised publicly and would be made available on Council’s website and at Council offices.

10 Targeted consultation would occur by way of notification letters to special interest groups and cultural groups to inform them of the public submission period.

Costs and Funding

11 As there are no proposed changes to current operational practice, no additional costs have been identified.

Policy Implications

12 There are no policy implications arising from the continuation of the Gambling Venue Policy or the amendment of the TAB Venue Policy.

Analysis

Options Considered

13 Council could choose to:

1. Re-adopt the current Gambling Venue Policy and an amended TAB Venue Policy; or

2. Draft alternative policies to those outlined in the Statement of Proposal.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Re-adopt the current Gambling Venue Policy and an amended TAB Venue Policy (clarifying the current approach).

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Council is legislatively required to have policies on gambling venue and TAB venues and the current policies are compliant.

· The sinking lid policy assists in the gradual decline of pokie machines, which may reduce harm.

· The current Gambling Venue Policy and the proposed amended TAB Venue Policy are aligned with the approach of other territorial authorities within the Southland Region.

· Amendments to the TAB Venue Policy would not reflect a change in Southland District Council’s approach to TAB venues. Rather, amendments would clarify that Council requires only that any new stand-alone TAB venue to comply with the provisions of the Southland District Plan (i.e. no other specific conditions apply).

· Some stakeholders may prefer an alternative approach to that taken in the current Gambling Venue Policy and/or the draft TAB Venue Policy however; these policies recognise the risks to public health arising from problem gambling. The Gambling Venue Policy was the subject of extensive community engagement prior to its adoption in 2013. The approach in the draft TAB Venue Policy is largely the same as the current policy which was also the subject of consultation in 2013.

Option 2 – Draft alternative policies to those outlined in the Statement of Proposal.

Advantages	Disadvantages
· Alternative policies could reflect the views of different stakeholders.	· Any policy that increased the number of pokie machines may increase gambling harm.

Assessment of Significance

14 Continuing the Gambling Venue Policy has not been assessed as significant, nor have changes to the TAB Venue Policy. No changes to operational practice would arise as a result of the proposal. At the time the current policies were adopted, they were determined be appropriate measures to reduce gambling harm in our communities.

15 A submission process on the continuation of these policies would once again provide the community with the opportunity to express their views.

Recommended Option

16 It is recommended that Council approve the release of the proposal to continue the Gambling Venue Policy and to amend the TAB Venue Policy (to clarify the current intent of the policy) for public consultation.

Next Steps

17 If Council decides to release the proposal to continue the Gambling Venue Policy and amend the TAB Venue Policy (to clarify the current intent of the policy) for public consultation the submission period would be open from 30 June to 30 July 2016. Submitters would have the opportunity to speak to their submissions at hearings in August and Council would deliberate on submissions in September.

Attachments

a Statement of Proposal Gambling Venue Policy and TAB Venue Policy View

b Tab Venue Policy 2013 View

Council

29 June 2016

POLICY: GAMBLING VENUE POLICY

GROUP RESPONSIBLE: Regulatory Services

DATE APPROVED: 15 May 2013

DATE AMENDED: {date to be confirmed}

FILE NO: 140/20/1/3, 140/20/1/4

1. INTRODUCTION

The Gambling Act 2003 (the Act) came into force on 18 September 2003.
Under Section 101 of the Act, the Council is required to adopt a policy to regulate the number and location of non-casino electronic gaming machines (Class 4), more commonly known as pokie machines.

At 31 March 2013 the Southland District had 23 Class 4 gaming venues and 133 electronic gaming machines.

The Council has the ability to limit the number and location of venues and the number of electronic gaming machines and must have regard to the social impact of gambling in developing its policy. As required under the Act, this policy only applies to gambling venues licensed after 17 October 2001, or to venues licensed prior to this if they wish to increase the number of electronic gaming machines.

2. DEFINITIONS

Class 4 Gambling - means any activity that involves the use of a gaming machine outside a casino, and may be conducted only by a corporate society and only to raise money for authorised purposes.

Class 4 Gambling Venue - means a place used to conduct Class 4 gambling i.e. premises with Class 4 gaming machines licensed under the Gambling Act 2003.
This includes any TAB venue with gaming machines

Corporate Society – means a society that is:

(a) Incorporated under the Incorporated Societies Act 1968 or

(b) Incorporated as a board under the Charitable Trusts Act 1957 or

(i) does not have the capacity or power to make a profit; and

(ii) is incorporated and conducted solely for authorised purposes; or,

Corporate Societies may therefore include Clubs (RSA, sports clubs etc.), Trusts and Racing Clubs.

Southland District - means all the area covered by the Southland Territorial Local Authority.

New Venue - any venue that has not held a Class 4 venue licence for six months or more or that has never held a Class 4 venue consent.

The Council - means Southland District Council.

3. OBJECTIVES

(a) To assist in limiting the harm of problem gambling in the community.

(b) To encourage responsible gambling practices and attitudes in Class 4 Venues.

(b) To reduce the number of electronic gaming machines in the community over time.

(d) To facilitate community involvement in decisions about gambling by ensuring that all communities in the Southland district are given the opportunity to consult with Council in a manner that is culturally appropriate.

4. Restrictions on venue and machine consents

(a) The Council will not grant consent for the establishment of any additional Class 4 venues or additional gaming machines, including Class 4 machines in TAB venues, under this policy.

(b) A gambling venue consent is for one venue (one premises) and is not transferable to another venue, unless consent is obtained from the Council as provided for in Clause 5 below. The consent is given to a venue at a given address, not to a person or business.

(c) Once a venue ceases to operate, the machine numbers will not be allocated to any new or existing venue except as specified in Clause 5 below.

(d) Council will not provide a consent under Sections 95(1)(f) or 96(1)(e) of the Gambling Act 2003 to any application by corporate societies with Class 4 licences seeking Ministerial discretion to increase the number of gaming machines permitted at a venue except as provided in Clause 5 below.

5. Transfer or changes to existing venues and machine consents

(a) If the owner of the principal business of the venue changes, the Council consent remains allocated to the venue. The new owner is not required to obtain a Council consent but a new licence may be required from the Department of Internal Affairs.

(b) Council will consent to the transfer of a licence from an existing venue to a new venue where the venue will be operated by the same corporate society provided that the maximum number of gaming machines which can be transferred to the new venue will be nine, and subject to a social impact study.

(c) Two or more licensed Class 4 Clubs in the Southland District may apply to the Council to merge and increase the number of machines that can be operated at a venue, subject to a social impact study. Council consent will only permit the maximum number of gaming machines to be the sum of the number of gaming machines specified in all of the corporate societies’ (the clubs that are merging) Class 4 venue licences at the time of application.

(d) Any substitute venues may only be established if:

(i) the vacated site will not be able to be used as a Class 4 venue; and

(ii) Council considers that the location of the new venue is suitable taking into account the matters referred to in Section 101(4) of the Gambling Act.

(e) Council may arrange its own peer review of any social impact study provided, at the applicant’s cost.

6. Visual and Sound

New substitute venues that are granted territorial authority consent are subject to the following additional conditions:

(a) Only one sign may make reference to the existence of Class 4 gambling, and may be visible from the street or other public space, this sign shall not mimic or replicate the operation of gaming machines.

(b) No other sign shall promote or identify the existence on site, of gaming machines.

(c) Advertising signs and activities within the building associated with the operation of gaming machines shall not be visible from beyond the property boundary.

(d) The operation of gaming machines shall not be audible from beyond the venue property boundary:

7. Encouraging Responsible Gambling Practices

• Two of the stated purposes of the Gambling Act 2003 are to “prevent and minimise the harm caused by gambling, including problem gambling’’ and to “facilitate responsible gambling”.

• Enforcement and monitoring of gambling venues is the responsibility of the Department of Internal Affairs.

• Regulations made under the Gambling Act 2003 set out:

- What constitutes an unsuitable venue.

- Requirements and restrictions regarding gambling machines.

- Requirements of venues to provide information about problem gambling.

- Requirements of venues to provide problem gambling awareness training to staff.

• A Council consent for a venue is not revocable once issued and cannot lapse or expire unless there is a period of six months or more where a Class 4 licence is not held for the venue.

Further, Council has no retrospective powers with regards to any consented venues and cannot impose conditions subsequently on any venue which has an existing licence.

• The Council is supportive in general of initiatives and actions that would help to ensure there is a balanced gambling environment in the city where potential harm is managed effectively, and where those who wish to gamble can do so safely. In this regard, Council encourages responsible gambling practices as outlined in Appendix 1.

• Where Council has concerns about the operation of existing gambling venues these will be reported to DIA. Council inspectors do not have enforcement powers over venues in terms of their gambling activities.

• The provision of information by the venues about problem gambling is required under the regulations and is a key way of promoting responsible gambling. Where Council has concerns about a venue in this regard, it will be reported to DIA.

8. APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT

(a) All applications will incur a fee which will be prescribed by the Council pursuant to Section 150 of the Local Government Act 2002.

(b) Council will publicly notify applications for Class 4 Gambling Venues and allow for public submissions to be lodged.

• Name and contact details of the applicant.

• Names of venue management staff.

• Street address of premises being relocated and new proposed address.

• Fees.

• Details of design and layout shall be provided to demonstrate how the venue will comply with Clause 6.

• Any other information that may reasonably be required to allow proper consideration of the application including how the applicant will encourage responsible gambling practices.

(d) The decision will be made at Officer level pursuant to delegated authority and based on the criteria detailed in this Policy, except where any matter of opposition is raised in a public submission, in which case the application will be heard and determined by Council.

9. COMMENCEMENT OF POLICY

This Policy has been adopted by Council following the special consultative procedure prescribed by the Local Government Act 2002.

This Policy is effective from {date to be confirmed}.

10. REVIEW OF POLICY

The Council will review its Gambling Venues Policy within three years from the date on which this policy comes into effect.

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Ashton Flats Road Bylaw

Record No: R/16/6/9020

Author: Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

Approved by: Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 The purpose of this report is to initiate the formation of a bylaw to control the activity on the Ashton Flats Road. This control is necessary to manage the potential conflicts and damage caused by motor vehicles accessing Department of Conservation (DOC) property adjoining the land and or cyclists on the road or formed trail.

Executive Summary

2 The report describes the situation that exists now at Ashton Flats Road and proposes future issues be controlled by way of a Council bylaw. The bylaw is needed to manage vehicle access to a sensitive environment and to manage the potential conflict of users and damage to the future cycle trail.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Ashton Flats Road Bylaw” dated 21 June 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Adopts the draft Ashton Flats Road Bylaw for consultation in accordance with Section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Content

Background

3 The Ashton Flats Road is a legal road owned and administered by the Council and bounded on either side by the Eyre Mountains Conservation Park (EMCP), managed by the Department of Conservation.

4 There are concerns for the fragile wetlands along and on either side of the road in the EMCP given that the road boundaries are not fenced.

5 To manage the use of the road given its location, surface and potential effects on neighbours and other users, it is appropriate that a bylaw is put in place.

Issues

6 The road is unfenced and currently access is controlled by a locked barrier. This barrier was installed by DOC when it was believed the land was all under DOC control. DOC allowed vehicles through the barrier on a permit basis subject to meeting their criteria. Only a small number of four wheel drive vehicles passed along the road each year.

7 It is now established that the road is actually a legal road under the control of the Southland District Council.

8 It is planned that the road become part of the Around the Mountains Cycle Trail. As such there is potential for greater awareness and greater demand for vehicles to use the road.

9 This has the potential to cause environmental damage on the road and on the adjacent DOC administered land. There is also potential for conflict with users of the cycle trail and damage to the cycle trail if access is not controlled.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

10 The Land Transport Act 1998 provides powers for councils to make bylaws as below;

S22AB Road controlling authorities may make certain bylaws

(1)

A road controlling authority may make any bylaw that it thinks fit for 1 or more of the following purposes:

Vehicle and road use

(c)

prohibiting or restricting, absolutely or conditionally, any specified class of traffic (whether heavy traffic or not), or any specified motor vehicles or class of motor vehicle that, by reason of its size or nature or the nature of the goods carried, is unsuitable for use on any road or roads:

(d)

for the safety of the public or for the better preservation of any road,……—

(g)

restricting the use of motor vehicles on unformed legal roads for the purposes of protecting the environment, the road and adjoining land, and the safety of road users:

(h)

prescribing the use of roads and cycle tracks, and the construction of anything on, over, or under a road or cycle track:…..

General

…….(zk) regulating any road-related matters not addressed by paragraphs (a) to (zj), including (but not limited to) enhancing or promoting road safety or providing protection for the environment…….

22AD Consultation

(1) Section 156 of the Local Government Act 2002 applies to a bylaw under section 22AB made by a road controlling authority that is a local authority as if that bylaw had been made under that Act.

Local Government Act 2002

11 Section 156 of the Local Government Act 2002 requires the Council to consult in accordance with Section 82 of the LGA.

Community Views

12 The communities’ views will be sought through the consultation process. This will be done by advertising the draft bylaw through newspapers and online, collating the feedback and reporting back to Council.

Costs and Funding

13 No specific costing of managing the permit process has been done. It is anticipated the number of applications for permits will be less than one per week and possibly as few as one per month, this can be managed within current administration and management systems and budgets.

Policy Implications

14 There are no policy implications.

Analysis

Options Considered

15 The options considered are to either create a bylaw or not.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Create a specific bylaw for the Ashton Flats Road

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Controls will be in place to manage the risks from vehicles to the environment on and adjacent to the road and from damage to the trail.

· Controls will be in place to manage the safety risks from conflict of users on the road.

· Free public access to the road by vehicles will be restricted.

· Administering the bylaw will require administration resources.

Option 2 - Not create a specific bylaw

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Uncontrolled public vehicle access to the road.

· No ability to manage the number and type of vehicles that access the road.

· No ability to manage the risks of environmental damage from vehicle use of the road.

· Potential damage to the road and or cycle trail.

Assessment of Significance

16 The issue is not significant in terms of the Council’s Significance Policy.

Recommended Option

17 It is recommended that the Council resolve to adopt the draft Ashton Flats Road Bylaw for public consultation.

Next Steps

18 If the Council resolves to put the draft bylaw out for consultation then the matter will be publicised through the Council’s usual communication media channels.

19 Feedback will be sought on the draft bylaw. This feedback will be collated and assessed and the results reported back to the Council to inform members so a final decision can be made to adopt the bylaw or not.

Attachments

a Ashton Flats Roading Bylaw 2016 - DRAFT View

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Bridge Weight Restriction Postings 2016/2017

Record No: R/16/6/8977

Author: Joe Bourque, Strategic Manager Transport

Approved by: Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 To comply with the Transport Act 1962 and Heavy Motor Vehicle Regulations 1974, the Road Controlling Authority for any territorial area is required to confirm at least annually any weight limit postings necessary for bridges on the roading network and to revoke any restrictions which no longer apply. This report provides the information to be able to fulfil this requirement. Council last confirmed its bridge posting in late June 2015.

Executive Summary

2 This report updates the list of posted bridges within the Southland District. The posting weight limits are based on detailed six yearly inspections and follow up analysis carried out in 2014, as well as inspection work carried out since. The attached schedule contains changes to bridge postings as a result of bridge inspection, review, upgrade and replacement work carried out in the 2015/2016 financial year.

3 In summary:

· MWH have inspected or attempted to inspect all of Southland District Council’s posted bridges, the bulk of which are timber.

· Of the total number of bridges there are approximately 20 that could not be fully accessed for inspection, but have previous as-built information available to allow a posting assessment to be carried out. Access should be provided on the next round of inspection, or in as part of a follow up inspection.

· Of the total number of bridges there are two that could not be accessed and have no previous as-built information to allow a posting assessment to be carried out.
Access should be provided ASAP for inspection to be carried out. This is subject to water levels.

· Of the total number of bridges there are 71 posted at less than 100% Class I.

· Of the total number of bridges there are 31 that require a revision of the previous posted restriction.

· Of the total number of bridges there are a significant number that have indications of internal defects (ie, rot/decay) requiring further investigation by either drill coring or non-destructive methods.

· The lack of objective internal verification, as a supplement to hammer sounding, exposes Council to risk. Further verification methods are therefore recommended.

· The adoption of central loading when setting posting, without consideration of eccentric loading, departs from best practice and also exposes Council to risk. Further quantification of this risk and consideration of upgrade options and/or reposting are therefore recommended.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Bridge Weight Restriction Postings 2016/2017” dated 22 June 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Confirms the maximum weight and speed limits for heavy motor vehicles on bridges as listed on the attached schedule.

e) Notifies the weight limits to the New Zealand Police, New Zealand Transport Agency and by public notice in daily newspapers.

f) Confirms that any bridges that have an internal defect noted via sounding, be prioritised for further assessment to verify the presence of decayed timber within the member within the next 12 months.

g) Confirms that going forward all structures should have some measure of objective internal condition assessment carried out on a periodic basis (ie, 10 years) with the first round of testing to be completed by 30 June 2018.

h) Continues to impose the ‘central on bridge’ as a restriction until the risk of central vs eccentric loading are fully quantified and reported back to Council.

Content

Background

4 In this round of inspections we have initiated a multi-level assessment in order to provide improved understanding and to better address the variable level of risk associated with each type of defect. For each beam inspected there are three types of defects that are picked up, specifically:

· External Condition Assessment - determining the condition of the member based on its external visual appearance (ie, cracking, crack depth, surface tolerance, etc).
This is typically a value between 100% and 80%.

· External Defect Assessment - determining any further reduction in capacity resulting from an external visible defect in the beam cross section that can be measured
(ie external decay, rebates, significant cracking, moisture content, etc). This factor is typically applied as a negative percentage reduction to the external condition assessment.

· Internal Sounding Assessment - determining an “indicative” condition of the member based on sounding (hitting with a hammer). As this method is highly subjective it requires further verification by drill coring or an alternative objective non-destructive method. This factor is typically applied as a negative percentage reduction to the external condition assessment and also raises a “red flag”, indicating a higher priority for further internal verification.

5 It is recommend that all structures should have some measure of objective internal condition assessment carried out (drilling or non-destructive testing (NDT)) on a periodic basis
(ie, 10 years). For any bridges that have an internal defect noted via sounding, these structures should be prioritised for further assessment to verify the presence of decayed timber within the member.

6 It should be noted that this more detailed format of assessment has been only partially applied to this round of inspection in order to retain and identify beams indicated by previous inspectors as having some form of internal defect, while minimising undue and significant changes to the current postings. With the additional information provided by drill coring and/or alternative NDT the full assessment can be applied over the next round of inspection.

7 In 2014 there was a major increase in posted bridges and changes to existing postings as a result of the six yearly detailed inspections carried out of the bridge network. After the inspections were carried out, the timber beam spans were analysed to check their capacities to carry heavy traffic, taking into account the visible deterioration in the condition of the beams. This resulted in a total of 115 bridges being posted. Work in the 2014/2015 year resulted in this number being reduced to 102.

8 Since this time three bridges have been able to be removed from the posting list and one (Dipton Flat Bridge 1) has been upgraded from 80% Class 1 to 100% Class 1 but still with the speed and central on bridge restriction. The three bridges totally removed from the list are:

• McGilvary Road bridge which was upgraded to full unrestricted Class 1.

• McIntosh Road bridge which has been closed after some of its piles failed, causing the deck to sink. This bridge cannot be economically repaired so it will remain closed while a range of options are considered.

• Horseshoe Bush Road steel culvert has also been closed after the culvert partly failed. This bridge cannot be economically repaired so it will remain closed while a range of options are considered

9 Another bridge has also been removed from the list as it had been double counted on both Ardlussa Cattleflat Road and off Ardlussa Cattleflat Road.

10 Over the coming year the following bridges are due to be upgraded and replaced

• 2862.001 Taylors Bush Road to be replaced with a culvert.

• 3004.002 Lang Road to be upgraded to 100% Class 1, but still with a speed and central on bridge restriction.

• 3144.001 Tomogalak Road to be upgraded to 100% Class 1, but still with a speed and central on bridge restriction.

• 3582.001 Mararoa Bridge is due to be replaced if funding can be sorted out for this work, including a cost share with the landowners.

11 Because these bridges will be upgraded or replaced relatively shortly, their postings have been left unchanged. This does present an increased short term risk but seeks to minimise inconvenience to the bridge users.

12 Work has been carried out on reviewing the remaining posted bridges and others which may potentially require posting. As a result of this work the postings on 30 bridges have been reduced. This may be increased further as ongoing inspections are completed and various bridge issues are resolved. Most of these reductions in posting have either involved a further reduction of 10% of the bridge loading capacity or a reduction in the speed restriction from 30 to 10 km/hr.

13 One new bridge has been added to the posting list. This is bridge number 9576.001 which is off Webb Road and leads to a gravel source.

14 SDC has one additional posted bridge, which is bridge number 3302.001 on Riversdale Pyramid Road. This bridge is shared with Gore District Council (GDC) who take the responsibility for its posting and notification requirements. As GDC has the formal jurisdiction for this bridge it has not been included in our SDC postings. This bridge is due to be replaced in 2017/2018.

15 The attached schedule includes 99 bridges for which weight and/or speed restrictions, in terms of the Heavy Motor Vehicle Regulation 1974, are still necessary. The schedule has three less weight limit postings than the previous 2015 Bridge Posting Council report.
The changes in bridge postings from the 2015 report are shown in the schedule in bold italics.

16 It is proposed that the Council accepts the attached schedule of bridge restrictions and authorises the advertising and notification of the list in accordance with meeting the requirements of the Transport Act 1962 and the Heavy Motor Vehicle Regulations 1974.

17 This requires that notification of the restricted weight limit posting or speed limits are advertised at least once annually to remain legally enforceable. This requirement is now due as the last public notification was carried out on 8 July 2015.

18 The objective of the decision is to maintain a suitable level of safety for road users and to limit any further structural damage resulting from unsuitable overloading.

Issues

19 The restricted bridges can cause a range of difficulties for those people who need them to transport heavy freight activity. The posted bridge listing continues to be used as a deficiency register to prioritise the bridge upgrading and renewal programmes in the coming years.

20 Limited by the available funding for this work, only those bridges with restrictions that cause the greatest commercial hardship or present the highest safety risk will be prioritised to be upgraded or replaced initially. The Economic Network Plan will play a significant part in developing and defining these priorities, as well as feedback from major users such as Fonterra and forestry companies.

21 Several bridges on the posting list are still being reviewed in terms of their status in relation to the extent of the roading network they provide access to and service. A few of these are not a part of council’s maintained network and council roading is scheduling those to be removed where and when possible. There are also off road bridges not currently on this list which need, detailed review to see if they can still safely carry Class 1 traffic, as well as discussions with landowners regarding the need for and ownership of these bridges.

22 Each bridge on the posting list is subject to ongoing consideration of the alternatives which include:

• Potential upgrading or replacement where this is justified in terms of the level of service that SDC can afford to provide.

• How to effectively better manage ‘Long Term’ postings where the bridge service activity is low use and the restriction is causing limited problems.

• Potential removal of the bridge from the network register as under Council’s Extent of Network Access Policy.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

23 The annual setting and advertising of weight restrictions is a requirement of the Transport Act 1962 and the Heavy Motor Vehicle Regulations 1974.

Limitation of Liability and Disclaimer

24 It should be noted that the engineering decisions on the posting requirements for each bridge are based on weighing up the available data, unknowns and risks and applying engineering judgement to come up with recommendations. The available information includes what can be seen visually, felt and heard (from hitting beams with a hammer) to try to best estimate their overall condition. In some cases there has also been limited load testing of individual beams to try to help calibrate the engineering judgement.

25 The unknowns include many critical items, including:

• The species and strength grade of timber used to build the bridges.

• As-built plans of the original bridge.

• Items that cannot be seen because they are either buried or internal to the structural members.

26 This assessment has included determining the degree of decay within timber members via sounding (hitting with a hammer). As timber is a highly variable material that can have well hidden and critical defects, it is recommended that further testing be undertaken including a programme of internal verification of the soundness of timber members. This will mitigate some of the risks associated with the above unknowns and align the inspection process with industry practice. This could involve drilling small holes in the beams to try to identify areas of rot, or more extensive non-destructive testing such as the use of ultra sound. Testing of the timber beams to determine the species of timber should also be carried out to maximise the available strength from specific species.

Community Views

27 Where the weight restriction on a bridge impacts heavily on a community or particular road user, the weight restriction can be discussed and economic options considered for strengthening or replacing the existing bridges or options for improving alternative routes can be investigated.

Costs and Funding

28 The ‘cost of advertising’ in providing notification of Council’s bridge postings is minor compared to the asset gains and protection realised. This is allowed for and funded by the Roading Network and Asset Management budget.

Policy Implications

29 The posted bridges are in accordance in meeting the Asset Management Plan requirements, the NZ Transport Agency funding requirement and policies, the Council’s Extent of Network Policy and the Heavy Motor Vehicle Regulations of 1974.

Analysis

Options Considered

30 The option of taking no action is not suitable in this case as it would result ‘unsafe’ structures being used by road users with potentially serious or fatal consequences.

31 In all cases the suggested weight restrictions have been set to provide a balance between safety and limiting damage to the structures, as well as setting reasonable limits for the type of vehicles using the bridges.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Impose Conservative Lower Posting Limits

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Provides increased protection to bridges, slowing down the rate of degradation of the bridge.

· Reduces risk of failure if an issue not fully identified during an inspection means the carrying capacity of the bridge is less than estimated.

· Imposes greater cost on landowners and heavy transport industry when required to either take detours or run more truck movements with lighter loads.

Option 2 - Accept Greater Risk and Allow Higher Posting Limits

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Higher postings mean fewer restrictions such that a lower cost is imposed on the heavy traffic industry.

· There is a higher risk of failure as during inspections not all areas of internal rot in timber members can be identified.

· Higher loads will lead to more rapid deterioration of the marginal bridge structures. This will lead to the need to replace the structure sooner.

32 This report is based on trying to achieve a reasonable balance of the above two options.

Assessment of Significance

33 It is determined that this matter is not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Recommended Option

34 It is proposed that Council accepts the attached list and authorises the advertising of the list in accordance with the requirements of the Transport Act 1962 and the Heavy Motor Vehicle Regulations 1974.

35 It is requested that Council discuss and agree how it wishes to deal with the risks outlined in this report.

36 The objective of the decision is to maintain a suitable level of safety for road users and to also limit damage to the Council’s bridge assets from unsuitable load crossing bridges.

Next Steps

37 Following the Council meeting, the bridge restrictions will be advertised and notified to the New Zealand Police, the New Zealand Transport Agency and the Heavy Transport Industry.

38 Work will continue on refining the postings by better understanding the bridge member conditions. Work will also continue on priority bridge upgrades and replacements as part of an overall bridge strategy.

39 Council will consider options for further internal verification of timber members using objective testing procedures (drill coring or NDT), and select a preferred option to progress. This further assessment will begin with high risk structures, with an indication of some internal defect (from sounding), but will eventually be carried out on all timber beam bridges.

40 Council will consider options to address central vs eccentric loading in the posting assessment. Structures will be prioritised on greatest risk (maximum difference between central and eccentric capacity) and further works or reposting carried out to mitigate those risks.

41 The next full round of posting inspections is scheduled to be carried out in 2018, but follow up inspections will be ongoing.

Attachments

a Southland District Council Notification of Weight (and/or speed) Limits on Bridges - June 2016 View

Council

29 June 2016

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

NOTIFICATION OF WEIGHT (AND/OR SPEED) LIMITS ON BRIDGES

June 2016

Notice is hereby given that pursuant to Regulation 11(3) of the Heavy Motor Vehicle Regulations 1974, the Southland District Council has fixed the following maximum weight and speed limits for heavy motor vehicles and combinations including a heavy motor vehicle on the bridges described hereunder:

Structure Number	Name Of Road	Name Of Waterway	Weight Limits Max Wt on Any Axle (kg) Position on Bridge	Gross And Axle Weight (% Class I)	Max Speed Limit (km/hr)
1692.001	Allison Rd 1	Otakau Cr Trib	Central on bridge	100%	30
2861.001	Anderson Rd 4	Bastion Cr	Central on bridge	100%	10
3248.001	Argyle Rd	Steven Burn	Central on bridge	80%	10
1164.001	Ashers Rd	Gorge Cr	Central on bridge	*80%*	10
1253.001	Badwit Rd	Waituna Cr	Central on bridge	*80%*	10
2865.001	Benmore Otapiri Rd	Winton Stm	Central on bridge	100%	10
2865.003	Benmore Otapiri Rd	Winton Stm Trib	Central on bridge	*80%*	10
2865.004	Benmore Otapiri Rd	Winton Stm Trib	Central on bridge	100%	30
2895.001	Benmore Rd	Oreti R	4,600	50%	10
3143.002	Biggar Rd 2	Tomogalak Stm Trib	Central on bridge	*90%*	10
1186.001	Birch Rd	Waituna Cr	Central on bridge	80%	10
1296.002	Braid Rd	Waimahaka Stm Trib	Central on bridge	80%	10
2494.001	Breeze Rd	Mossburn Cr	Central on bridge	70%	10
1606.001	Bridge Inn Rd	Waikiwi Stm	Central on bridge	100%	10
3346.001	Bruce Rd	Mandeville Drain	Central on bridge	80%	10
2825.001	Caird Rd	Otapiri Stm	Central on bridge	60%	10
3353.001	Carter Rd	Waimea Stm	Central on bridge	60%	10
2563.001	Channel Rd 1	Makarewa Flood Ch	Central on bridge	*60%*	10
1183.001	Cook Rd	Waituna Cr Brch	Central on bridge	70%	10
3654.001	Cumming Rd	Stag Stm		100%	10
1565.002	Davidson Rd 3	Gold Cr	Central on bridge	100%	10
2647.001	Deans Rd	Winton Stm		70%	10
2896.001	Dipton Flat Rd	Dipton Stm	Central on bridge	*100%*	10
2896.002	Dipton Flat Rd	Dipton Stm Trib	Central on bridge	70%	10
3015.004	Dipton Mossburn Rd	Dipton Stm	Central on bridge	100%	30
2371.002	Dunearn Rd	Terrace Cr Trib	Central on bridge	*80%*	10
3598.002	Dunrobin Valley Rd	Aparima R Trib		*90%*	10
3598.003	Dunrobin Valley Rd	Aparima R Trib		80%	10
3363.001	Duthie Rd 2 (Bdy Rd)	Kelvin Stm	Central on bridge	100%	10
2115.003	Feldwick Rd	Orauea R	Central on bridge	*90%*	10
3347.001	Fortune Rd	Mckeller Stm	Central on bridge	100%	10
1373.001	Frazer Rd (Bdy Rd)	Waiarikiki Stm	Central on bridge	80%	10
1992.001	Fryer Rd	Taunoa Stm	Central on bridge	80%	10
1057.001	George Rd	Waikawa R W Brch	Central on bridge	40%	10
1528.001	Halcrow Rd	Waihopai R	Central on bridge	*70%*	10
2373.001	Harbour Endowment Rd	Henderson Cr Trib	Central on bridge	100%	30
2373.002	Harbour Endowment Rd	Henderson Cr	Central on bridge	*90%*	10
1498.001	Hedley Rd	Titipua Stm	Central on bridge	100%	10
3902.002	Horseshoe Bay Rd	Backwater		*80%*	10
2476.001	Howden Rd	Lochiel Stm	Central on bridge	90%	10
3736.001	Hume Rd	Mataura R	Central on bridge	100%	30
3342.001	Kingsbury Rd	McKeller Stm	Central on bridge	*70%*	10
1332.001	Klondyke Rd	Caddon Burn	Central on bridge	100%	10
3407.002	Lake Monowai	Waiau River	7,000	28,500kg	10
3407.003	Lake Monowai Rd	Canal		70%	10
3407.004	Lake Monowai Rd	Lake Overflow		80% (TBC)	10
3004.002	Lang Rd 2	Dipton Stm	Central on bridge	80%	10
1376.001	Lauderdale Bush Rd	Marairua Stm	Central on bridge	100%	30
2066.005	Lillburn Monowai Rd	Dean Burn Trib	Central on bridge	90%	10
2623.001	Mandeville Rd	Makarewa R Trib	Central on bridge	100%	10
3582.001	Mararoa Rd	Mararoa R	Central on bridge	60%	10
1065.001	Marinui Rd	Marinui Stm	Central on bridge	100%	10
1334.002	Matheson Rd 2	Cadden Burn	Central on bridge	80%	10
2826.001	McBride Rd	Otapiri Stm		60%	10
1504.001	McDonald Rd 2	Hedgehope Stm	Central on bridge	*70%*	10
3002.002	McDonald Rd 4	Dipton Stm Trib	Central on bridge	100%	10
1584.001	McKerchar Rd 1	Myross Cr	Central on bridge	80%	10
2515.001	McKinnon Rd 2	Mossburn Cr	Central on bridge	80%	10
2444.001	McLeish Rd 2	Middle Cr	Central on bridge	90%	10
3048.001	McLeod Rd 2 North	Okaiterua Stm	Central on bridge	100%	10
3224.001	McRorie Rd	Washpool Cr	Central on bridge	*60%*	10
1172.001	Moffat Rd 1	Moffat Cr	Central on bridge	90%	10
3158.002	Murphy Rd	Black Swamp Drain		90%	10
2475.001	Nelson Rd	Lochiel Stm	Central on bridge	20%	10
3192.003	Off Ardlussa Cattleflat Rd 1	Mataura R Trib		*60%*	10
3192.004	Off Ardlussa Cattleflat Rd 2	Mataura R Trib	Central on bridge	70%	10
2619.001	Off Hall Rd	Makarewa R Trib	Central on bridge	20%	10
9576.001	Off Webb Rd	Thornbury Stm	Central on bridge	60% *(TBC)*	10
1206.001	Orr Rd 1	Duck Cr N Brch	Central on bridge	80%	10
2828.007	Otapiri Mandeville Rd	Ruhtra Stm	Central on bridge	100%	30
3694.001	Parawa Station Rd	Parawa Stm	Central on bridge	100%	10
3245.012	Piano Flat Rd	Charcoal Cr	Central on bridge	*80%*	10
1002.001	Progress Valley Rd	Waikawa R Trib	Central on bridge	100%	30
2503.001	Pullar Rd	Grove Bush Cr	Central on bridge	*60%*	10
2128.001	Purvis Rd	Orauea Stm Trib	Central on bridge	100%	10
2897.001	Riverside School Rd	Dipton Stm	Central on bridge	*90%*	10
2897.002	Riverside School Rd	Dipton Stm Trib	Central on bridge	60%	10
1733.001	Ross Rd	Taunamau Cr		70%	10
2596.001	Scott Rd 2	Makarewa R	Central on bridge	*50%*	10
2555.001	Sharks Tooth Rd	Sharks Tooth Cr	Central on bridge	80%	10
2661.001	Smith Rd 3	Oreti R Trib	Central on bridge	70%	10
3652.005	Sutherland Rd	Murray Cr	Central on bridge	80%	10
3618.001	Taylor Rd 4	Oswald Stm		60%	10
2862.001	Taylors Bush Rd	Winton Stm Trib		60%	10
2526.001	Thomsons Crossing Rd West	Winton Stm		*60%*	10
3144.001	Tomogalak Rd	Tomogalak Stm	Central on bridge	80%	10
2856.002	Turnbull Rd	Winton Stm Trib	Central on bridge	100%	10
2466.002	Valley Rd	Oporo Cr Brch	Central on bridge	60%	10
1168.001	Waghorn Rd	Currans Cr	Central on bridge	*50%*	10
1703.001	Waianiwa Oporo Rd	Oreti R Trib	Central on bridge	50%	10
1067.001	Wairata Rd	Waimahaka Stm	Central on bridge	70%	10
1166.002	Waituna Lagoon Rd	Currans Cr Trib	Central on bridge	100%	30
2654.001	Welsh Rd East	Winton Stm		*10%*	10
3617.001	West Dome Station Rd	Oswald Stm Trib	Central on bridge	100%	10
3147.001	Wilson Rd 7	Larnach Stm	Central on bridge	*80%*	10
2858.001	Winton Channel Rd	Bastion Cr	Central on bridge	100%	30
1355.001	Woods Rd 1	Oware Stm	Central on bridge	90%	10
1321.001	Wyndham River Rd	Kuriwai Cr		*10%*	10
1328.001	Wyndham Valley Rd	Don Cr		*90%*	10

Please note the highlighted restrictions may still alter as a result of work currently underway.

Notice is hereby given that pursuant to Regulation 11(3) of the Heavy Motor Vehicle Regulations 1974, the Southland District Council has revoked the following maximum weight and speed limits for heavy motor vehicles and combinations including a heavy motor vehicle on the bridges described hereunder:

STRUCTURE NUMBER	NAME OF ROAD	NAME OF WATERWAY	WEIGHT LIMITS MAX WT ON ANY AXLE (KG) POSITION ON BRIDGE	GROSS AND AXLE WEIGHT (% CLASS I)	MAX SPEED LIMIT (KM/HR)
1592.002	Horseshoe Bush	Gold Creek		50%	10
1624.001	McGilvray Rd (Bdy Rd)	Weelwood Cr	Central on bridge	60%	10
1505.001	McIntosh Rd South	Hedgehope Stm	Central on bridge	70%	10

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Approval of Unbudgeted Expenditure for Southland Warm Homes Trust for 2016/2017

Record No: R/16/6/8406

Author: Susan McNamara, Management Accountant

Approved by: Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 To seek Council’s approval to grant $35,000 of unbudgeted expenditure in 2016/2017 to the Southland Warm Homes Trust.

Executive Summary

2 As part of the Annual Plan for 2014/15 Council approved grant funding of $35,000 per annum to Southland Warm Homes Trust (SWHT) until 30 June 2016. This aligned with the contract awarded to SWHT by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority’s (EECA) Health Homes Programme.

3 SWHT presented to the Activities Performance Audit Committee in public forum on 27 April 2016. During this presentation SWHT discussed the work it has been completing to date and informed the Committee that a report relating to the continued funding by EECA after 1 July 2016 was with Cabinet.

4 EECA have confirmed a new insulation programme beginning on 1 July 2016 for two years. This programme relates to low income rental properties. This new programme has been confirmed since the submission and deliberations on the draft 2016/17 Annual Plan were completed.

5 With confirmation of EECA’s funding now in place SWHT has requested an ongoing commitment from Council of $35,000 for the 2016/17 financial year. This is unbudgeted expenditure, and staff are recommending that it be funded from the District Operations Reserve.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Approval of Unbudgeted Expenditure for Southland Warm Homes Trust for 2016/2017” dated 22 June 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Approves the request for unbudgeted expenditure in 2016/2017 of $35,000 for a grant to Southland Warm Homes Trust funded from the District Operations Reserve.

Content

Background

6 SWHT made a submission on the draft Annual Plan for 2014/15 requesting additional funding of $35,000 per annum for the two years ended 30 June 2016. The funding request for two years aligned the funding from the Council with the funding from EECA. Council approved the request at the Extraordinary Council meeting of 5 and 6 June 2014.

7 SWHT were advised of the decision made by Council in a letter dated 4 August 2014. This letter mistakenly included “Council decided to support the grant request from Southland Warm Homes Trust for the three years”, rather than the two years that was requested by SWHT.

8 No allowance for this grant has been included in the draft Annual Plan for 2016/17 based on the Council’s two year approval in 2014/15. The Draft Annual Plan for 2016/17 was available for public consultation from 30 January 2016 to 29 February 2016. No submission was received from SWHT on the draft Annual Plan, they comment that this was due to the correspondence received from Council advising of a three year commitment.

9 SWHT presented to the Activities Performance Audit Committee in public forum on 27 April 2016. During this presentation the Trust outlined the work currently being completed and the anticipated timeline of the announcement of any on-going funding support from EECA. During this presentation it was noted by the Committee that no grant was included in the draft Annual Plan for 2016/17 and no submission had been received for SWHT for funding in 2016/17 as part of the Annual Plan process.

10 On 26 May 2016 SWHT requested funding of $35,000 for the 2016/17 financial year. This request in included as Attachment A.

11 SWHT have advised that EECA has confirmed a new home insulation programme beginning on 1 July 2016 for two years for low income rental properties. The Warm Up NZ Health Homes Rental Extension Programme will provide funding for landlords with low income tenants with a community services card or low income tenants if they have a health referral related to cold, damp housing. Landlords will be required to contribute 50% of the total cost with EECA contributing 25% and the remaining 25% to be provided from third party funders.

12 The current Healthy Homes Programme funded by EECA until 30 June 2016 is targeted at home owners, including landlords with rental properties, on low incomes (they must have a Community Services Card) with high health needs. For homeowners EECA contributes 50% of the funding for this programme with 50% coming from third party funding. For rental properties landlords must contribute 40%. In addition to the EECA programme, SWHT and Awarua Synergy provide a subsidy for general income home owners over the summer months.

Issues

13 The Annual Plan for 2016/17 does not include a grant to Southland Warm Homes Trust. Approval is required from Council for the unbudgeted expenditure.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

14 There are no significant legal or statutory implications. The only point identified is to ensure that the correct decision-making process for the expenditure is followed.

Community Views

15 No community views have been identified at this stage. A grant for $35,000 was included in 2015/16 in the draft Long Term Plan 2015-25. No negative submissions were received on this grant.

Costs and Funding

16 Staff recommend that if the grant of $35,000 is approved that it be funded from the District Operations Reserve.

Policy Implications

17 There are no significant policy implications.

Analysis

Options Considered

18 Options are to approve the unbudgeted grant to Southland Warm Homes Trust or not.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Approves the request for unbudgeted expenditure in 2016/2017 of $35,000 for a grant to the Southland Warm Homes Trust funded from the District Operations Reserve.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Continued support of the work being completed by Southland Warm Homes Trust.

· Enhancement in the health of our communities due to improved living conditions. This aligns with the Council vision ‘to have thriving, healthy Southland Communities’.

· A reduction in funds available for other projects.

Option 2 – Declines the request for unbudgeted expenditure in 2016/2017 of $35,000 for a grant to the Southland Warm Homes Trust funded from the District Operations Reserve.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Funds remain available for future projects.

· Southland Warm Homes Trust will have a reduced funding pool to operate with.

· No improvement in the living conditions of our communities and their health.

Assessment of Significance

19 The content of this report is not deemed significant under the criteria within Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Recommended Option

20 Option 1. Approve the request for unbudgeted expenditure of $35,000 from the District Operations Reserve. In recommending Option 1, staff have considered Council’s vision “to have thriving, healthy Southland Communities”.

Next Steps

21 To advise Southland Warm Homes Trust of Council’s decision.

Attachments

a Southland Warm Homes Trust Funding Application for 2016/17 Year View

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Unbudgeted Expenditure - Riverton Skate Park Shelter

Record No: R/16/6/9029

Author: Louise Pagan, Communications Manager

Approved by: Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 To seek approval for $20,000 of unbudgeted expenditure to assist with funding the Southland District Youth Council’s LeadLab project to erect a shelter at the Riverton Skate Park.

Executive Summary

2 The Riverton/Aparima Community Board has resolved to build a fibreglass shelter at the Riverton Skate Park in the shape of a paua shell. The project will cost $25,235 (GST exclusive).

3 Plans have been drawn, with a basic copy attached for your information at Attachment B. An engineer’s producer statement (PS1) has been obtained and a PIM has been accepted by Council. If this funding is secured construction can begin almost immediately.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Unbudgeted Expenditure - Riverton Skate Park Shelter” dated 22 June 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Approves $20,000 (GST exclusive) unbudgeted expenditure toward the Riverton Skate Park shelter as follows:

i) $10,000 (GST exclusive) from the Riverton Ward reserve.

ii) $10,000 (GST exclusive) from the Riverton/Aparima Community Board, to be funded from the Riverton General reserve.

Content

Background

4 In June 2015, as part of the Southland District Youth Council LeadLab project, Aparima College students Chloe Gorton and Kataraina Harris sought the Riverton/Aparima Community Board’s support for a shelter to be built at the Riverton Skate Park.

5 The students have undertaken fundraising and sought assistance from a variety of funders.

6 Contributions are from the Riverton and Districts School Sesquicentennial Committee, Riverton Youth Focus Group’s skateathon, the Community Initiatives Fund, the now defunct Riverton Youth Group and a mufti day at Aparima College, in aggregate totalling $4,062.

7 The Riverton/Aparima Community Board and Waiau/Aparima Ward Councillors have agreed to make significant contributions ($10,000 each) to the project. Confirmations of their support are attached by way of letter (Attachment A) and community board minutes (Attachment C).

Issues

8 There is a need to identify a source of funding to enable the project to proceed.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

9 Environment Southland has no natural hazard related concerns or recommendations. Building consent and resource consent are not required from Southland District Council. A PIM has been granted for the proposed shelter and a PS1 document has been obtained from a consultant. Insurance will be covered by Council’s existing policy.

Community Views

10 As representatives of the public, the Community Board approved this proposal in principle in June 2015.

Costs and Funding

11 This project will cost $25,235, (GST exclusive) which includes construction and the cost of obtaining an engineer’s producer statement (PS1). Community contributions and fundraising for this project total $4,062. The Riverton/Aparima Community Board has agreed to contribute $10,000 from the Riverton General reserve. The Waiau/Aparima Ward councillors have agreed to match this with $10,000 from the ward reserve. We are awaiting funding decisions from community funders for the remaining $1,173.

Policy Implications

12 There are no policy implications

Analysis

Options Considered

13 To approve the unbudgeted expenditure request or not.

Analysis of Options

e) Option 1 – Approve the request for $20,000 (GST exclusive) unbudgeted expenditure toward the Riverton Skate Park shelter as follows:$10,000 from Waiau/Aparima ward reserve and $10,000 from the Riverton General reserve.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· This structure will provide shelter for young people using the skate park

· It is supporting a Youth Council initiative

· The design of the shelter will be an attraction and a point of difference for Riverton

· The cost of the shelter

· Council will be responsible for ongoing maintenance of the shelter

Option 2 – Do not approve the request for $20,000 (GST exclusive) unbudgeted expenditure

Advantages

Disadvantages

· No cost to Council

· Council will not be responsible for ongoing maintenance of the shelter

· There will not be a shelter for young people using the skate park

· Council won’t be supporting a youth initiative

· Disappointment for Riverton youth and the community who have been supportive of this project

Assessment of Significance

14 The decision is not considered to be significant under the Council’s Engagement and Significance Policy.

Recommended Option

15 Option 1 – Approve the request for $20,000 (GST exclusive) unbudgeted expenditure toward the Riverton Skate Park shelter as follows ($10,000 from the Waiau/Aparima ward reserve and $10,000 from the Riverton General reserve).

Next Steps

16 Action the Council’s recommendation and complete the project.

Attachments

a Letter to Waiau Aparima Ward Councillors - Funding for Shelter at the Riverton Skate Park View

b Riverton Skate Park Shelter design (indicative images only) View

c Riverton/Aparima Community Board Extract of Minutes - 13 June 2016 Board Meeting View

Council

29 June 2016

DELEGATION: RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991 AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS

INSTRUMENT OF DELEGATION

DELEGATED TO: Group Manager Environmental Services ~~Environment and Community~~

Manager/Team Leader - Resource Management

Senior ~~Resource Consents~~ Planner

Resource Management Planners

Specific delegations to each officer as outlined below.

GROUP RESPONSIBLE: Environmental Services ~~Environment and Community~~

DATE APPROVED: 25/1/2006 - resolution of full Council, 25/11/2009, 24/3/10, 29 June 2016

FILE NO: 10/4/4/3, 360/15/5/1, 240/10/1/4

Pursuant to Section 34A(3) of the Resource Management Act 1991, Sections 34-39 of the Building Act 2004, and related legislation, the Southland District Council hereby delegates to the officers of Council specified below those functions, powers and dates as specified below.

This instrument of delegation was formally approved by a meeting of the full Southland District Council on 29 June 2016.~~25 November 2009~~

This instrument of delegation hereby rescinds and replaces all and any previous instruments of delegation under the Resource Management Act 1991.

Dated this 30th day of June 2016 ~~25th day of November 2009~~. Signed:

Steve Ruru~~D P Adamson,~~ Chief Executive

For the purposes of this instrument, the following abbreviations apply:

GMES = Group Manager Environmental Services ~~GMEC Group Manager - Environment and Community~~ = Group Manager - Environment and Community

M/TLRM = Manager/Team Leader, Resource Management

SP ~~SRC~~P = Senior Planner

RMPs = Resource Management Planners

Authority:

Section of Act	Delegated to:	Details
10, 10A, 10B	~~GMEC~~ GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Determination of whether existing rights in terms of Section 10 of the RMA apply.
27	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	To provide information to the Minister for the Environment.
34A	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Power to carry out delegated functions, as specified in this instrument.
36(3)	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Power to require the payment of additional charges to cover processing costs in accordance with Council’s approved Schedule of Fees and Charges under the Resource Management Act 1991.
36(3A)	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Power to provide on request an estimate of additional charges over and above processing deposits.
37, 37A	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Power to waive and/or extend time limits for functions under Act.
38	GMES, M/TLRM	Authorisation of Enforcement Officers.
41B	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Direction to provide evidence with time limits.
42	GMES, M/TLRM	Protection of sensitive information (eg trade secret or cultural issue).
42A	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Preparation of staff reports on resource consent applications and other relevant matters.
42A	CE, GMES, M/TLRM	Approval for public circulation of staff reports on relevant matters.
42A(5)	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Waiving compliance regarding timeframes for distributing reports, where no material prejudice.
87E	GMES, M/TLRM	Decision on request for application to go directly to Environment Court.
87F	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Preparation of report on application referred directly to Environment Court.
88(3)	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Determining an application incomplete and returning to the applicant.
91	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Determining not to proceed with notification or hearing of application pending lodging of further consents under the Act.
92	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Request further information or agreement to commissioning of a report on resource consent application.
92A(2)	GMES, M/TLRMSP, RMPs	Set timeframe for provision of further information or commissioning of a report.
95A, 95B	GMES, M/TLRM, , SP	Determination of public notification or limited notification.
95D	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Determination of adverse effects likely to be more than minor.
95E	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Determination if group is affected customary rights group.
95F	GMES, M/TLRM	Determination if person is affected order holder.
99	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Organise and convene prehearing meetings and prepare reports on these under Section 99(5).
100	GMES, M/TLRM	Determine whether a formal hearing is necessary.
101	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Fix time and date for hearings.
102	GMES, M/TLRM	To determine whether applications are required to be heard by Joint Hearings Committee.
103	GMES, M/TLRM	To determine whether two or more applications to different authorities are sufficiently unrelated that a joint hearing is not appropriate.
104, 104A, 104B, 104C, 104D, 108 and 113	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Make and issue decisions and impose conditions for non-notified resource consent applications, and limited notified resource consent applications where there are no submissions received or where all submissions received are in support and no party wishes to be heard; in accordance with the provisions of the Southland District Plan and the RMA.
106	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Ability to refuse subdivision consent in certain circumstances.
108A	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Determination of requirement for a bond.
114	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Notify decisions to applicant and other appropriate authorities.
123(b)	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Duration of consent.
125(1A)(b)	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Fix longer period for lapsing of resource consents than is the norm under Section 125(1).
126	GMES, M/TLRM	Cancel consent if not exercised.
127	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Determining whether application to change or cancel consent requires notification, or limited notification and changing or cancelling any condition on a resource consent.
128	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Service of notice of intention to review conditions of a resource consent.
129, 130	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Formulation and public notification of notice to review conditions.
133A	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Minor corrections of resource consents.
134(4)	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Approval of transfer of resource consents - written notice.
138	GMES, M/TLRM	Surrender of consent.
139	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Consider request for and issue Certificates of Compliance for any activity which is a permitted activity under the District Plan.
139A	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Consider request for and issue Existing Use Certificate.
169	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Request further information and process notice of requirement.
170	GMES, M/TLRM	Discretion to include notice of requirement in proposed Plan.
171	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Consider notice of requirement and submissions thereto, and make recommendation to the requiring authority.
174	GMES, M/TLRM	Lodge appeal against decision of a requiring authority.
176A(2)(c)	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Outline plan waivers.
181(3)	GMES, M/TLRM	Alteration of designation in plan at request of requiring authority, to a minor extent.
220 and 240	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Issue certificates relating to requirements to comply on ongoing basis with consent conditions and endorsements on titles.
221	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Imposing and issuing Consent Notices on subdivision consents.
222	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Dealing with Completion Certificates on subdivision consents.
223	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Approval of Survey Plan - check compliance prior to sealing.
224	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Issue certificates indicating all or any of conditions on subdivision consent have been complied with.
226	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Certification of plans of subdivision that allotments on the plan meet the requirements of the District Plan.
229-237H	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Creation of esplanade reserves and strips and associated conditions.
240 and 241	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Imposition and cancellation of amalgamation conditions and restrictive covenants.
243 (e)	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Revoking a condition specifying easements.
310 and 311	GMES, M/TLRM	Application to Environment Court for a declaration.
314 and 316	GMES, M/TLRM	Seek and/or respond to an Enforcement Order.
320	GMES, M/TLRM	Seek and/or respond to an interim enforcement order.
322, 324, 325A	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Signature or cancellation of abatement notice.

Other Delegations under Related Legislation
37 Building Act 2004	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	To permit issue of building consent with certificate attached that resource consent required and no work to commence until this has been obtained.
72-74 Building Act 2004	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	To permit the issue of a building consent in circumstances where the site may be subject to natural hazards but the situation is not made worse by the construction of the building.
75 Building Act 2004	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Building on two or more allotments - issue and authenticate certificate for entry of titles.
100(f) Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Certificates that proposed use of premises meets requirements of Resource Management Act 1991 and Building Code.
348 Local Government Act 1974	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Creation and cancellation of right of ways.
Overseas Investments Act 2005	GMES, M/TLRM, SP	Issue certificates relating to land

Authority:

‘Authorised Officer’ signing authority as required by:

Early Childhood Certs (Education Act)		GMES, M/TLRM, SP
Project Information Memorandum	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Building Act 2004 (Planning Information)
Land Information Memorandum	GMES, M/TLRM, SP, RMPs	Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (Planning Information)

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Building Consents and Values for April 2016

Record No: R/16/5/6317

Author: Kevin O'Connor, Manager - Building Control

Approved by: Bruce Halligan, Group Manager Environmental Services

☐ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☒ Information

Summary/Comments:

Building consent numbers for April 2016 were up by 7.5%, but project values were down by 27% from those of April 2015. Ten months into the financial year, total consent numbers are back by 11% and project values back by 34%. New dwelling consent numbers for the month are consistent with the previous years. Additions to dwellings numbers were up significantly, with commercial building and farming building numbers up only slightly.

		No.	2016 $	No.	2015 $
1.	Dwellings	12	1,406,750	12	2,080,928
2.	Additions to Dwellings	20	825,000	11	712,800
3.	Commercial/Industrial Buildings	5	389,000	3	96,500
4.	Swimming/Spa Pools	0	0	0	0
5.	Heating Units	28	118,400	34	147,550
6.	Garages	5	101,700	5	137,568
7.	Farm Buildings	20	675,000	22	1,237,090
8.	Houses for Removal	7	227,000	5	260,000
9.	Cowsheds	0	0	1	450,000
10.	Miscellaneous	4	13,500	1	5,000
11.	Certificates of Acceptance	0	0	0	0
	TOTAL	101	3,756,350	9494	5,127,436

	2016	2015	Variation %
Total consents for month	101	94	7.45
Total consents for year	808	909	-11.11
Total project values for month	3,756,350	5,127,436	-26.74
Total project values for year	66,015,188	100,033,710	-34.00

Average Residential Cost	117,229	173,410
Average House Area (m²)	191.80	170.43

Number of Inspections Carried Out	371	425

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Building Consents and Values for April 2016” dated 29 June 2016.

Attachments

a Appendix A - Consents Database Graph April 2016 View

b Appendix B - Building Consents Issued Numbers April 2016 View

c Appendix C - Building Consents Issued Values April 2016 View

Council

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Haast-Hollyford Highway

Record No: R/16/6/9354

Author: Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

Approved by: Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 To enable the Council to consider whether to support the proposed Haast Hollyford road being put forward for inclusion in the Regional Land Transport Plan and National Land Transport Programme.

Executive Summary

2 Haast Hollyford Highway Ltd (HHHL) is promoting a scheme to build and operate a new 136 km toll road from Haast to Hollyford. In April 2015 the Council passed a resolution which indicated its support for the concept of developing the Haast Hollyford Road.

3 The Council has received a copy of a letter from the Minister of Transport which indicates that Central Government would only support the project if it proceeds through the normal Land Transport planning processes. As part of these processes, projects which receive support are included in the appropriate Regional Land Transport Plans and then the National Land Transport Programme.

4 Given the indication from the Minister of Transport as to the position of Central Government and the preliminary information that Council now has on the range of community views that exist it is considered appropriate that Council indicate its support for the project proceeding through the normal land transport planning processes. These processes are seen as reflecting good practice for the evaluation and development of a project of this nature.

5 To ensure that HHHL have a clear understanding of the process that would need to be followed it is suggested that this Council would look to initiate a meeting between HHHL, the Westland District Council, NZ Transport Agency and this Council.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Haast-Hollyford Highway” dated 20 June 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Notes that its meeting on 22 April 2015 it passed the following resolution:

Moved by Cr Kremer, seconded by Cr Baird

and resolved that the Council agrees that the concept of developing the Haast Hollyford Road is a project that potentially has merit and wishes to investigate the project further.

e) Notes the content of the letter dated 9 June 2016 from the Minister of Transport and in particular the indication that “the Government has no plans to support this project unless it goes through the established planning processes”.

f) Agrees to support the proposed Haast Hollyford road being put forward for inclusion in the Southland Regional Land Transport Plan and National Land Transport Programme, in accordance with the normal land transport planning processes, subject to Haast Hollyford Highway Limited meeting the costs associated with this process.

g) Agrees that the Council should seek to convene a meeting with the Westland District Council, Haast Hollyford Highway Limited and NZ Transport Agency to agree on the process that would need to be followed to enable the proposed Haast Hollyford Road to be approved via the normal land transport planning process.

h) Asks the Chief Executive to write to the Westland District Council, Haast Hollyford Highway Limited and NZ Transport Agency to propose a joint meeting in accordance with the above decisions.

Content

Background

6 Council was briefed, at a meeting on 4 March 2015, by representatives of Haast Hollyford Highway Ltd (HHHL), on its proposal to develop a new 136 km toll road from Haast to Hollyford. The road would be built as a toll road which would require the Westland and Southland District Council to negotiate a 30 year concession agreement with HHHL.

7 Council subsequently considered a report on the HHHL proposal at its 22 April 2015 meeting and passed a resolution which expressed support for the concept of developing the road. The resolutions passed also indicated that the Council wanted to give further consideration to the relative merits of the project including developing an understanding of the range of community views that might exist about it.

8 Since these decisions were made:

· Council has obtained a range of feedback on the HHHL proposal via a number of different mechanisms including its 2016/17 Annual Plan consultation process and the recent Community Conversations engagement process.

· Council has received a copy of a letter from the Minister of Transport, the Hon Simon Bridges, which outlines the central Government position in relation to the HHHL proposal. A copy of the letter is attached (Attachment A).

Issues

9 Given the new information that the Council now has, particularly that regarding the position of central Government, there is an opportunity for the Council to review the approach that it is currently following and determine whether it should endorse the approach being put forward by the Minister of Transport.

Factors to Consider

Government Position

10 The letter received from the Minister of Transport outlines the government position in relation to the development of the road. The key sections to note from this letter include:

If this road is to be built with Government support, it is important that investments are considered within established planning processes, including through development of the relevant Regional Land Transport Plans and the next National Land Transport Programme.

…the Government has no plans to support this project unless it goes through the established planning processes. Further it is unlikely that this privately funded road is likely to proceed without major consenting processes and significant legal processes due to the road encroaching onto conservation land.”

11 The Minister’s letter indicates that, from a Central Government perspective, there is a clear expectation that the road should proceed through the normal Land Transport planning processes if it is to get the Government’s support.

12 Given the complex range of issues that need to be addressed having Government support for the road is clearly important. Indeed, HHHL have previously acknowledged this where they have indicated that once they had approval in principle from the Councils they would like to jointly approach central Government seeking support for the road to be called in as a “road of national significance”.

13 Irrespective of whether the road is developed as a privately funded road, local road, Government road or state highway it would be reasonable for it to be evaluated through the established land transport planning processes. In this way the Council can ensure that it is evaluated via a process that is accepted as good practice.

Legal and Statutory Requirements

14 The decision-making provisions in the Local Government Act 2002 apply to all Council decisions. These provisions require that, in making any decision, the Council must:

· Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options

· Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages

· Give consideration to the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by or who have an interest in the matter

· For any significant decision involving land or water take into account Māori cultural values and the impact of the decision on such.

15 Under Section 97 of the Local Government Act 2002 the Council is not able to make a decision which would involve a significant change to the level of service for a significant activity undertaken by or on its behalf, nor provide for the transfer of control of a strategic asset to another party unless that decision is explicitly provided for in its Long Term Plan.

16 The Land Transport Management Act 2003 contains provisions relating to the operation of toll roads including a requirement that the road remain in public ownership throughout the term of the agreement. The provisions also require that the development of any proposed toll road is approved by the Minister of Transport. Before giving his approval the Minister needs to be satisfied that:

· There is a feasible toll free route available

· That the Councils have carried out adequate community consultation on the proposal

· That there is a good level of public support for the proposed project

· That the tolling scheme is an efficient and effective way of meeting a transportation need.

17 It is also likely that the project, if it proceeds, will require resource consent for some aspects of the work. The extent of any consenting requirements is unknown at this stage. It is reasonable to expect, however, that for a project of this scale there will be a need for a public notification process to be followed.

18 As noted in the Minister’s letter there are also a number of other complex legal matters that will need to be considered depending on the proposed classification of the road and the extent to which it encroaches on to land administered by the Department of Conservation.

Community Views

19 As part of the 2016/17 Annual Plan consultation process the Council received four submissions which indicated strong support for the HHHL proposal. As a result of its consideration of these submissions the Council asked officers to proceed with the development of a proposed consultation process that would enable it to develop a better understanding of the range of community views that might exist on the proposal.

20 Council has recently completed the Community Conversations engagement process. These meetings were held to develop an understanding of what the community saw as important strategic issues that needed to be considered leading into development of the 2018 Long Term Plan. Through this process Council received feedback on a wide range of strategic and operational issues.

21 As part of the Community Conversations process questions were raised in a number of the meetings about the position that Council was adopting in relation to the HHHL proposal and the relative merits of developing a road between Haast and Hollyford. During the discussion those expressing a view could generally be split into the following categories:

· A number who supported the development of the road and just wanted to see it built, almost irrespective of how it was done or the risks that would be carried by the various parties involved including Council. A number of people in this category seemed to accept the viewpoint that the HHHL proposal would mean that it could be done at no cost (or risk) to the Council or simply see development of the road as an important regional priority.

· A number who supported the concept of developing the road but saw it as appropriate that it be subject to robust and considered investigation, analysis and decision-making processes. A number in this category were keen to ensure that the Council did not repeat what they perceived as mistakes which had been made in the development of other projects such as the Te Anau Manapouri Airport and the Around the Mountains Cycle Trail.

· A number who had concerns about the proposal and who did not support its development. In a number of cases those in this category were concerned about the environmental impacts of the project and the fact that it was proposed to be built in a wilderness area.

· A number who were somewhat indifferent and/or did not have a view either way.

22 Points put forward in support of developing the road included:

· It would have positive economic benefits for Southland and the West Coast through an increase in tourism to these regions and/or existing tourists staying in Te Anau and Southland rather than alternate locations such as Queenstown

· It would provide for easier access to Milford Sound

· It would provide a shorter access route, from Fiordland, to the West Coast and vice versa

· It would provide increased resilience to the roading network by providing an alternative access route to the West Coast in the event of adverse weather etc. In this regard some submitters noted the issues which have been experienced on the existing Haast Pass route with landslides in recent years

· The HHHL proposal meant that the road could be built as a public private partnership with a significant portion of the risk being carried by the private sector investor.

23 Points put forward against supporting development of the road as currently proposed included:

· Concerns about it being built through a wilderness area that should continue to be protected

· That it would ‘open up’ what is currently an existing ‘back country’ area for recreational users

· Concerns about the risks associated with a project of this scale, how these would be managed and whether it was appropriate for these to be carried by the Councils

· Questions as to whether the road should be developed as a state highway or with central Government support given its potential national significance.

24 There was particularly strong support for development of the road from the estimated 150 people who attended the Te Anau Community Conversations meeting. The fact that this meeting followed on from a public meeting held by HHHL four days earlier meant that there was a high level of support for and at times emotion shown at the meeting for the HHHL proposal. This meant that it was difficult for people who may have held an alternative point of view to express those views and/or engage in a balanced discussion about the pros and cons of the proposal.

25 Outside of the Community Conversations process there have also been a range of views expressed to Council. It is important that the Council also hear and consider, particularly given the significance of this project, the full range of views that exist on the proposal.

Costs and Funding

26 If the recommended option is followed then the direct costs of developing the business cases and other information needed would be met by HHHL.

27 Outside of these costs there will be a level of costs that the Council will incur in obtaining its own advice and supporting the project proceeding through this process. These costs are not expected to be significant and officers believe that they could be absorbed within existing budgets at this stage. Officers will come back to Council should this position change.

Policy Implications

28 It is proposed that the HHHL proposal would flow through the normal land transport planning processes. Adopting this approach is consistent with existing Council and NZTA policy and would eventually see the road being reflected in the formal Council policy and asset management plans if approved.

29 The Council does not have a formal policy on the development of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs), which the HHHL would be if approved. It does, however, have a procurement policy that is of relevance and will need to be considered in further depth at an appropriate time. There is also a range of ‘good practice’ guidance available from the Auditor-General and National Infrastructure Unit. Officers will look to use this guidance to inform the approach that the Council should follow.

Analysis

Options Considered

Option 1 - Support inclusion in Land Transport Planning Process

30 Under this option the Council would support the HHHL proposal proceeding through the normal land transport planning process for inclusion in the Regional Land Transport Plans and National Land Transport Programme. Note that it would need to be included in both the Westland and Southland Regional Land Transport Plans.

31 If Council adopts this option officers would propose that this Council would seek to organise a meeting with the Westland District Council, NZ Transport Agency and HHHL to develop and agree on the process that would need to be followed.

32 This option is consistent with the letter received from the Minister of Transport and provides a clearly defined pathway via which HHHL can advance their project.

Option 2 - Do Nothing

33 Under this option the Council would not make a decision, at this point, on supporting the project proceeding through the land transport planning process.

34 Adoption of this option would mean that the Council would look at going through a community consultation process relating to the HHHL proposal. Officers have developed a draft consultation document and a suggested process. As a result we would be in a position to bring this proposed document and process through to Council at its next meeting for approval.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Support Inclusion

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Would enable HHHL to advance their proposal to develop the road.

· Is consistent with the process outlined by the Minister of Transport as necessary for the project to gain central Government support.

· Ensures that the road proceeds through a robust evaluation process that is consistent with good practice.

· Would ensure that the road would be eligible to receive NZTA funding once the HHHL concession ended and responsibility for its maintenance is returned to Council.

· HHHL would be responsible for developing the material needed for the road to be considered for inclusion in the RLTP.

· HHHL may not be prepared to invest in developing the material needed to have the road progress through the established planning processes.

Option 2 – Do Nothing

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Would enable the Council to adopt a more structured approach to the collection of community views prior to it making a decision on whether to support the project being put forward.

· Allows the Council to make further progress in obtaining the information needed to evaluate the project before deciding whether to support the project proceeding to the next stage.

· There would be a delay to the project starting to be evaluated through the established land transport planning processes.

· There remains a risk that it would not receive an indication as to whether central Government are prepared to support the project.

Assessment of Significance

35 The decision that the Council is being asked to make through this paper is whether to support the Haast Hollyford Road proceeding through the normal land transport planning processes so that it is able to attract central Government support.

36 Making this decision would be in accordance with existing Council policy and the process that is used for all other roading projects. As a result officers are of the view that a decision in accordance with the recommendation would not represent a significant decision.

Recommended Option

37 The recommended option is for the Council to adopt Option 1 and support the proposed Haast – Hollyford road proceeding through the normal land transport planning processes. This decision would ensure that the road proceeds through the standard planning and evaluation processes used for all other roads.

Next Steps

38 Officers would look to convene a meeting between the Westland District Council, NZ Transport Agency and HHHL to discuss and agree on the planning and decision-making process that needs to be followed to enable the project to obtain central Government support.

Attachments

a Letter from Minister of Transport View

Council

29 June 2016

MINUTES of the VENTURE SOUTHLAND JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING held in the VENTURE SOUTHLAND BOARDROOM, 143 SPEY STREET, INVERCARGILL on MONDAY, 16 MAY 2016 at 10.00AM

PRESENT:

Trevor Johnston (Chair) Cr Gavin Macpherson		Cr Cliff Bolger
Tom Campbell	Cr Ian Pottinger	Robin Campbell
Chair Ali Timms

IN ATTENDANCE:

Paul Casson	Stephen Canny	Bobbi Brown
Tim Mackay	Hunter Andrews	Nicola Wills
Bronwyn Affleck
Ashleigh Reid – Fiordland Advocate David Nicol – Southland Times

APOLOGIES: Nil

Trevor welcomed everyone to the meeting.

1.0 MINUTES

1.1 MINUTES OF THE VENTURE SOUTHLAND JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING
18 APRIL 2016

Moved Tom Campbell, seconded Robin Campbell

and RESOLVED THAT THE MINUTES OF THE VENTURE SOUTHLAND JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 18 APRIL 2016 BE CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD.

1.2 MATTERS ARISING - Nil

2.0 REPORTS

2.1 VENTURE SOUTHLAND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE MONTH ENDED
30 APRIL 2016

Report by Tim Mackay

Tim spoke to the report.

Moved Cr Gavin Macpherson seconded Tom Campbell

AND RESOLVED THAT THE VENTURE SOUTHLAND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE MONTH ENDED 30 APRIL 2016 BE RECEIVED.

2.2 HEALTH AND SAFETY WORKSHOPS

930/120/8/4

R/16/5/6703

Report by Nicola Wills

Nicola spoke to the report.

The Committee acknowledged this was a great initiative.

Moved Robin Campbell, seconded Tom Campbell

and RESOLVED THAT THE HEALTH AND SAFTEY WORKSHOPS REPORT BE RECEIVED.

2.3 OHAI NIGHTCAPS POPULATION STUDY

930/120/8/4

R/16/5/6683

Report by Nicola Wills

Nicola spoke to the report.

Cr Gavin Macpherson commented the information from the Study would be beneficial for Southland District Council’s long-term planning and strategic direction.

Moved Cr Ina Pottinger, seconded Cr Cliff Bolger

and RESOLVED THAT THE OHAI NIGHTCAPS POPULATION STUDY REPORT BE RECEIVED.

2.4 TOURISM TRENDS AND ISSUES

930/120/8/4

R/16/5/6412

Report by Warrick Low

Bobbi spoke to the report.

Discussion included:

While Southland had a record number of visitors, the challenge was to get people to stay longer and spend more.

Jim Boult recently commented that there had been no applications from Southland to the Tourism Growth Partnership Fund and the Committee enquired why?

Bobbi advised the Fund was only available for applications/projects that would attract international visitors. Also projects that had received any other Government funding were not eligible to apply. There may be an opportunity for heritage sector projects to apply to this Fund. Venture Southland is working alongside MBIE to identify options.

The domestic market was still Southland’s largest target market.

Venture Southland would continue to work with Council and industry to maximise the benefit and mitigate the impact of visitors to the Southland region.

Discuss regional deals with Air NZ to assist in making it more affordable for families from other regions around New Zealand to come to Southland.

Moved Cr Cliff Bolger, seconded Tom Campbell

and RESOLVED THAT THE TOURISM TRENDS AND ISSUES REPORT BE RECEIVED.

David Nicol left the meeting at 10.30am

2.5 THE REAL TIME TRAFFIC VIDEO MONITORING PROPOSAL

930/120/8/4

R/16/5/6843

Report by Renatta Hardy

Stephen Canny spoke to the report.

Stephen advised the current data collection process is out dated no longer meets requirements.

Chair Ali Timms recommended approaching the Regional Transport Committee for funding consideration.

Moved Tom Campbell, seconded Cr Gavin Macpherson

and RESOLVED:

(a) THAT THE REAL TIME TRAFFIC VIDEO MONITORING PROPOSAL REPORT BE RECEIVED.

(b) THAT THE VENTURE SOUTHALND JOINT COMMITTEE SUPPORT THE CONCEPT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AUTOMATED TRAFFIC COUNTER SYSTEM FOR SOUTHLAND.

(c) THAT THE VENTURE SOUTHLAND JOINT COMMITTEE ENDORSE THE PROPOSAL TO UNDERTAKE A TRIAL TO EVALUATE THE MERITS OF ESTABLISHING A REGIONAL INTEGRATED NETWORK OF REAL TIME TRAFFIC COUNTERS INCLUDING THE PREPARATION OF APPROPRIATE BUDGETS.

(d) THAT THE VENTURE SOUTHLAND JOINT COMMITTEE APPROVES VENTURE SOUTHLAND STAFF WORKING WITH LOCAL COUNCIL STAFF AND NZTA TO ADVANCE A VIABLE SOLUTION AND REPORT THE FINDINGS BACK TO THE JOINT COMMITTEE.

2.6 2016 SOUTHLAND BUSINESS SURVEY

930/120/8/4

R/16/5/6844

Report by Rhiannon Suter

Rhiannon spoke to the report.

Cr Pottinger enquired whether the survey gathered information relating to the Invercargill CBD and retailer confidence, which would be useful to the Invercargill City Council (ICC).

Stephen advised surveys were completed online and protected participants anonymity which ensured a platform for participants to provide real information.

A separate piece of work would be required to ascertain information relating to Invercargill’s CBD and retailer confidence.

Stephen advised a group of Otago University Students had recently undertaken a study of the Invercargill CBD, South City and Bluff. This work may provide some of the information Cr Pottinger enquired about and/or could be used as a base for further investigation, if required.

Moved Robin Campbell, seconded Cr Ian Pottinger

and RESOLVED THAT THE 2016 SOUTHLAND BUSINESS SURV EY REPORT BE RECEIVED.

2.7 AEROMAGNETIC SURVEY OF SOUTHLAND UPDATE

930/120/8/4

R/16/5/68446

Report by Adina Pirvu

Stephen spoke to the report advising the surveying was ahead of schedule. RFP for Data Analysis was about to be circulated.

Moved Cr Cliff Bolger, seconded Cr Gavin Macpherson

and RESOLVED THAT THE AEROMAGNETIC SURVEY OF SOUTHLAND UPDATE REPORT BE RECEIVED.

2.8 PROJECT UPDATES

930/120/8/4

R/16/5/6845

Report by Stephen Canny

Stephen spoke to the report.

Moved Tom Campbell, seconded Robin Campbell

and RESOLVED THAT THE PROJECT UPDATE REPORT BE RECEIVED.

2.9 VERBAL UPDATES

No verbal updates.

2.10 HEALTH AND SAFETY UPDATE

Tim reported no incidences since the meeting held 18 April 2016.

Working was continuing on Health and Safety policies.

Venture Southland representatives had attended a ‘Contractor Management Safety’ seminar on 10 May 2016.

3.0 GENERAL - Nil

The Meeting concluded at 12.45pm.

C O N F I R M E D:

CHAIRMAN:

DATE:

MINUTES of the SOUTHLAND REGIONAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE MEETING held at VENTURE SOUTHLAND, 143 Spey Street, Invercargill on FRIDAY, 6 MAY 2016 at 10.00am.

PRESENT: Cr Paul Duffy (Chairman)

Cr Gavin Macpherson

Cr Peter Grant

Cr Bret Highsted

Cr Lindsay Thomas

Cr Lloyd Esler

IN ATTENDANCE:

Jim Geddes	Jo Massey
Paul Horner	Bobbi Brown
Bruce Halligan	Bronwyn Affleck

Mayor Tracy Hicks	Cr Rebecca Amundsen

APOLOGIES:

Maureen Reynolds, Kathleen Simmonds, Dale Booth

Moved Cr Lindsay Thomas, seconded Cr Lloyd Esler

and RESOLVED THAT THE APOLOGIES BE ACCEPTED.

Cr Duffy welcomed everyone to the meeting and in particular Bruce Halligan who had recently been appointed by Southland District Council (SDC) to provide oversight and support for the Roving Museum Officer working out of the SDC office.

1.0 MINUTES

1.1 MINUTES OF THE SOUTHLAND REGIONAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE MEETING
HELD 6 NOVEMBER 2016

Minutes for confirmation.

Moved Cr Peter Grant, seconded Cr Lindsay Thomas

and RESOLVED THAT THE MINUTES OF THE SOUTHLAND REGIONAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 6 NOVEMBER 2015 BE CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD.

1.1.1 MATTERS ARISING: Nil

2.0 REPORTS

2.1 ROVING MUSEUM OFFCIER ANNUAL REPORT APRIL 2015 – MARCH 2016

Report by Jo Massey

Moved Cr Lloyd Esler, seconded Cr Lindsay Thomas

and RESOLVED THAT THE ROVING MUSEUM OFFICER ANNUAL REPORT APRIL 2015 – MARCH 2016 BE RECEIVED.

2.2 ROVING MUSEUM OFFICER POWERPOINT PRESENTATION

Jo Massey spoke to the powerpoint presentation.

Cr Duffy thanked Jo for the on-going support of Museums and heritage organisations around the region. It is reassuring to know Southland’s significant heritage is being preserved.

2.3 REGIONAL STORAGE UPDATE

Verbal Update Jim Geddes

Jim reported the Advisory Group had had several meetings to discuss regional storage. The January 2016 meeting was attended Bronwyn Simes. Bronwyn has significant Museum/Art Gallery project management experience. Most recently shepherding the redevelopment of Toitu Otago Settlers Museum and now assisting Canterbury Museum with their earthquake recovery.

Bronwyn provided a brief summary of discussions and options to explore and pursue.

Jim advised Tracey Wedge, SMAG collections manager, would be visiting the Hampshire regional storage facility whilst in the UK. The Hampshire storage facility services 15 Museums. Some run by volunteers and others have professional staff, so there are a number of synergies with the Southland region.

Tracey would provide a report informing findings from the visit to the Hampshire storage facility. The recommendations/options identified by Bronwyn Simes would be added to this information and the Advisory Group would formulate a plan forward which will be reported to the next SRHC meeting.

Jim commented that the plan forward would be influenced by identified Museum projects including the proposed SMAG redevelopment. It would identify collections at risk and address not only physical facilities but add-on services as well.

2.4 HERITAGE SOUTH REPORT ON HERITAGE FORUM

Report by Heritage South

Cr Amundsen spoke to the report.

Cr Amundsen reported a few people from outside the Southland region attended the Forum. Some had attended previously and consider the Forum an excellent opportunity to meet and discuss ideas and issues relating to the ‘heritage community’.

Cr Duffy advised he had intended to attend on Saturday only however was so impressed by Saturday’s programme he also attended on Sunday. Cr Duffy added the lack of Councillors attending was disappointing.

Moved Cr Lindsay Thomas, seconded Cr Lloyd Esler

and RESOLVED THAT THE HERITAGE SOUTH HERITAGE FORUM REPORT BE RECEIVED.

2.5 SOUTHLAND REGIONAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE FINANCIAL REPORT TO
31 MARCH 2016

Report by Kathleen Simmonds and Maureen Reynolds, ICC

Cr Duffy advised he had meet with Audit NZ representatives and the ICC finance team as part of Audit NZ’s pre-audit preparations. Cr Duffy advised Audit NZ had a good understanding of the SRHC and how it links with the Councils.

Jim reported he would meet with Community Trust of Southland representatives on 10 May 2016 regarding submitting an application for assistance towards the Roving Museum Officer role for the three year period April 2016 – March 2019.

Moved Cr Lloyd Esler, seconded Cr Bret Highsted

and RESOLVED THAT SOUTHLAND REGIONAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE FINANCIAL REPORT TO 31 MARCH 2016 BE RECEIVED.

2.6 SOUTHLAND REGIONAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE ADVISORY GROUP APPLICATION ASSESSMENT REPORT

Report by Jim Geddes, Jo Massey, Paul Horner, Bobbi Brown, Bruce Halligan

1.	Applicant OTAUTAU COMMUNITY BOARD Project Description Isla Bank War Memorial Restoration Total Project Cost: $18,507 Amount Requested: $3,000 Awarded: $3,000
2.	Applicant OTAUTAU RSA Project Description Otautau War Memorial – Gun Shelter Display Total Project Cost: $2,943 Amount Requested: 2,943 Awarded: $2,943
3.	Applicant VENTURE SOUTHLAND ON BEHALF OF THE TUATAPERE RSA Project Description Restoration of the Orawia War Memorial Total Project Cost: $6,960 Amount Requested: $3,000 Awarded: $3,000
4.	Applicant VENTURE SOUTHLAND ON BEHALF OF THE MATAURA ISLAND WAR MEMORIAL Project Description Mataura Island War Memorial Restoration Total Project Cost: $4,238 Amount Requested: $3,000 Awarded: $3,000

5.	Applicant SOUTHLAND MUSEUM & ART GALLERY – NIHO O TE TANIWHA Crs Lloyd Esler and Gavin Macpherson Declared an Interest Project Description (A) Film Scanner Total Project Cost: $9,532 Amount Requested: $4,500 Awarded: $4,500 Project Description (B) Long-term Storage Project for Clothing and Textiles Total Project Cost: $4,916 Amount Requested: $4,916 Awarded: $4,916
6.	Applicant RAKIURA MUSEUM Project Description Cataloguing of Stewart Island Lockerbie Archaeological Collections Total Project Cost – Up to: $2,440 Amount Requested – Up to: $2,440 Awarded: Up to $2,440
7.	CROYDON AVIATION HERITAGE TRUST Cr Bret Highsted Declared an Interest Project Description Croydon Aviation Heritage Centre and Precinct – preparation of exhibition and exterior concept plans Total Project Cost: $28,820 Amount Requested: $13,820 Awarded: $13,820
8.		Applicant SOUTHLAND HERITAGE AND BUILDING PRESERVATION TRUST Project Description Kohi Kohi Cottage Restoration – Stage 2 Total Project Cost: $44,930 Amount Requested: $7,000 Awarded: Building/maintenance costs not eligible
9.		Applicant MATAURA MUSEUM Project Description Design and printing of 9 rotating story panels and Photo Collection Total Project Cost: $6,510 Amount Requested: $6,510 Awarded:: $6,510
10.		Applicant WINTON RACECOURSE RESERVE HISTORIC GROUP Project Description Photo Restoration Total Project Cost: $2,437 Amount Requested: $2,437 Awarded: $2,437 – continue to liaise with RMO
11.		Applicant SOUTHERN STEAM TRAIN CHARITABLE TRUST Project Description Project and Feasibility Study Brief for the Proposed Purchase and Restoration of the Kingston Flyer Steam Train Total Project Cost: $39,000 Amount Requested: $29,000 Decision: Decline Asset in private ownership – could be sold anytime. Lack of certainty around heritage value – was it Southland’s. Heritage project versus Tourism project. Not a priority
12.		Applicant SOUTH CATLINS CHARITABLE TRUST Cr Paul Duffy declared an interest Project Description Curio Bay Tumu Toka Natural Heritage Centre Total Project Cost: $390,000 Amount Requested: $100,000 Awarded: $100,000 - to be uplifted on confirmation of preferred contractors for interpretation
13.		Applicant NORTHERN SOUTHLAND DEVELOPMENT TRUST Project Description Northern Southland Heritage Trail Brochure Reprint Total Project Cost: $4,231 Amount Requested: $1,500 Awarded: $1,500

Mayor	Mayor Gary Tong
Deputy Mayor	Paul Duffy
Councillors	Lyall Bailey
	Stuart Baird
	Brian Dillon
	Rodney Dobson
	John Douglas
	Bruce Ford
	George Harpur
	Julie Keast
	Ebel Kremer
	Gavin Macpherson
	Neil Paterson

Chief Executive	Steve Ruru
Committee Advisor	Fiona Dunlop

Applicant Details

Applicant name:

Trading name of business (if applicable):

Postal address:

Primary telephone:

After hours telephone:

Email address:

Please indicate the type of activity permit for which you are applying.
☐ Displaying a sign on a road or footpath		☐ Placing objects on the footpath
Please specify the location where the sign(s) or object(s) would be located. Please attach a map, if required.

Are you applying to erect a mobile sign?
☐ Yes		☐ No
Please provide details of the sign content.

Please detail the size of the sign or object.

Please provide details of the construction of the sign or object.

Date the sign or object is to be erected:
Date the sign or object is to be removed:
Permit Requirements
I confirm that:
☐	I have included in this application the required information necessary to enable the Council to consider the application.
☐	I have paid the prescribed fee
☐	I agree to comply with the times, terms and conditions of the permit if a permit is issued.
Signature: (applicant)		Date:

OFFICE USE ONLY
Application received on:
Recommendation:	Approved / Declined (circle one)
Permit number:
Applicant advised:	Yes / No (circle one)
Date:
Notes:

Full Name:
Organisation:
Email:

Address:
		Postcode:

Home phone:		Mobile:
Do you support the overall approach that Council has taken in the draft Signs and Objects on Roads and Footpaths Bylaw 2016?
q Support	q Oppose
Please indicate if you wish to speak in support of your submission.
q Yes, I wish to speak in support of my submission.	q No, I do not wish to speak in support of my submission.
Please tell us why you support or oppose the proposed approach.
Comments:
















Do you have any further suggestions or comments?
Comments:













(Please add further pages if you wish)
Submissions close 30 July 2016 at 5.00 pm Please note that your submission and your name will be available to the public. You can make your submission online or by post or deliver your submission to any SDC office.

ENCOURAGING RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING PRACTICES Best Practice	*Supporting Action*
Host Responsibility and Harm Minimisation Policy	The applicant has in place a Host Responsibility and Harm Minimisation Policy. The programme conforms to best practice as set out by national guidelines or standards should these become available.
Location of gaming machines	Electronic gaming machines sites should be located so that: • The facility is ancillary to a principal business and is not the primary purpose of the site. • The facility is separate from the area of the principal business so that the legal age limit of 18 can be observed and enforced.
Staff training programme or activities	The applicant demonstrates that staff and management are familiar with its Host Responsibility and Harm Minimisation Policy. The programme provides information on: • The potential effects of gambling on customers. • The identification of problem gambling traits. • The processes for approach, intervention and follow up for patrons with suspected problem gambling. • Identification practices for patrons appearing under 25 and actions to be followed. • Systems in place to support self barring. • Recognition of intoxicated patrons and steps to be followed to prevent intoxicated patrons from gambling. • Systems to be followed if children are left unattended in premises or nearby premises.
Policy on under age access to gambling machines	The licensee must ensure that appropriate signage is in place indicating age restrictions so that this is visible at every gambling machine and at the point(s) of entry into the gambling area. Policy on identification checks for patrons appearing under 25. Staff training on identification of patrons appearing under 25 and actions to be followed.
Provision of problem gambling information	The licensee must ensure that patrons have access to appropriate information on problem gambling and problem gambling help services. Gambling help line phone number information is placed on or near all gambling machines. Additional material on problem gambling and help services displayed in at least one other area within the premises, situated near to gambling machines.
Clocks are visible in premises	The licensee ensures that clocks are visible from gambling machines.
There is good visibility where gambling machines are located	Natural or artificial light illuminates the area where gambling machines are located at all times when machine are in operation.