Notice is hereby given that a Meeting of the Te Anau Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 24 October 2018

2.00pm

Distinction Hotel & Villas
64 Lakefront Drive
Te Anau

 

Te Anau Community Board Agenda

OPEN

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Rachel Cockburn

 

Deputy Chairperson

Sarah Greaney

 

Members

Shaun Cantwell

 

 

Mary Chartres

 

 

Kara Matheson

 

 

Tony O'Loughlin

 

 

Councillor Ebel Kremer

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Committee Advisor

Jenny Labruyere

Community Partnership Leader

Simon Moran

 

 

 

Contact Telephone: 0800 732 732

Postal Address: PO Box 903, Invercargill 9840

Email: emailsdc@southlanddc.govt.nz

Website: www.southlanddc.govt.nz

 

Full agendas are available on Council’s Website

www.southlanddc.govt.nz

 

 

 


Terms of Reference – Community Boards

 

Community Boards are bodies established by statute.  Their responsibilities and powers are as delegated by the Southland District Council which are to:

·                      Represent and act as an advocate for the interest of its community.

·                      Consider and report on all matters referred to it by the Southland District Council, or any matter of interest or concern to the Community Board.

·                      Maintain an overview of services provided by the Southland District Council within the community.

·                      Consider annual estimates for expenditure within the community and recommend these to Council.

·                      Communicate with community organisations and special interest groups within the community.

·                      Undertake any other responsibilities that are delegated to it by the Southland District Council.

 

In addition to these activities, Community Boards will consider how best to provide for their communities, and the people who live there, into the future.

 

Community Board members will provide leadership by:

·                Positively representing their community and the Southland District

·                Identifying key issues that will affect their community’s future and work with Council staff and other local representatives to facilitate multi-agency collaborative opportunities.

·                Promote a shared vision for the wider community of interest area and develop ways to work with others to achieve positive outcomes

 

·                Community Boards will adopt a strategic focus that will enable members to:

·                Provide local representation and guidance on wider community issues, initiatives and projects.

·                Contribute to the development and promotion of community cohesion, by developing and supporting relationships across a range of stakeholders at a local, regional and national level.

·                Take part in local community forums, meetings and workshops.

·                Inform local residents and ratepayers on issues that affect them.

 

Community Boards shall have the following delegated powers and be accountable to Council for the exercising of these powers

 

Engagement and representation by:

·                Facilitating the Council’s consultation with local residents and community groups on local issues and local aspects of district wide issues including input into the Long-term Plan, Annual Plan, and policies that impact on the Board’s area.

·                Engaging with council officers on local issues and levels of service, including infrastructural, recreational, community services and parks, reserves and cemetery matters.

·                Representing the interests of the community at Council, Committee or Subcommittee meetings when a motion under debate relates to a matter that the Board considers to be of particular interest to the residents within its community.

·                Monitoring and keeping the Council informed of community aspirations and the level of satisfaction with services provided.

 

Financial by:

·                Approving expenditure within the limits of annual estimates.

·                Approving unbudgeted expenditure for locally funded activities up to the value of $10,000.

 

Rentals and leases

·                In relation to all leases of land and buildings within their own area, on behalf of Council;

§    Accepting the highest tenders for rentals of $10,000; or less per annum.

§    Approving the preferential allocation of leases where the rental is $10,000 or less per annum.

 


 

Local assets and facilities by

·                Overseeing the management of local halls and community centres which are owned by Council and where no management committee exists.  This will occur by way of relationship with officers of Southland District Council. 

·                Appoint a local liaison person responsible for community housing.

 

Some Community Boards have specific delegations in addition to the broad delegations above:

 

Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

·                Contributing to the development of policy relating to the governance of the Stewart Island Electrical Supply Authority (SIESA). 

·                Overseeing the management of SIESA by way of relationship with officers of Southland District Council. 

 

Te Anau Community Board

·                Overseeing the management of the Te Anau/Manapouri Airport by way of relationship with officers of Southland District Council.

 

The Community Boards can make recommendations to Council on:

 

Assets and Facilities

·                Annually providing feedback on any asset management plans or community services strategies applicable to the community for which the Community Board is responsible.

 

Rentals and leases

·                In relation to all leases of land and buildings within their own area, on behalf of Council;

§    Recommending rentals in excess of $10,000 per annum to the Group Manager Services and Assets

§    Recommending the preferential allocation of leases where the rental is in excess of $10,000 per annum to the Group Manager Services and Assets.

 

Contracts/Tenders

·                Recommending tenders less than $200,000 to the Group Manager Services and Assets.

·                Recommending tenders in excess of $200,000 to the Services and Assets Committee.

·                Recommending tenders to the Services and Assets Committee where preference is not for acceptance of the highest tenderer,

 

Financial

·                Recommending annual estimates to Council.

·                Recommending unbudgeted expenditure in excess of $10,000 to the Services and Assets Committee.

 

Local Policy

·                Considering matters referred to it by officers, the Council, its committees or subcommittees, including reports and policy and bylaw proposals relating to the provision of council services within the Board’s area; and

·                Making submissions or recommendations in response to those matters as appropriate.

 

The Chairperson of each Community Board is delegated with the following additional responsibilities:

·                 Approval of leases, rental agreements and the rollover of existing contracts under $1,000;

·                 Engaging with Community Board members to make submissions to the Council on behalf of the Community Board where a submission period is outside of the Community Board meeting cycle.  Where a Chairperson is unable to base a submission on a consensus among Community Board members, a Community Board meeting must be held.

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 

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 Minutes                                                                                                                               8

Reports

7.1         Council Report                                                                                                                                                   17

7.2         Financial Report for the year ended 30 June 2018                                                                       37

7.3         Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy                                                                                              51

7.4         Bird Strike Risk Assessment - Te Anau Airport                                                                              61

7.5         Te Anau Airport Manapouri Manager's Report - September 2018                                  137

Committee Reports

8.1         Chairperson's Report

The Chairperson, Member Cockburn to report on matters with which she has been involved since the Board’s last meeting.

 

Councillor's Report

9.1         Councillor's Report

Councillor Kremer to report on matters from the District Council table.

  


1             Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

 

2             Leave of absence

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

 

3             Conflict of Interest

 

Committee Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

 

4             Public Forum

Notification to speak is required by 5pm at least two days before the meeting. Further information is available on www.southlanddc.govt.nz or phoning 0800 732 732.

 

5             Extraordinary/Urgent Items

To consider, and if thought fit, to pass a resolution to permit the committee to consider any further items which do not appear on the Agenda of this meeting and/or the meeting to be held with the public excluded.

Such resolution is required to be made pursuant to Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, and the Chairperson must advise:

(i)     the reason why the item was not on the Agenda, and

(ii)          the reason why the discussion of this item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a)    that item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i)            that item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii)           the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b)             no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

 

6             Confirmation of Minutes

6.1             Meeting minutes of Te Anau Community Board, 29 August 2018


 

Te Anau Community Board

 

OPEN MINUTES

 

 

 

Minutes of a meeting of Te Anau Community Board held in the Distinction Hotel & Villas, 64 Lakefront Drive, Te Anau on Wednesday, 29 August 2018 at 2.00pm.

 

present

That

Chairperson

Rachel Cockburn

 

Deputy Chairperson

Sarah Greaney

 

Members

Shaun Cantwell

 

 

Tony O'Loughlin

 

 

Councillor Ebel Kremer

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Committee Advisor

Jenny Labruyere

Community Partnership Leader

Simon Moran

Group Manager Services and Assets

Matt Russell

Strategic Manager Property

Kevin McNaught

Communications Manager

Louise Pagan

 

PUBLIC GALLERY

 

John Greaney, Richard Wason, Mark Fletcher
1       Apologies

 

Apologies for non-attendance were lodged by Members Chartres and Matheson.

 

Moved Cr Kremer, seconded Deputy Chairperson Greaney and resolved:

That the  Te Anau Community Board accept the apologies for non-attendance by Members M Chartres and K Matheson.

 

 

2             Leave of absence

 

There were no requests for leave of absence.

 

 

3             Conflict of Interest

 

There were no conflicts of interest declared.

 

 

4             Public Forum

 

J Greaney – on behalf of the Fiordland Trails Trust

 

Mr Greaney addresses the Board  on behalf of the Trails Trust in support of the Trust’s submission to the Councils Long Term Plan 2018-2028. 

 

Mr Greaney outlined issues the Trust believes the Board could assist with when considering future community development planning within the Long Term Plan.

 

Richard Wason

 

Mr Wason highlighted  a recent article in the Advocate South, raising the issues the town had during last years’ hot dry summer when water restrictions and hosing bans were put in place, and requested the Board  and Council be prepared to avoid the same happening for the coming summer.

 

Mr Russell responded that he will investigate the situation further, and in the mean-time will have  the Communications Team respond to the letter in the advocate and prepare an advisory notice for the public prior to the busy summer period.

 

 

5             Extraordinary/Urgent Items

 

There were no Extraordinary/Urgent items.

 

 

 

 

 

6             Confirmation of Minutes

 

Resolution

Moved Member Cantwell, seconded Member O'Loughlin   and resolved:

That the minutes of Te Anau Community Board meeting, held on 27 June 2018 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

 

Reports

 

 

7.1

Council Report

Record No: R/18/8/19672

 

Simon Moran (Community Partnership Leader) and Councillor Kremer presented the report.

Mr Moran advised the purpose of the report is to provide an overview of key issues across the Southland District, as well as high level local issues from various Council units.

 

Both Mr Moran and Councillor Kremer  highlighted  the various issues  of interest including;

§  Three Waters issues

§  Local Government funding, Climate Change and Localism Projects are all Government driven projects

§  Council Strategic Workshop

§  Milford Opportunities  - increase in the level of communications and engagement with the public and stakeholders to assist with the establishment of guiding principles for the project

§  Te Anau Airport Manapouri - Te Anau Community Board are considering to engage an expert in running airports to provide a clear indication for the future of the airport

§  Te Anau Wastewater Discharge project is awaiting a report from Mr Riddell on a conceptual subsurface drip irrigation design and costings, once completed this business case is to be presented  to Council and subsequently to the Wastewater Committee, Services and Assets Committee and the Finance and Audit Committee for decision.

113.    Mr Moran advised the finances shown are an interim end of year report income is likely to increase as the final allocation of interest is included for the final report.                         

Members sought the timing for a report to be provided to the Board in regard to better recycling and the levels of service with a focus on the environment and sustainability as a target to the minimisation of waste for the township, and the potential for the district as a whole.

 

 

 

Resolution

Moved Deputy Chairperson Greaney, seconded Member Cantwell  and resolved:

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Council Report” dated 20 August 2018.

 

7.2

Consideration of a request to rename the Fergus Square Reserve as Frana Cardno Reserve

Record No: R/18/8/18855

 

Kevin McNaught  (Strategic Manager Property) presented the report.

Mr McNaught advised that a request has been received from Irene Barnes to name the reserve in Fergus Square as the Frana Cardno Reserve.

3          Mr McNaught added that no record can be found of the so-called reserve ever having been given an official name therefore the Te Anau Community Board can resolve that the reserve be known as the Frana Cardno Reserve should it so desire.

  In discussing the report Members agreed to option three to the renaming of Fergus Square to Frana Cardno Reserve which will formally recognise  Mrs Cardno’s standing in the community.

Member’s also agreed for Council to provide an information sign along-side the  Reserve name sign outlining some history of Mrs Cardno’s status and achievements to compliment the name change.

 

 

 

Resolution

Moved Cr Kremer, seconded Member Cantwell  recommendations a to d and a new e (as indicated) and resolved:

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Consideration of a request to name the Fergus Square Reserve as Frana Cardno Reserve” dated 22 August 2018.

 

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

 

c)            Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

 

d)           Resolves that the Recreation Reserve in Fergus Square being section 125 Block 1 Manapouri Survey District shall hereafter be known as Frana Cardno Reserve.

 

e)            Requests Council to provide some history type signage relating to Mrs Cardno to compliment the change of name for the reserve.

 

 


 

 

7.3

Consideration of a Request from the Department of Conservation to have Land by the Te Anau Golf Club Vested in Council

Record No: R/18/8/18878

 

Kevin McNaught (Strategic Manager Property) presented the report.

Mr McNaught advised of  a request from the Department of Conservation to have land at the western end of the Te Anau Golf Course vested in Council so it can be added into the lease of the Golf Club.

2          Mr McNaught outlined that the Te Anau Golf Club has for many years held a lease for most of the golf course from Council, however a small portion at the western end of the course has been developed onto DOC land and held by a concession from them.

3          Mr McNaught added that recently DOC have written to Council, offering not only the area at the western end of the course currently occupied by the golf club but also additional land covering an area through to Golf Course Road. The Te Anau Golf Club have advised Council that they are agreeable to have this land added into their lease from Council.

4          In addition Mr McNaught advised that given the potential liabilities, primarily around keeping the land neat and tidy, an approach was made to the Golf Club as to whether they wanted all the land offered or just the area they currently occupy.  The club have advised that they are agreeable to have all the land added into their lease from Council and will undertake maintain the land.

 

 

 

Resolution

Moved Deputy Chairperson Greaney, seconded Member Cantwell  and resolved:

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Consideration of a Request from the Department of Conservation to have Land by the Te Anau Golf Club Vested in Council” dated 20 August 2018.

 

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

 

c)            Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

 

d)           Resolves to recommend to Council to accept the offer from the Department of Conservation to have vested in Council as Recreation Reserve all that land west of Section 1 SO 7608 through to Golf Course Road and the land when vested to be added to the lease held by the Te Anau Golf Club.

 

 

 

 

 

7.4

Request to Council to make Council owned land from the Marakura Yacht Club to Blue gum Point as a prohibited area in term of Council's Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy 2017

Record No: R/18/8/18798

 

Kevin McNaught (Strategic Manager Property) presented the report.

 Mr McNaught outlined the  request from the Board to Council to alter the Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Policy 2017 (the Policy) by making the Council land between the Marakura Yacht Club to Bluegum Point a prohibited area.

2          Mr McNaught added that when the Policy was prepared and adopted in 2017 there were no prohibited areas identified at that stage.

3          However Mr Naught advised that since this time safety issues have arisen in regard to the interaction between drones and aircraft operating along the lakefront in Te Anau. The Te Anau Community Board (the Board) now wish to make this area a prohibited area in terms of the policy adding that to do this the Board can resolve to request Council to amend the Policy.

In discussing this issue Members believed improved communication with Moteliers’ and camp grounds in the area may assist in advising  potential users of restrictions placed on the lakefront area.

 

 

 

Resolution

Moved Cr Kremer, seconded Deputy Chairperson Greaney  recommendations a to d and a new e (as indicated) and resolved:

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Request to Council to make Council owned land from the Marakura Yacht Club to Blue Gum Point as a prohibited area in term of Council's Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy 2017” dated 20 August 2018.

 

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

 

c)            Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

 

d)           Request Council to amend the Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy 2017 by including as a prohibited zone the following area:  All that area of Council owned and administered land from the Marakura Yacht Club to Bluegum Point for a distance of up to 60 m right angles from the physical edge of Lake Te Anau.

 

e)            Request a communication be submitted to moteliers and camp ground owners in the area advising of restrictions along the lakefront area.

 

 

7.5

Requests and suggestions from submissions to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028

Record No: R/18/8/19285

 

Simon Moran (Community partnership Leader) presented this report.

 

Mr Moran advised that the report details the issues and suggestions raised by submitters to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 that were specifically related to the Te Anau area.

 

Mr Moran added that Council has requested that the Board consider the feedback received related to Te Anau as part of the decision making process. 

 

The Board noted that Stephen Hoskin has also requested to be informed of the Board’s consideration of the matters raised in his submissions.

 

During consideration of the report the Board commented that the matters raised by Mr Hoskin will be addressed with in the Board’s community development planning project that is currently being developed, and that Mr Hoskin will be advised of this.

 

 

Resolution

Moved Cr Kremer, seconded Member O'Loughlin recommendation a and a new b (as indicated) and resolved:

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)       Receives the report titled “Requests and suggestions from submissions to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028” dated 22 August 2018.

 

b)      Request staff respond to Mr Hoskin advising that the Board will take his comments into account while progressing it’s Community Development Plan.

 

 

 

7.6

Te Anau Airport Manapouri Manager's Report - July 2018

Record No: R/18/7/18126

 

Matt Russell (Group Manager Services and Assets) presented this report.

 

Mr Russell updated the Board on the general operations of the airport over the quieter winter months and preparations for the coming summer season.

 

In discussing the issues around MGJV’s lease expiration Mr Russell  recognised the limitations at present and is investigating options to improve the long term development of the airport such as;

 

  • Layout,, concepts, designations, to be fit for purpose
  • Valuation information
  • Lease negotiations
  • Feedback, options and discussions

 

 

Resolution

Moved Member O'Loughlin, seconded Deputy Chairperson Greaney  and resolved:

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)        Receives the report titled “Te Anau Airport Manapouri Manager's Report - July 2018” dated 30 July 2018.

 

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

 

c)         Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

 

 

 

Committee Reports

 

 

8.1

Chairperson's Report

Record No: R/18/8/19702

 

The Chairperson, Member Cockburn reported on matters with which she has been involved since the Board’s previous meeting, these included;

 

  • Lumsden Maternity Hospital Trust to have a meeting with the Minister in regard to down grading of the Lumsden Maternity Centre
  • Meeting with Dale Wairua and Richard Murray on the potential for a gateway entrance concept  for the town.  The current position being awaited for further information and costings from that group prior to any further consideration
  • Community Housing – an expression of interest has been shown in regard to a lack of emergency housing, lower cost housing and seasonal housing requirements for the area.  An approach to Venture Southland has been suggested however this would be a community initiative rather than an Council one
  • Milford Crescent plantings and removal of car park at the school  area by the pedestrian crossing to be followed-up along with the removal of road marking issues on Milford Crescent to be re-visited
  • Green Waste area at the Transfer Station repair works to be monitored with improvement to drainage and the hard stand area to take place in the spring/summer
  • Te Anau Sports Domain signage being progressed with the Communication Team and Community Engineer
  • Dog Bylaw Review – Board have agreed for community feedback through the Community face book page and the “Advocate South” to gauge an indication as to the communities appetite for the potential to allow dogs in the town centre
  • Investigation required to ascertain if a Bylaw change is required to allow disabled parking in the town centre

 

Community Updates

 

  • Tourism – Destination Fiordland Manager Sharon Salmons resignation received
  • Fiordland Retirement Village – Infrastructure installations and first concrete due for pouring,  14 units under contract out of a total of 23 units to be sold.
  • Fiordland Community Events Centre – roof replacement, general repairs and maintenance , Health and Safety polices and criteria audit
  • Fiordland College – Opening of new administration block

 

 

 

 

Councillor's Report

 

 

9.1

Councillor's Report

Record No: R/18/8/19703

 

Councillor Kremer reported on matters with which he has been involved since the Board’s previous meeting, these included;

 

Councillor Kremer advised Council is currently developing a full bridge analysis to determine and priorities replacement/repairs of Council owned bridges in the district.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The meeting concluded at 4.45pm                       CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE Te Anau Community Board HELD ON 29 AUGUST 2018.

 

 

 

DATE:............................................................................................

 

 

 

CHAIRPERSON:........................................................................

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 

Council Report

Record No:             R/18/9/22399

Author:                      Simon Moran, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:         Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Chief Executive

Water Issues

1.       Work is continuing with the Central Government Three Waters Review As noted previously, the work is divided into the following four major work streams:

1)      Oversight of the sector, the regulatory settings within which it works and the institutional arrangements in place for management of the water sector.

2)      Funding and financing mechanisms, including consideration of a range of options for future funding of three waters infrastructure.

3)      Capacity and capability of suppliers and regulatory agencies.

4)      The information used for providing transparency of the sectors performance, its accountability and decision-making processes.

2.       Central Government has been clear about the extent of the review process and the range of options that are being considered. Some of the key messages/points made to date include:

Regulation

·       An independent drinking water regulator is being considered.

·       Some form of economic regulation of infrastructure assets is also under consideration and there is a question about whether the current environmental regulation system needs to be strengthened.

·       Changes to the regulatory framework, whether they involve enhanced reporting, oversight, compliance or raised standards are likely to have significant funding implications for local government.

·       Affordability is not an acceptable reason for failing to meet drinking water standards.

Service Delivery Options

·       Service delivery arrangements should be reviewed and the Government is considering the merits of aggregation of water providers. There are a number of ways in which this aggregation could occur including at the regional or super regional level

·       A ‘system-wide’ joined up solution may be required. The solutions needed cannot necessarily be separated out by different territorial local authorities

·       Continued public ownership is seen as a ‘bottom line’. This could include ownership by either central or local government

·       The broader role and functions of local government will need to be reviewed if the responsibilities for the delivery of water services is aggregated into larger service delivery entities.

3.       The Minister of Local Government has indicated her strong support for the development of aggregated water supply entities. In this regard she made the following comments in a recent speech to the Infrastructure NZ conference (https://www.beehive.govt.nz/speech/water-infrastructure-speech)

Given the interconnected nature of our water systems it is difficult to see how we can meet future regulatory requirements and consumer expectations without also making changes to service delivery arrangements, including infrastructure provision.

So while fixing the regulatory arrangements for water is a priority we also need to look at how we consider water service delivery to be able to fund infrastructure.

4.       In her speech the Minister also commented on the lessons she has drawn from her recent visit to the United Kingdom. Her comments on the lessons learnt included:

In general, as many of you may know, in the United Kingdom and Ireland they have:

·       much stronger regulation and more capable and better funded services;

·       independent drinking water and environmental regulation leading to safer drinking water and better environmental performance;

·       economic regulation that provides a  level of assurance that the right level of investment is being undertaken in the three waters; and

·       economic regulation that drives a focus on customers and efficiencies.

It is particularly instructive to note that Scottish Water has achieved 40 per cent savings and Ofwat, in England, achieved a 30 per cent savings on their consumers’ water bills.

Reflecting on their water reform experience my view is that a strong coordinated regulatory regime will not be enough on its own to deliver all the outcomes we are seeking here. The costs of upgrading the system to meet expected standards will fall on already heavily burdened ratepayers, and will take a very long time to accomplish.

This is something we will need to consider as we contemplate alternative options for service delivery in New Zealand, as is the need for professional skilled directors in any new options.

5.       It will also be important for the work being progressed via the Government Three Waters project to be integrated with the Local Government Funding Inquiry work being undertaken by the Productivity Commission and the Localism work that is now also underway. The way in which this integration is to be managed between the different government agencies involved is still to be clarified.

6.       Officers are continuing to monitor the progress being made with the Three Waters review and will keep Council updated as work progresses. 

Council Strategic Workshop

7.       Council held a strategic workshop on 6th and 7th August.

8.       The workshop provided an opportunity to have a ‘stocktake’ of the organisation’s progress and strategic direction following completion of the 2018 Long Term Plan and adoption of a new strategic framework.

9.       It is also clear that the local government sector as a whole is operating in a period of considerable change, the speed of which is likely to increase further in the short – medium term. Some of the major issues driving these changes include the three waters review, climate change, housing, regional development, funding and social equity issues. It is clear that in all of these areas retention of the status quo is not an option. The challenge is for Council to ensure that it has a position on and can influence the change processes as they occur.

10.     The outputs from the workshop will be used to inform the organisational work programme including that leading into the 2021 LTP. In this regard Council is being asked, as part of a separate agenda item, to confirm the continued use of the current strategic framework for the development of the 2021 LTP. 

Infrastructure Commission

11.     In August central Government announced the establishment of a new Infrastructure Commission that will be tasked with developing a consolidated national view on the state of infrastructure development across NZ.

12.     The creation of the Commission is a response to concerns about whether NZ is developing the infrastructure it needs to progress economically and the extent of the infrastructure deficits that exist in some parts of NZ. Infrastructure is a critical enabler for economic growth and development over time. The funding of infrastructure is a critical issue under Government’s urban growth agenda work programme. Hence, it has been allocated a level of priority for further work.

13.     Treasury is to lead development of the policy work needed to support formation of the new entity which will presumably replace the National Infrastructure Unit.

Southland Regional Development Agency

14.     Work is proceeding with the creation of the new Southland Regional Development Agency (SRDA).

15.     Consultation with the proposed community shareholders is well advanced and a final draft Memorandum of Understanding is close to being finalised with the four Murihiku Runanga. The MOU will need to be taken to each of the Councils for formal consideration/approval.

16.     A meeting of all of the proposed shareholders was held in August and there is a good level of agreement as to the proposed shareholding and other constitutional arrangements. These are to be formalised through a formal Shareholders Agreement which is currently being drafted and will be brought back to Council for formal approval in the near future.

17.     Work is also well advanced with the development of proposed new ‘contracting’ arrangements. In looking at what it is that this Council wants to purchase from the new Agency it is important to recognise that we need to change the focus of the organisation from what it was that Venture Southland has delivered in the past. There is a need for the Agency to be focussed on priorities that will make a difference to the development of the Southland region as a whole as well as the overall goals, particularly the attracting 10,000 more people goal that was set through SORDS. 

18.     The move to having a stronger regional focus does mean that the SRDA will do a number of different things, and in a different way, to which they may have been addressed in the past. 

Public Housing Plan

19.     Central Government have recently released their Public Housing Plan 2018 – 2022, which outlines how the Government aims to deliver around 6,400 more public housing places by June 2022 – approximately 1,600 places per year on average across Housing New Zealand (HNZ) and Community Housing Providers (CHPs). This includes some 100 new units in the Southern region which covers both Otago and Southland.

20.     Financial support is now available nationally to HNZ and CHPs to enable and incentivise the additional supply being sought.  The operating supplement will be extended so it is available to both HNZ and CHPs nationwide for net new (new build and turn-key) and net additional buy-in public housing supply. Upfront funding, on the other hand, will only be available in very limited circumstances.

Emergency Management Review

21.     Central Government have recently released their decisions on changes to be made to the Emergency Management systems in NZ following completion of the Technical Advisory Group review that was completed in 2017. A copy of the decisions report is available on the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet website (www.dpmc.govt.nz).

22.     The Government’s response addresses the Technical Advisory Group’s recommendations and details which aspects of the recommendations have been accepted. It then goes on to set out a multi-year work programme to progress the implementation of those recommendations that have been accepted. The work to be progressed will deliver improvements in the following five areas:

·       Putting the safety and wellbeing of people at the heart of the emergency response system

·       Strengthening the national leadership of the emergency management system

·       Making it clear who is responsible for what, nationally and regionally

·       Building the capability and capability of the emergency management workforce

·       Improving the information and intelligence system that supports decision making in emergencies

23.     Central Government officials are now charged with progressing the work programme needed to implement the improvements identified in these areas.

Long Term Plan Consultation Documents

24.     The Office of the Auditor-General have recently released a report (www.oag.govt.nz/2018/ltp-consultation-documents/docs/ltp-consultation-documents.pdf) that provides an overview of their findings from the auditing of the 2018 LTP consultation documents.

25.     While noting that all 2018-28 consultation documents were considered to be fit for purpose it identifies that there are a number of opportunities for improvement, including some identified in their 2015 report which have not been realised. These include the content and layout of the document and well as giving considering to engaging with communities on critical issues well ahead of the formal consultation document process.

Environmental Services

Group Managers Update

26.     Consent workloads across the team have continued to be relatively strong, although a slight slowdown in building consent numbers lodged has occurred in the last 2-3 weeks.

27.     Collaborative cross-council discussions have been held with regard to evaluating and progressing on-line lodgement and processing. It is desirable to seek to work towards common platforms across the Southland Councils, consistent with the SoRDS Ease of Doing Business work streams.

28.     The IANZ Project team continues to work towards the positioning of the Building Solutions Team for the March 2019 reaccreditation audit. A strong focus has been on learnings from other recent audits of other councils and the issues that have been flagged through those.

29.     Work continues on the action plan from the Environmental Services Service Delivery Review action plan, with an update presented to the Regulatory and Consents Committee meeting on 6th September 2018.

30.     The Council will be participating in a combined programme coordinated through Emergency Management Southland to improve Business Continuity Planning. A consistent approach to this will be coordinated by Ian Cryer, Recovery Manager for Emergency Management Southland with this programme having been endorsed by the Coordinating Executive Group (CEG).

Environmental Health

Prosecutions

31.     Council successfully prosecuted a person for littering in a public place.  While being driven by a companion, the person threw greenwaste while standing in a large trailer onto long stretches of road, including Kennington-Waimatua Road and Motu Rimu Road. 

32.     This person pleaded guilty and was dealt with by Judge Brandts-Giesen.  The Judge fined him $150; court costs of $130 and made an order that $240.35 clean-up costs be paid to the Council.

33.     At the time of writing, prosecution proceedings have commenced against the two owners of the Rottweilers that attacked a member of the public in Winton on 10 June 2018. The charge is under the Dog Control Act 1996, Section 58 Dogs causing serious injury.

Freedom Camping

34.     In Te Anau Council is managing the shared service this season, and this will be organised shortly.

35.     In the Catlins area, the Department of Conservation (DoC) is managing the service this season. Council will be requesting that the Officer is also appointed as a Dog Ranger, to provide educational services in Curio Bay whilst there for freedom camping. Senior DoC staff have endorsed this proposal.

36.     In Lumsden, it is proposed to advertise for Enforcement Officers shortly.

Dog Control

37.     An education drive is proposed to ensure that dog owners have their dogs on a leash on Riverton’s beaches.  Along with media releases, Dog Control Officers will be issuing infringement fines, and new signage will be investigated.

38.     An educational drive is also proposed to encourage dog owners to pick up dog droppings on Stewart Island, which has been reported to be worsening. This will include the limited distribution of some free dog waste bags. 

Resource Management

39.     A report has been prepared for the Regulatory and Consents Committee recommending that Council resolves to initiate a Plan Change to establish some stronger lighting controls on Stewart Island/Rakiura to support the Dark Skies Sanctuary application by Stewart Island Promotions that is currently being processed by the Dark Skies Association.

40.     One of the key requirements of achieving “sanctuary status” is having a level of lighting controls within the sanctuary area. If endorsed by Council, work will commence immediately with a view to notifying a plan change in early to mid-2019.

41.     Council has prepared a joint submission with Environment Southland, Invercargill City Council and Gore District Council on the draft National Planning Standards which seek to standardise District and Regional plans prepared under the Resource Management Act. The draft standards at this stage seek to establish a consistent layout of plans, standardise definitions and measurements along with outlining a timeframe for delivering the plans in an interactive electronic format.

42.     The number of resource consents being lodged with Council remains steady. There are currently 51 consents in the system (on hold and processing).

Building Solutions

43.     The department has commenced forwarding some building consents for processing to an external contractor, this is intended to maintain customer service and ease pressures on processing staff, relieve pressure points with processing and free up consent processors to assist with inspections when needed. This process is not expected to have any negative impact on the applicant as the current fee structure is based on an hourly rate fee.

44.     The district continues to see somewhat of a two speed economy, with Mararoa Waimea, Winton Wallacetown and Waiau Aparima wards accounting for more than 80% of the consents.

45.     The department have recently relocated a BCO to Te Anau and this is relieving some of the workload pressure in the area and creating greater efficiency with reduced staff travel.

46.     The Department issued 112 consents and received 87 new applications for the month. This is the same number of consent applications as received for August 2017 however it is down on the previous 3 year average. The value of consents issue this month is less than for the 94 issued in August 2017 this is associated with a higher number of heating unit consents for the month.

47.     The number of live consents continue to drop as the number of CCCs issued and refused CCCs exceeds the number of consents issued.

Customer Support

Libraries

48.     We currently have 5340 active library users in the District as at 1 September 2018 (this is defined as having used their library card in library or online in the last 12 months).

49.     The table below shows the number of individuals checking out items from a branch library each month.

Library Name

July

August

Book Bus

326

451

Lumsden

94

89

Otautau

94

108

Riverton

215

192

Stewart Island

47

45

Te Anau

431

375

Winton

642

603

Wyndham

71

69

Community and Futures

Governance

Representation Review

50.     Appeals and objections on the Council’s representation review closed on 22 August 2018.  Eight were received and these and other documentation regarding the process the Council undertook were sent to the Local Government Commission.  The next stage and timeframe is for the Commission to determine. 

51.     When Council adopted the Final Proposal, one of the resolutions it passed was to recommend to the incoming Council, following the elections in October 2019, that reserves held by community boards and community development area subcommittees be ring-fenced for a period of up to three years when the Revenue and Financing Policy is reviewed.  This is usually done as part of the Long Term Plan.

Community Governance Elected Representative Working Group

52.     At the Community and Policy Committee meeting on 5 September 2018, the Committee agreed to endorse the continuation of the Community Governance Elected Representative Working Group to progress the implementation of the Representation Review. 

53.     The membership will remain the same, but it can decide to invite other members to discuss particular matters.  The role of the working group in this next phase will be to focus, comment on and support the processes identified in the Community Governance Reference Document.  This document (a copy of which was sent to all elected members) set out a new way of working for community boards, following the representation review. 

54.     Matters the group will consider include the introduction of new standing orders, role of members, code of conduct, induction and training for members, reporting to the community, reporting to Council and the relationship with Council and protocols relating to local groups operating in the their local community. 

Strategy and Policy

Corporate Performance Framework

55.     The Corporate Performance Framework aligns Council’s high level direction to its activities and outcomes, and its purpose is to streamline Council planning and reporting functions.

56.     As part of the Corporate Performance Framework, Council will deliver on its legislative requirements – including the Long Term Plan, Annual Plan, Annual Report and Activity Management Plans.

57.     Council will produce an Interim Performance Report, undertaken three times a year – for the four month periods of July-October, November-February and March-June, with the third being produced to inform the Annual Report. The new framework will require Council activity managers to report by exception and provide meaningful explanation of the level of performance compared to what was planned. The Interim Performance Report will utilise Council’s new CAMMS reporting tool for the first report presented in November/December 2018.

58.     Council staff have developed Team Business Plans and Individual Performance Plans. These are an operational level tool to provide staff and elected members with the linkages between Councils overall vision, and align that to the programmes of work, projects and operational requirements to effectively deliver what is promised in the Long Term Plan and Annual Plans.  Alongside the Interim Performance Reports, the Team Business Plans will utilise CAMMS and look to be incorporated into this reporting tool within the next twelve months.

Risk Management Framework

59.     Council continues to identify the need to invest in and develop its risk management processes and approach. In developing the framework the objective is to effectively understand, plan for, and mitigate risk across all levels and activities within the organisation.

60.     A Risk Management Framework project meeting was held on 16 August 2018, to agree the objectives, thresholds and management approaches for the overall framework. Coming up in October is a two day workshop for all Councillor Chairs and Finance and Audit Committee members, the Executive Leadership Team, and all senior managers that will look at developing a profile of significant organisational risks.  This will include education around how Council approaches risk, identifying risk, how it will prioritise these and agree on where responsibility rests for managing the highest priority risks to Council and community.  A draft framework will be developed for consideration following this workshop.

BERL Stage 3 – Working towards positive Southland community futures

61.     Business and Economic Research Limited (BERL) was commissioned by Southland District Council to undertake research to assist with the development of the District’s 2021-2031 Long Term Plan.

62.     The research is based on the idea that the District can passively accept the future that fate will provide for its communities, or work strategically to shape the future it wants to achieve.

63.     The research is in three stages, each of which is designed to answer a specific question:

·       Stage 1 asked “where we are now?”  This involved collecting and analysing data to show the state of wellbeing in the District as a whole and in seven defined Communities.  This stage has been completed.

·       Stage 2 asked “where we are heading?”  This involved some forecasting to examine how the population and the level of employment in the District and each of the Communities would change, if past trends were left to continue.  This stage has also been completed.

·       The current stage, stage 3, is about asking the question “where we actually want to be?”  Its aim is to define a set of actions that will help to shape positive futures for each of the main Communities in the District.

What Stages 1 and 2 Found

64.     In summary, stage 1 of the research found that, compared to New Zealand as a whole, wellbeing in Southland District was high.  Southland District was better particularly in terms of: employment and unemployment rates; incomes; home ownership; and community connectedness. But it was worse in terms of the qualifications of the workforce and economic diversity.  It also found that, in the recent past, incomes in Southland District had grown more rapidly than nationally. However, the District had attracted relatively few migrants, and home ownership in the District had fallen more rapidly than nationally.

65.     Looking ahead, stage 2 indicated that the District’s working age population is likely to increase slightly over the next ten years, but that it is likely to decrease fractionally during the following decade.  Meanwhile, if the District’s economy continues to grow at the same rate, relative to the national economy, as it has in the recent past, the demand for labour will grow.  This means that, because the District’s unemployment rate is already low, there is a real possibility of large and growing labour shortages.  The likelihood is that, unless the District can attract more migrants, incentivise its young people to stay, and encourage older workers to stay in the labour force, economic growth could be stifled.

Next Steps Stage 3

66.     The specific purpose of stage 3 (the final stage) is to engage with individuals, organisations, and businesses in the District to pinpoint what needs to be done to ensure that the District and its communities maintain and increase their levels of wellbeing.  Ultimately, stage 3 will help to inform the District Council about what it can do itself to increase wellbeing, and how communities, as they strive for overall community wellbeing, can best work with other agencies and Council to achieve the same goal.  This next stage will focus on what needs to be done to ensure that Southland District maintains and builds on its current position as a place where wellbeing is at a high level – a place in which it is good to live and work.  BERL will be speaking directly with many people within the district over the next few months to discuss any matters that affect wellbeing in Southland District.  This will include all activities and services where the Council has a role, either by itself or in partnership and support with other Councils, government agencies and communities. 

67.     These conversations will involve discussions on:

·    Do you agree that the summary above provides a reasonable picture of wellbeing in Southland District?

·    If not, what’s wrong/missing?

·    Looking at the District, what problems/issues need to be fixed/focused on to improve general wellbeing?

·    Similarly, what do you see as the opportunities to promote wellbeing?

·    Thinking about the problems/issues you have described, which do you think should have the highest priority, and who/which organisation do you think should take the lead in addressing them?

·    And thinking about the opportunities you have described, which do you think would contribute most to wellbeing, and who/which organisation do you think should take the lead in pursuing them?

68.     Stage 3 will be completed by December 2018.

Community Futures Research and Analysis Work Programme

69.     Council is undertaking research and analysis work to support its decision making and transitioning from 2018 to 2021 in preparation for the Long Term Plan 2021-2031. This work will assist in leading the development of Council’s overall approach to the management of change and preparation for what the future might hold for the district and its communities. The purpose of this work is to develop project plans based on identified work streams that will help identify what is required to deliver priority projects within the district. 

70.     The topics for further research and analysis include:

·    Socio-demographic projects (where are we now, where are we heading, and where do we want to be)

·    Climate change and implications for Southland District (risks and impacts on the district)

·    Service Delivery Framework – District vs Local service provision and levels of service (an assessment and evaluation of council services and determine the most appropriate level of service to meet community needs in the future)

·    Rating affordability planning and implications (to understand income levels in our communities and affordable measures for delivery of activates and services – and implications of decisions on rating affordability for the district)

·    Future infrastructure and asset renewal (what and how will council replace significant infrastructure when due for replacement)

·    Land and Water Plan Implications (to understand the implications of compliance standards on the future provision of services to local communities)

·    Community Facility Provision Framework (how, what and when are facilities used and needed)

·    Community Partnerships Assistance and Funding Alignment Approach (multi-agency community partnership opportunities, and council’s funding and grant schemes to support community organisations)

·    Technological change impacts on communities and implications for Council

71.     This work will assist Council in delivering on the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 and identify priorities for investing in community future planning.

72.     High level project plans have now been developed for each of the topics above and a report presented to the Community & Policy Committee was received at their 5 September 2018 meeting.  From here, the Project Team will establish prioritisation for the works scheduled, and identify any additional resources that may be required to undertake priority projects.  Regular updates will be presented to the Community and Policy Committee throughout the next 9 months.

Policy and Bylaw Updates

73.     There are a number of Council bylaws and policies currently being reviewed and updated, and a large number of bylaws due for review in the next 12-24 months. 

74.     The Strategy and Policy team have undertaken a high level stocktake of all policies and bylaws currently held by Council and their timeframes and requirements for review.  This work will include analysis of determining the appropriate categories for our policies into Governance and Management, and also discussing those which may be better served as procedures and guidelines. The Strategy and Policy team will be developing a Policy Manual to further define the scope of future policy and guideline provision for Council to operate efficiently and effectively in the future. 

Community Partnership Leaders

The Milford Opportunities Project

75.     A further meeting of the Governance Group took place on 18 September 2018 where those in attendance considered the phase 1 research and analysis that was completed and the recommendations for further work. The next steps will be to:

·    Undertake public engagement, starting 17 September 2018 in Te Anau; and

·    Seek further funding to undertake the further work for Phases 2 and 3.

Tourism Infrastructure Fund (TIF)

76.     Council has been advised that the applications that were lodged to the last round of the TIF have been approved.  These applications were for;

a.  A $5million contribution towards the cost of upgrading the Te Anau Wastewater scheme

b.  $411,000 for the upgrading of toilets on the Southern Scenic Route at Waikawa, Clifden Bridge, Monkey Island and Te Anau

c.  $300,000 for upgrading of the parking area at the Lake Manapouri Visitor Centre at Pearl Harbour.  

Responsible Camping

77.     The Queenstown Lakes District Council are working to a very tight timeframe to develop a Responsible Camping Strategy that will also be used to assist with managing ‘freedom camping’ this summer. They are aware that there may be implications for other councils and organisations and have invited representatives from DOC, LINZ, NZTA, Southland District Council and Central Otago District Council to be part of their project control group.

Southland Museum Consultation - Our Tale Project

78.     Staff have been involved in a volunteer working group which undertook community consultation across Southland asking residents for their views on the future Southland Museum so that those views would have a voice in the future development plan.

79.     The community consultation took place throughout the month of July 2018.  The volunteer working group was formed to advise and assist with the consultation process.  The group provided specialist expertise in heritage and marketing including social media and additional reach within different communities. Members of the group also assisted at the workshops and with analysing the very large volume of input received.  The completion of the report in August will ensure that the information is able to be fully considered within the larger redevelopment project.

80.     The public were able to give their views by either completing an online or hard copy survey or by attending a workshop.  Many participants expressed a sense of loss and concern at the closure of the museum, but also hope and excitement for what the future museum could be. They also hoped, quite strongly at times, that the redevelopment could be progressed rapidly.

81.     A copy of the report is available from Council’s area offices.

Venture Southland

82.     Following the resignation of Destination Fiordland manager, Sharon Salmons, Venture Southland is providing increased support to Destination Fiordland until a new manager is appointed.

83.     Venture Southland is facilitating the development of the 2019-2029 Southland Murihiku Destination Strategy which will establish a framework for destination development, destination management and provide a pathway for achieving the goal of $1 billion in tourism revenue, in Southland by 2025.  A Southland Destination Strategy (SDS) Strategic Advisory group has been established to drive the development of the strategy and ensure the process is inclusive.

84.     The group includes representatives from the Southland tourism sector, MBIE, Department of Conservation, Tourism NZ, Air NZ, Iwi and Council.  The strategy will align with local, national and sector initiatives including the regional events strategy, Welcoming Communities pilot programme and the development of the Southland Story. 

85.     An independent consultant will be employed to carry out wider consultation and advance the strategy. Requests for proposals from consultants are currently being sought.  The development and implementation of the strategy will help position Southland as a preferred destination for both domestic and international markets and will set the strategic direction for the region.

86.     The development of a Southland Story was identified as an immediate priority in the Southland Regional Development Strategy Action Plan.  The project, which aims to identify and develop a consistent Southland story that articulates a unified message of past, present and future, is now being facilitated by Venture Southland.

87.     This project is supported by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, aligns with the Southland Murihiku Destination Strategy and will play a fundamental role in achieving the goal of 10,000 more people to Southland by 2025.  As part of the project a digital platform will be developed for community groups and sectors to discover, share and celebrate the essence of Southland and what the region offers to those who choose to live, visit, invest, work and study here.

88.     An Advisory Board has been established to ensure the project process is inclusive and representative of Southland, act as project champions, assist with selection of consultants and ensure alignment with councils and the wider community. It is anticipated that the project will be completed by the end of 2018 or early 2019

Services and Assets Group

Group Manager’s Update

89.     As we move further into the financial year, the group is looking to stabilise its activities and focus on programming, resourcing and delivering the necessary works identified through the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.  In conjunction with this, there is also a focus on finalising the 2019-2020 Annual Plan.

90.     We continue our search for a Community Facilities Team Leader.  There are a number of critical business improvement works streams that need to be delivered within this activity; the lack resource is hampering our ability to deliver on these commitments.

91.     The Programme/Project Management Platform is in the process of finalising the design and workflow.  Internal training programmes and change management processes are also being established, to ensure the system is able to be integrated into the organisation, with minimal impact but maximum outcomes.

92.     The Pyramid Bridge project is progressing with Gore District Council.  Southland District Council staff and Council representation form part of the project governance team; contact and updates are regular.  An updated design estimate has been provided and an external Quantity Surveyor will be reviewing this prior to the two councils having an opportunity to decide which of the two options to pursue (single or double-lane).

93.     Another key activity underway, is the assessment of the two solid waste contracts that are up for renewal in 2019.  Both of these contracts have been subject to review and will now move into extension negotiations, in line with the contract renewal processes stipulated in each of the contracts.

94.     Work is ongoing to provide further clarity and prioritisation of expenditure in association with infrastructure deficits, activities, sub-activities and services.  This work is necessary to adequately inform levels of service discussions and consultation in the lead up to the 2021 Long Term Plan.

95.     Asset information is also an area of focus currently, particularly within the Community Facilities and 3-Waters Activities.  For 3-Waters this involves establishing a Master Data Specification determining what asset information is required, across the hierarchy of assets within each of the three reticulated services activities.  Once established, it will be necessary to work with our contractors to ensure at the point of install or intervention, the appropriate information is captured in a way that is then easily migrated into IPS, our Asset Management software.

96.     For Community Facilities this has involved identifying some priority activities (playgrounds, buildings and toilets) and tapping into support from the New Zealand Recreation Association (NZRA) as the national support body to establish asset information templates for each.  These are currently in draft and being finalised.  Once finalised we will progress to gathering the relevant asset information for these activities.  Concurrently, it will be necessary to review the Asset Management System to support its function.

97.     It is anticipated that this Asset information work will be ongoing for a number of years and will impact all of the activities and services that Council delivers.  This work will be rationalised alongside the Core Systems Project.

98.     The programme/project management software platform approved in July 2018, is in the process of being rolled out and has been established in a testing platform.  We are refining the workflow and business rules/integration associated with the software and will be rolling out and bedding in the change processes necessary to support this new system over the coming months.

Te Anau Airport Manapouri

99.     Flights for the larger aircraft over the summer season will commence on Saturday, 25 August 2018.  There is a slight increase in larger aircraft movements predicted for this up and coming season, due to Tauck Tours scheduling more tours, to accommodate the increase in demand.  

100.   Alliance Airlines are still currently operating the flights for Tauck Tours, with their Fokker 50.  Awaiting confirmation as to whether Alliance will continue with the contract to supply services to Tauck.  If there is a change then a jet might be utilised on the tour requiring the implementation of a Part 139 Aerodrome Operating Certificate.  The aerodrome has been operating to the standards of Part 139 and will be an easy transition back to that level of certification. 

101.   There has been an increase in small aircraft landings recently, due to training pilots from both the Dunedin and Invercargill flight schools.  

102.   Annual maintenance checks have currently been completed on all equipment at the Airport.  This is to ensure all equipment is fully functional and ready for the summer season. An inventory of all equipment and furnishings has been completed and has currently been updated to show a correct record of items at Te Anau Airport. The security cameras are under review for replacement or upgrade as some have intermittently failed over the last six months.

103.   Further work is also ongoing around the land-side leasable area and associated development opportunities.  Options for further marketing and development of the air-side activities at the airport is also a focus.

Forestry (IFS)

104.   Harvesting of the 2018-19 harvest program has commenced in the Waikaia forest with the previous year’s program now completed.  This has meant nil re-establishment costs of the logging crew, a saving to the Southland District Council.

105.   Production for July was 9,600 tonnes, of the budgeted 26,000 ton annual program.  The crew will be completed at Waikaia in September.

Strategic Water and Waste

Te Anau Wastewater Discharge Project

106.   The business case in support of the preferred Kepler option was presented to Council in December 2016, and while they resolved to progress with detailed design on the pipeline route to Kepler, they also requested that staff undertake further work around a sub-surface disposal option (option 3).  Council staff and consultants are currently developing this work, in conjunction with an external peer reviewer, Ben Stratford.

107.   The roles of the Te Anau Wastewater Discharge Project Committee, Fiordland Sewage Options Group and their representative Peter Riddell have also been reviewed, with Mr Riddell engaged to provide commentary on a conceptual subsurface drip irrigation design and costings.  Once this work is completed and finalised, an updated business case will be provided to Council for decision following submission and review by the Te Anau Wastewater Discharge Project Committee, Services and Assets Committee and the Finance and Audit Committee.  It is anticipated that this work will be completed by early September, after which the updated business case will be presented to the various Committees and Council for consideration.  These meetings have been scheduled for mid-October with a Council meeting planned for 23 October 2018.

108.   In addition to the above, a finalised basis of design for the pipeline to Kepler has been delivered to Council.  Council staff are also working through options around resourcing for the delivery of the various stages of the overall project.

Land and Water Plan Implementation

109.   Under the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management water quality and quantity are to be maintained and improved, with any over allocation to be phased out over time.  Environment Southland is required to set environmental limits by 2025, with all ‘communities’ required to meet those limits in due course.  They are progressing this work via their proposed Water and Land Plan.

110.   To assist with addressing the impacts of these changes on local authority infrastructure, Environment Southland have formed a Three Waters Officer Working Group.  The objectives of the group are to work through the implications of the new freshwater standards, develop an agreed approach to the re-consenting of local authority infrastructure and ensure that the organisational objectives are aligned.

111.   In total 25 appeals were received by Environment Southland of which Council has identified 10 which it will join as a Section 274 party.  Council has also lodged an appeal to the decision.  The basis of Council’s appeal is largely around the ‘non-complying’ activity status on wastewater discharges to water. 

112.   The latest direction issued from the Environment Court outlines a proposed path, where appeals to objectives will be heard ahead of mediation, by grouped topic on policies and rules.  A pre-hearing conference is scheduled for 12 September. 

Review of Solid Waste Contract Arrangements

113.   The WasteNet Southland Waste Management Group recently notified contractors Bond Contracts and Southland Disability Enterprises Limited of its intention to begin negotiations, around rolling both contracts over.  Both contracts are currently in year six of an initial eight year duration, with ability to roll over for a further eight years. 

114.   Further information has been requested by the Waste Management Group which should allow a recommendation to be made to the Waste Advisory Group as to whether to roll the contracts over, or to go back to the market.  The Waste Advisory Group made a number of decisions around each contract at their meeting on 27 June 2018.  At the meeting it was recommended that Contract 550 be rolled over for a further eight year term.  This recommendation was endorsed by both Invercargill City and Gore District Councils in July.  The recommendation was presented to Finance and Audit Committee on 30 August 2018 and Services and Assets Committee on 5 September 2018, with a final report planned to be presented to Council on 19 September 2018.  Further decisions around Contract 650 are expected by late October 2018.

Strategic Roading

Alternative Coastal Route Seal Extension Project

115.   Work is progressing well to complete the main route with the final preparation work at the Curio Bay end of the route (last 1.1km) nearing completion in anticipation for sealing.  Based on geotechnical assessment and testing the road was realigned away from the slip area and appears to be performing well.

116.   Progress along the Waipapa Route has been progressing well with approximately 90% of the basecourse complete.  This will be held until weather is suitable for sealing.  The legal survey for land purchases is continuing.

117.   It is still expected that the project will be finalised around October / November 2018 when weather condition should be more favourable for the sealing works prior to the peak of the visitor season.

LED Street Light Conversion

118.   Work is well on track to be completed by the end of the calendar year.  Work is currently being undertaken in around the South Eastern area.  The only larger townships remaining to be completed are Riverton, Orepuki and Tuatapere.

Strategic Property

119.   Work has commenced on the 2018/19 projects to be completed this financial year.  Primarily at this phase of the project, is seeking the relevant quotes to complete the work and consider these against budget.

120.   Those under budget will commence once signed off. However, those over budget will either be subject to a scope change or the commencement of the unbudgeted expenditure approval process.

121.   Work has also commenced to identify, plan to commence and complete those improvement processes, as identified in each of the seven activity plans used as the basis of the recently approved Long Term Plan.  In relation to open spaces, toilets and buildings this is creation of spreadsheets to determine components to be identified and assessed.  For community centres this will also be the collection of data regarding each facilities utilisation.

Finance

122.   The income is under budget because the parks and reserves capital project is to be part funded by development contributions and that funding has been equally split over the 12 months of the financial year. Expenses are under budget as expected at this time of the year.

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Council Report” dated 10 October 2018.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.  

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 

Financial Report for the year ended 30 June 2018

Record No:             R/18/7/17589

Author:                      Nick Lewis, Community Engineer

Approved by:         Matt Russell, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

1        These financial results are subject to review by Audit NZ in September, and therefore may change.

Community financial performance for the year

2        The graph above shows what actually happened (Actuals), what the original budget was (Original annual budget) and then what was expected to occur by year end (Reforecast annual budget) for each of the Income, Expenditure, and Capital Expenditure categories.

3        The ‘Reforecast’ totals show the effect of unbudgeted expenditure, projects that have been put on hold or are to be completed in 2018/2019 and/or expected changes to income and operating expenditure over the year.

4        Monthly reports provided to you by the Community Engineers compared the actual YTD against reforecast YTD totals.

5       Any significant variances between the ‘Actual’ and ‘Original budget’ totals are explained below. The details are provided in the attached Annual Report figures.

Significant Variances to the Annual Budget

Income

6        Overall Income has come in over budget, most Cost Centres are approximately on target with the minor variances detailed below.

7        Administration - Income is significantly higher than budgeted due to internal interest on reserve allocated of $18,278 against a budget of $3,300. This results from the 30th June 2018 reserve balance was higher than budgeted due to reserve funded capital projects not being undertaken.

8        Cemetery - Income is slightly over budget due to Interments.

9        Parks & Reserves - Income has come in under budget, this is due to budgeted Parks Contribution ($30,000) that were to fund the Water Park project, this funding was not required as the project was not complete. This was offset slightly by a grant that was received from the Te Anau Lions Club (approx. $7,000), 89% of the income budget was received.

10      Luxmore Subdivision – Income was less than budgeted due to less internal interest on reserves allocated. This is mainly caused by the actual interest rate applied being 3% against a budgeted rate of 4.19%.

Expenditure

11      Expenditure has come in under budget overall, with significant variances detailed below.

12      Library - Expenditure come in 12% higher than budgeted, mainly through additional resources being required resulting in increased ordinary time (wages) costs and electricity costs (the electricity budget was increased for future years).

13      Operating Costs - Under budget as only 76% of budgeted expenditure was spent.  Also, the $10,000 grant for cycle branding was not utilised and the majority of the general projects budgeted for not required.

14      Stormwater Drainage - 74% of the expenditure budget was spent. Total variance due to no operating and extra monitoring costs incurred. The higher resource consent costs were offset by the lower general maintenance costs.

15      Cemetery - Expenditure came in slightly higher due to the removal of several trees and the H&S risk they held which was not anticipated in the budget, cost of around $2,000.

16      Beautification - Expenditure has come in under budget, as only 81% of the budget was spent.  The main component being the hanging baskets not being maintained for the season.

17      Sportsground/Boating - Less mowing and maintenance required and lower insurance costs resulted in only 85% of the expenditure budget being spent.

18      Parks & Reserves – Less mowing and maintenance required resulting in 81% of the expenditure budget being spent.

19      Luxmore Subdivision - Expenditure was significantly higher due to the $40,000 grant paid to the Fiordland Retirement Housing Trust. This grant was approved by Council on June 15th 2017 as unbudgeted expenditure.

Capital Expenditure

20      Capital expenditure has come in significantly under budget overall, significant variances are as follows:

21      Administration - The replacement of the swimming pontoon was budgeted as general projects work ($19,000), this was moved to be a capital cost ($17,480).

22      Streetworks - The $41,500 streetlight renewal project was deferred due to contractor availability with the district wide LED project. The Wong Way streetlight budget ($20,000) was not spent and is still in the discussion phase with the overall Wong Way concept not being finalised.

23      Stormwater Drainage – The full budget of the Condition Assessment project was not spent due to an issue in the industrial area of Caswell Rd.

24      Beautification - The entrance feature/sign and events sign projects are still in the planning phase, discussions are being held between the Board and Community Partnership Leader, the budget was therefore unspent.

25      Lakefront - This business unit held the public wharf/pontoon structure project, budgeted for $204,800, which was subsequently deleted to be reconsidered during future lakefront development planning.

26      Parks & Reserves – Under budget due to the water park project budgeted at $30,000 not being undertaken and the skate park pump track project being completed under budget.

Schedule of Loan Balances

 

Balance
June 2017

Uplifted Loan

Principal Repayments

Balance June 2018

Years Remaining

Sandy Brown Road

$28,623

-

$13,945

$14,678

1

Project List

27     Community projects that were budgeted to be undertaken in the 2017/2018 year are in the table below.

Activity

Project Name

Financial Year

AP Budget

Actual cost

Status

Officer’s Comment

Community Facilities

Te Anau Library

2017/2018

 33,587

 -  

Deferred

Deferred - Pending Future operations

Parks & Reserves

New Pontoon

2016/2017

 204,800

 -  

Deleted

Deleted

Parks & Reserves

Renewal of Playground equipment

2017/2018

 20,000

 22,400

Completed

Refurbishment works were completed and equipment re installed in November 2017.

Parks & Reserves

Town Entrance Signs

Multi-year 2016/2017

 20,992

 -  

Not started

This is for an electronic sign most likely in front of the events centre.

Roads & Footpaths

Footpath Renewals

2016/2017

 4,100

 -  

Deleted

Not utilised, to be deleted

Roads & Footpaths

K&C renewals

Multi-year 2016/2017

 7,175

 -  

Deleted

Not utilised, to be deleted

Roads & Footpaths

Street Lighting

Multi-year 16/17

 41,533

 1,227

Deferred

To be deferred as contractor unable to undertake works until August 2018

Roads & Footpaths

Streetlights on Wong Way

2017/2018

 20,000

 -  

In progress - Investigation

Project stalled between CB and private, options still to be investigated and agreed by CB and private.

Roads & Footpaths

Skate Park upgrade

2015/2016

 -  

 7,326

Completed

Fountain installed, project complete

Roads & Footpaths

Water Park - New Track

2015/2016

 -  

 -  

Not started

Awaiting MOU for access over DOC land

Stormwater

Condition Assessment

2017/2018

 19,784

 6,950

In progress - Construction

Investigation continues

Financial Considerations

Development and Financial Contributions

28     Contributions are collected to fund community growth projects. The use of these funds are considered by Council staff when projects are in the planning stage. Certain policy and legislative requirements must be met before these contributions can be applied to projects.

29     The total balance of Development and Financial contributions for your community as at 30 June 2018 is in the table below. 

Parks

Roading

Total

81,300

201,049

282,349

 


 

Reserves

30     Interest has been allocated to the reserve accounts. Interest is calculated on the average balance of the reserves for the year at an interest rate of 3%. The budgeted interest rate was 4.19%.

Te Anau

Schedule of Reserve Balance

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Financial Report for the year ended 30 June 2018” dated 4 September 2018.

 

Attachments

a             Te Anau Annual Report figures for the year ended 30 June 2018    

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 

Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy

Record No:             R/18/9/22948

Author:                      Jane Edwards, Policy Analyst

Approved by:         Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        This report is in response to the request to Council from the Te Anau Community Board (the Board), dated 12 September, to amend the Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Policy (the policy).

2        This amendment is requested to include Council owned land, from Marakura Yacht Club to Blue Gum Point, as a prohibited zone.

3        The policy is attached as Attachment A.

Executive Summary

4        The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy is an enabling policy that generally allows UAVs (such as drones) to be flown on or above Council owned or controlled land.

5        The policy sets out that where there are situations where flying UAVs is restricted, or where the use of UAVs is prohibited, Council approval is required.

6        The policy currently contains no prohibited areas.

7        Te Anau Community Board, at its meeting on 29 August, requested that Council make Council owned land from the Marakura Yacht Club to Blue Gum Point, a prohibited area in the policy.

8        Staff wish to advise that internal discussions have resulted in a suggestion to propose to Council an amendment to the confusing wording within the current policy.  At present, Restrictions and Prohibited Areas, are stated with similar limitations.   In each, UAV usage can be permitted with Council approval.

9        In the amendment proposed by staff, Restrictions will continue to have the option of UAV usage with Council approval, while Prohibited Areas will state that UAV usage is forbidden under any circumstances.

10      Therefore it is requested that the Board consider the future level of control they would like for the Te Anau lakefront as this will impact on where it is placed within the policy.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy” dated 15 October 2018.

 

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

 

c)            Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

 

d)           Considers the report and determines the level of control they would consider appropriate for the Council owned and administered land from the Marakura Yacht Club to Blue Gum Point for a distance of up to 60m right angles from the physical edge of Lake Te Anau.

 

e)            Recommend Council amend the policy to include the Te Anau lakefront within the Restrictions with subsequent community education/engagement.

 

f)             Note that in recommending to Council the policy be amended to include the Te Anau lakefront within the Restrictions, Council may give written approval for UAV usage in appropriate circumstances.

 

 


 

Background

11      The policy was adopted by Council on 19 July 2017 with no prohibited areas specified in it.

12      The area over Lake Te Anau is in the Fiordland National Park and under the control of DOC. While flight operations are not in a controlled air space, Council land along the lakefront is one of the areas where the operators are located when flying UAVs.

13      Since the policy’s adoption, safety issues have arisen in regard to the interaction between drones and aircraft operating along the lakefront. To address this Council staff, in conjunction with operators and DOC, have installed signage in appropriate locations along the lakefront. This signage advises that it is a restricted area and that no drones may be flown without council approval. 

14      The Board have requested that Council also amend the policy to make the lakefront in Te Anau a prohibited area with an aim to formalise the restriction and give it more authority.

15      At present, there are no methods in place to enforce either restrictions or prohibitions.

Issues

16      The policy, in its current form, describes Prohibited Areas as follows:

“There are some areas where the use of UAVs is prohibited unless written approval has been granted by Council”

17      It is the opinion of staff that this language is confusing and does not clearly define the difference between a prohibited area and an area with restrictions.

18      Consequently it has been recommended that the language of the policy be amended to define prohibited as being formally forbidden and restricted as being put under control or limits. A risk to note is that the policy amendment to tighten control on Prohibited Areas (which will be recommended to Council) may not allow recourse to Council for written approval for the use of UAVs. 

19      In order that Council is able to continue giving written approval to fly UAVs in specific circumstances, it is recommended that the Te Anau lakefront area, with detailed geographical limits, is included within the Restrictions.

20      It is requested that the Board consider what level of UAV usage they consider appropriate and therefore the future level of control they would like for the Te Anau lakefront.

 

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

21      All the statutory requirements are set out in the policy, and establishes criteria for UAV usage over Council owned and controlled land within the District.

22      Given the varying width of the Council owned property from the Marakura Yacht Club to Blue Gum Point, that maximum distance that has been determined from the edge of Lake Te Anau to the property boundaries on the opposite side of Lakefront Drive and Te Anau Terrace is 60m.

23      For that reason the width of the requested prohibited area on the Council land has been set at up to 60m right angles to the physical edge of Te Anau which is the boundary of the Fiordland National Park. 

Community Views

24      No community consultation has been undertaken, however the Board’s request has been made following feedback from aircraft operators on the Te Anau lakefront.

25      If the Board recommend that the lakefront is added to the Restrictions, it is recommended that community education engagement is undertaken in order to publicise the limits contained in the policy to the Te Anau community and visitors.

26      If the Board recommend that the lakefront is added to the Prohibited Areas, it is recommended that consultation is undertaken in order to capture the wider community views.

Costs and Funding

27      There will be staff time and advertising costs associated with both an engagement or consultation process with the Te Anau community.

Policy Implications

28      If the current policy is amended to include the Te Anau lakefront (with clearly defined geographical boundaries) within the Restrictions, this will give the Board specific detail to reference back to when communicating with UAV users. It is not able to be enforced currently and is still only publically communicated by the existing signage.  It does, however, enable permission for UAV usage to be given by Council in appropriate circumstances.

29      If the current policy is amended to include the Te Anau lakefront (with clearly defined geographical boundaries) within the Prohibited Areas, similar level of control is given to the Board as neither restricted nor prohibited is currently able to be enforced. However, amending signage to reflect that the lakefront is a prohibited area may help to deter UAV users. As with Restrictions, permission for UAV usage can be given by Council in appropriate circumstances within the current policy.

Analysis

Options Considered

30      The options are as follows:

·    recommend policy is amended to include Te Anau lakefront area within the Restrictions, with subsequent engagement to inform Te Anau community 

·    recommend policy is amended to include Te Anau lakefront within the Prohibited Areas, with subsequent consultation with the Te Anau Community

·    not amend the current policy at this time

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Recommend policy is amended to include Te Anau lakefront area within the Restrictions, with subsequent engagement to inform Te Anau community

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        The policy will clearly state the geographical boundaries of restricted UAV usage

·        May help to reduce UAV usage in the area and the risk of a collision between a UAV and existing aircraft operations

·        Allows Council to consider requests for UAV usage and give written approval in specific instances

·        An education/engagement process can target lakefront motels and premises in order to publicise restrictions to potential UAV users

·        The use of ‘restricted’ may not have the authority that the Board requested and may not deter UAV users.

·        There is currently no ability to enforce the restrictions

·        Restrictions still reliant on signage to alert UAV users.

·        Signage has proved inadequate so far.

·        An education/engagement process might potentially still miss the tourist base who are the most likely to be UAV users.

 

Option 2 – Recommend policy is amended to include Te Anau lakefront within the Prohibited Areas, with subsequent consultation with the Te Anau Community

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        This will clearly state the geographical boundaries of prohibited UAV usage within the policy

·        May help reduce UAV usage in the area and  remove the risk of collision between UAV and existing aircraft operations

·        Currently allows Council to consider requests for UAV usage and give written approval in specific instances

·        Use of ‘prohibited’ may deter most UAV users

·        Consulting on this issue will allow the Te Anau community to present their views.

·        Prohibition still reliant on signage, that has so far proved inadequate, to alert UAV users.

·        There is currently no ability to enforce the prohibited area.

·        Prohibited is still reliant on signage to alert UAV users.

·        Signage has proved inadequate so far

·        With the potential for a change to the meaning of prohibited in the current policy, Council will not be able to approve any UAV usage in lakefront area.

 

Option 3 – Make no amendments to the current policy

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        The current policy does restrict UAV usage over the lakefront

·        Signage currently alerts people that they need permission to fly UAVs over the lakefront

·        Permission is able to be given by Council in appropriate circumstances

·        Language used in current policy mean that restricted and prohibited have the same requirements and limitations

·        UAV usage on the Te Anau lakefront still reliant on signage to alert users of restrictions

·        The current policy is not successfully mitigating the risk of UAV and aircraft interaction

 

Assessment of Significance

31      The amendment to the policy is not considered significant.

Recommended Option

32      Staff recommend Option 1, to amend the policy to include the Te Anau lakefront within the Restrictions with subsequent community education/engagement.  This will clarify and tighten the restriction on the lakefront area while still allowing Council to give written approval for UAV usage in appropriate circumstances.

Next Steps

33      Report Board’s recommendation to Council prior to policy been amended to include the Te Anau lakefront.

34      Council staff will present the Policy to the Community and Policy Committee to propose an amendment to the wording that will clarify the distinction between Restrictions and Prohibited Areas. If the proposed amendment is approved by Council, prohibited areas will mean Council will not be able to approve any UAV usage.

 

 

Attachments

a             Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy 2017    

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

 

USE OF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES POLICY

 

 

This policy applies to:    Members of the public using UAVs over Council land

(excluding UAVs being used by the Southland District Council)

 

DOCUMENT CONTROL

 

Administered by:

Strategic Manager (Property)

TRIM reference number:

r/15/12/22465

Effective date:

19 July 2017

Approved by:

Council

Date approved:

19 July 2017

Next review date:

2023

 

 

CONTENTS

 

1.            PURPOSE.. 1

2.            DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS.. 1

3             BACKGROUND.. 2

4.            POLICY DETAILS.. 2

4.1         General Criteria. 2

4.2         Restrictions. 2

4.3         Prohibited Areas. 2

4.4         Enforcement 3

5.            ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS.. 3

6.            REVISION RECORD.. 3

 

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 

USE OF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES POLICY

 

 

1.   PURPOSE

 

This policy sets out the conditions for use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) on Council owned or controlled land. 

 

 

2.   DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

 

Term

Meaning

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV)

The term UAV covers all electric powered remote controlled model aircraft, including the type commonly referred to as “drones” that are capable of vertical take-off and landing and small hand-launched gliders less than 1.5 metre wing span. 

 

UAVs are also known as drones, Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems and Unmanned Aerial Systems.  

 

The term UAV does not include the following:

·              Fixed wing electric-powered model aircraft greater than 1 metre wing span.

·              All fixed - winged model aircraft that are internal combustion engine (petrol) powered.

·              Gliders greater than 1.5 metre wing span and bungee-launched gliders.

·              Single rotor helicopters that are electric powered or internal combustion engine (petrol) powered.

·              Jet powered models.

 

Civil Aviation Authority Rules / CAA rules

Civil Aviation Rules are set by the Minister of Transport.  The rules are divided into parts.  The two parts relevant to UAVs are:

·              Part 101: Gyrogliders and Parasails, Unmanned Aircraft (including Balloons), Kites, and Rockets - Operating Rules, and

·              Part 102: Unmanned Aircraft Operator Certification.

 

 

3    BACKGROUND

 

Under rules introduced by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on 1 August 2015, Council can grant or decline consent for the use of UAVs on property that it owns or controls.  This policy establishes criteria for UAV use over Council owned and controlled land in the Southland District. 

 

 

4.   POLICY DETAILS

 

4.1 General Criteria

In addition to the CAA rules, the following criteria apply to the use of UAVs over land or property owned or controlled by Southland District Council.  They do not apply to the use of UAVs by Southland District Council. 

 

Operators of UAVs must:

·              Comply with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner guidance on preserving peoples’ personal privacy by not flying over other people or adjoining private property without their consent.

·              Be courteous of other park users, who often are there for the quiet enjoyment of Council’s parks, reserves and open spaces.

·              Wear a high visibility vest.

 

4.2 Restrictions

Operators do not need approval to use UAVs over land or property owned or controlled by the Southland District Council except in the following situations:

·              Over a sports field if in use by others, or within 50 metres of any organised activity taking place in a reserve or Council controlled open space.

·              Over or above Council owned or controlled cemeteries, commercial forestry or formed roads.

·              Over or within 50 metres of other users of open spaces.  If another open space user moves within this range, the UAV user must immediately land their UAV.

·              Over or within 50 metres of any building on Council land or any playground equipment or swimming pool.

·              Within 50 metres of livestock, wildlife or sensitive wildlife habitats. If livestock or wildlife move within this range, the UAV user must immediately land their UAV.

·              Within 50 metres of a reserve boundary where residential housing or stock farming adjoins.

·              Within 100 metres of another UAV user.

 

Written Council approval must also be obtained for any organised event involving the use of UAVs.

 

If requested to cease operations by Council officers operators must land their UAV immediately.

 

If the Council owned land or property is held under a lease or licence from Council, or there is an organised event taking place, the applicant must obtain written approval from the lessee, licensee or the event organiser, prior to seeking approval from Council. Operators of UAVs must comply with any additional conditions imposed by the lessee, licensee or event organiser.

 

Council’s approval can be sought by making a written request to Council’s property department. Council will notify the applicant about whether or not approval has been granted. If a request to fly a UAV in a restricted situation is declined, Council will outline the reasons why.

 

4.3 Prohibited Areas

There are some areas where the use of UAVs is prohibited unless written approval has been granted by Council.  These areas are:

·              There are no prohibited areas.

 

4.4 Reporting incidents and near misses

UAV users must report all incidents and near misses of a significant nature (such as those involving people and property (including animals, buildings and power lines)) to Southland District Council. This obligation also extends to other reserve users involved in any incident or near miss relating to UAV use.

 

4.5 Enforcement

Any breach of the above conditions could result in termination of your permission to fly unmanned aircraft over Council land.

 

Council will report breaches to the Civil Aviation Authority, which may result in infringements or prosecution. 

 

 

5.   ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS

 

•      Civil Aviation Authority Rules and Guidelines: http://www.caa.govt.nz/rpas/

•      Southland District Council District Reserves Management Policy

 

 

6.   REVISION RECORD

 

Date

Version

Revision Description

19 July 2017

1

Policy first adopted

«Type Date»

«Version»

«Revision»

«Type Date»

«Version»

«Revision»


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 

Bird Strike Risk Assessment - Te Anau Airport

Record No:             R/18/6/13584

Author:                      Ian Marshall, Senior Projects Manager

Approved by:         Matt Russell, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        The purpose of this report is to inform the Te Anau Community Board of the outcome of an assessment of bird strike risk at the Te Anau Airport Manapouri.  The work was commissioned to assess the risk in relation to the present situation and the possible future scenarios of wastewater effluent irrigation on the adjacent land.  Both irrigation options of centre pivot irrigation and sub-surface irrigation are contemplated in the report.

Executive Summary

2        Avisure carried out bird activity surveys on the airport property and on the adjacent land known as the Kepler Block which is the site for wastewater effluent irrigation.

3        The irrigation site is already highly attractive to birds under the current farming practice of allowing grass regrowth and then grazing to very short grass along with shelter belts and water ponding around the bog area. If mitigation is not applied, this attraction could be exacerbated by the introduction of nutrient rich treated wastewater, which will flush invertebrates to the surface for food.

4        Avisure’s assessment indicates that the centre pivot irrigation system is likely to be slightly more attractive to birds than sub-surface irrigation which would be less likely to saturate the soil.
The production of silage would also be a potential bird attraction, particularly during cutting, which exposes insects and other prey items to birds and encourages fresh grass shoots that species such as Canada Geese can graze on.

5        The airport currently operates a Bird Management Strategy to mitigate the risk of bird strike and has done so for many years.  The current Bird Management Strategy must be enhanced and a comprehensive management plan developed that details the mitigation required to manage the risk and is backed by regular monitoring and evaluation.


 

6        Mitigation at the site should include adopting a long grass policy, eliminating standing water, infilling existing depressions and dispersing roosting birds. If applied well, mitigation could significantly reduce the risk currently created by the site. Such reduction in risk makes it feasible to adopt a centre pivot irrigation system rather than a sub-surface option. It is critical that risks are regularly monitored and reviewed and, if necessary, corrective actions taken to ensure the risk is maintained to acceptable levels.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Bird Strike Risk Assessment - Te Anau Airport” dated
15 October 2018.

 

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

 

c)            Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

 

d)           Request Council commence a seasonal bird monitoring programme to better understand bird populations in and around the TEU airspace and provide guidance on wild life management to mitigate the risk to the airport users.

 


 

Background

7        There have been many claims made, by submitters and members of the general public, over the past number of years about the increased risk of bird strike that will be created if Council implements a waste water irrigation process on the Kepler Block land.  The issue was addressed in a report by MWH (now Stantec) dated March 2013.  This report was part of the supporting information for the resource consent application.

8        As the result of these claims, management felt it was important from an airport operation risk perspective that a second opinion be obtained.  Also since the March 2013 report was produced, the concept of subsurface drip irrigation has been mooted.  It was considered important to understand the comparative risks of each of the options.

Why Avisure?

9       We chose Avisure to do the work as they are a company that specialises in managing aviation hazards by applying a safety management system approach.  They have worked with civil and military operations around the world since 1996 to provide strategies and services that manage aviation risk.

10     Their expert team has worked with Sydney International Airport and Vancouver International Airport, as well as various airlines, aviation regulators, pilots, airport safety teams, aviation legislators, policy developers, and numerous national and international wildlife management committees.

11      Phil Shaw carried out the work at Manapouri.  Phil is the Managing Director of two Australian consulting firms, Ecosure Pty Ltd and Avisure Pty Ltd and President of a Vancouver-based Canadian company, Avisure Services Limited (a wholly owned subsidiary of Avisure Pty Ltd).  Phil is a Principal Biologist with a Bachelor of Science and Diploma of Education.  He is a member of the Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand and has more than 20 years consulting experience, with specialist knowledge and application in the field of aircraft/wildlife collision risk mitigation. In this field he has advised the operators of more than 70 airports and defence-force bases across the globe including in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Fiji, and the Middle East.

Findings and Comparisons

Avisure Report Findings

12      Spur-winged Plover were by far the most populous species on the Airport, with 80 observed during the afternoon survey. Australian Magpie and Paradise Shelduck were the only other significant observations with peak counts in the morning of 11 and three birds respectively.

13      Surveys at the proposed irrigation site indicate a very high attraction to large flocking birds that could be a serious hazard to aircraft. Maximum counts of the following species were recorded at the site: Paradise Shelduck, 87; Black-backed Gulls, 48; Canada Goose, 14; Grey Duck,
6; Australian Magpie, 14; Spur-winged Plover, 6; Common Starling, 300; and Chaffinch, 150.


 

14      Many of the other off-airport sites had few or no birds present, and some sites were moderately attractive to waterbirds, although not to the extent of the proposed irrigation site.

15      The irrigation site is already highly attractive to birds under the current practice of allowing grass regrowth and then grazing to very short grass along with shelter belts and water ponding around the bog area.

16      If mitigation is not applied, this attraction could be exacerbated by the introduction of nutrient rich treated wastewater, which will flush invertebrates to the surface for food.

17      Avisure’s assessment indicates that the pivot irrigation system is likely to be slightly more attractive to birds than sub-surface irrigation which would be less likely to saturate the soil.

18      The production of silage would also be a potential bird attraction, particularly during cutting, which exposes insects and other prey items to birds and encourages fresh grass shoots that species such as Canada Geese can graze on.

19      The removal of shelter belts and the installation of denser shelter belts could inflate populations of birds such as Chaffinches and Starling which already use these habitats for roosting.

20      Avisure recommendation is that the proposal to irrigate wastewater and produce silage only proceeds in this location if a comprehensive management plan is developed that details the mitigation required to manage the risk and is backed by regular monitoring and evaluation.

21      Mitigation at the site should include adopting a long grass policy, eliminating standing water, infilling existing depressions and dispersing roosting birds. If applied well, mitigation could significantly reduce the risk currently created by the site.

22      Such reduction in risk makes it feasible to adopt a centre pivot irrigation system rather than a sub-surface option. It is critical that risks are regularly monitored and reviewed and, if necessary, corrective actions taken to ensure the risk is maintained to acceptable levels.

MWH Report recommendations:  March 2013.

23      It is relevant to compare the findings of the MWH report dated March 2013 and the much more recent Avisure report.  The MWH report had the following recommendations:

·    Employment of passive control measures in and around the irrigation area during the initial development stage and first season/year of irrigation.  The degree of control will be governed by field observations;

·    Removal of ground depressions and underlying pans that impede drainage and could potentially act as ponding areas during the development stage of the project;

·    Management of the grass sward to a minimum height of 100 mm within the area beneath the centre pivots as part of the cropping rotation;

·    Maintenance of a short sward beyond the centre pivots to prevent grass seed head development;

·    Maintaining a rate of discharge that avoids the potential for ponding;

·    Absence of strobe lights on the centre pivots;

·    The removal of shelter belts within the irrigated area to reduce the extent of nesting and roosting habitat for magpies.

24      Many of these recommendations are consistent with the Avisure report recommendations.

Issues

25      Council has been granted a consent (Discharge Permit) to discharge treated wastewater as below:

Details of Permit

26      Purpose for which permit is granted:  To discharge treated wastewater onto land from the
Te Anau Wastewater Treatment Plant

27     Location - site locality                          1701 Manapouri -Te Anau Highway, Te Anau

               - map reference                           NZTM2000 E1182670 N4944369

               - groundwater zone                     Te Anau

                        - catchment                            Waiau

         Legal description of land at the site:     Lot 2 DP 410687

Expiry date:                                        22 January 2040

28     The consent contains many conditions that Council is required to meet.  Many of these conditions relate to the environmental effects of the discharge.  There are also consent conditions that relate to the issues raised in the two wildlife risk reports.

29      The consent that has been granted to discharge treated effluent at the Kepler site, via pivot irrigator, includes several conditions.  It is insightful to compare these conditions alongside the recommendations from the Avisure report and the MWH report.

Consent Condition

Avisure

MWH (Stantec)

10. Prior to commencement of the wastewater discharge on the North Block, the consent holder shall plant and maintain a shelter belt along the northern, western and eastern boundaries of the North Block. The consent holder shall maintain the shelter belt for the term of the consent. The shelter belts shall comprise three staggered rows of Radiata pine and / or Douglas fir.

Dispersing roosting birds.

Reduce the extent of nesting and roosting habitat.

6.   (a) There shall be no surface run-off, prolonged ponding, or contamination of surface water, resulting from the application of treated wastewater onto the irrigated area. For the purpose of this consent, prolonged ponding is deemed to occur if wastewater remains on an area for more than three consecutive hours.

Infilling existing depressions.

Removal of ground depressions.

Eliminating standing water.

Maintaining a rate of discharge that avoids the potential for ponding.

7.   (a) The consent holder shall operate a cut and carry operation in accordance with the application.

Adopting a long grass policy.

Management of the grass sward to a minimum height of 100 mm.

30     There is commonality across all three documents.  The two reports both recommend similar outcomes as being desirable whereas it is mandatory for Council to comply with the consent conditions.  So what is desirable on the one hand coincidentally is a requirement in the consent conditions.

31      In terms of bird strike risk the following table compares the risk factors across the two potential irrigation methods.

32      Comparison of Centre Pivot Irrigation to Subsurface Drip Irrigation.

Centre Pivot Irrigation

Subsurface Drip Irrigation

The irrigation process could attract birds through saturation of the soils and flushing of bird prey items to the surface. The application of nutrient rich treated wastewater would provide an ideal environment for insects and other invertebrates to proliferate. The irrigators themselves could become perches for birds.

Less likely to occur.

The highly productive grass sward would frequently create new grass shoots, potentially attractive to species such a Canada Geese.
It would also require regular cutting which, when cut at heights lower than 100 mm will expose insects and other bird prey items. Cutting would be most frequent in spring summer and autumn when aircraft movements are at their greatest. Short grass is preferred by most of the species of concern (Black-backed Gulls, Paradise Shelduck, Spur-winged Plover) and the grass will be thicker and taller under the irrigated grassland than what is already present.

Same as for Centre Pivot Irrigation.

The retention of the water channel flowing into the peat bog will continue to be attractive to birds. It is possible with the generally taller grass that fewer birds will be attracted to this area.

Same as for Centre Pivot Irrigation.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

33      The airport is required to comply with the relevant CAA regulations.  Appendix B of the attached Avisure report contains Table 3 (reproduced below):

34      Sections of NZ CAA Part 139 and AC relevant to the proposed wastewater irrigation facility.

35        Document

36        Requirement

37      NZ CAA Part 139, CAA Consolidation, Aerodromes - Certification, Operation and Use, March 2017.

38      Subpart B, Section 139.71 states:

39      “An applicant for the grant of an aerodrome operator certificate must, if any wildlife presents a hazard to aircraft operations at the aerodrome, establish an environmental management programme for minimising or eliminating the wildlife hazard.”

40      TEU has a documented Wildlife Management Programme (Appendix C of the attached Avisure report.).

41      NZ CAA Guidance material for land use at or near aerodromes, June 2008

42      The document states:

43      “It is important that land use changes are monitored and reviewed by the aerodrome operator in areas outside their immediate control to ensure that these land use changes do not increase wildlife hazards for the aerodrome.

44      Garbage disposal dumps and other sources that may attract wildlife activity on, or in the vicinity of, an aerodrome, need to be assessed as a potential source of wildlife hazard. It is an International Civil Aviation Organisation requirement that such activities are closely managed by the controlling authority.
If necessary, an aeronautical study may need to be undertaken to assess the potential wildlife activity hazard. Examples of wildlife attractants include: ………. Agricultural - cultivation of land….”

45      NZ CAA Advisory Circular AC139-16, Wildlife Management at Aerodromes, Revision 0, October 2011.

46      This advisory circular (AC) is applicable for certificated and non-certificated aerodromes. It lists agriculture, including crops such as grass to be harvested, as a potentially hazardous land use practice. The AC discusses the advantages of short and long grass management techniques. Grass length and its effect on birds is discussed in latter sections of this report.

47     It is important to note that the Te Anau Airport does not operate under a Part 139 certificate, at this time it is not required to.  However the airport management operates all systems and procedures that would be required to operate under a Part 139 certificate.  This includes a wildlife management regime.

48     The wildlife management regime will be modified as necessary to mitigate the change in risk created by changes in wildlife behaviour.  This is a premise of the management regime regardless of why the change in risk may have occurred.


 

Community Views

49      Community views on this issue have been expressed through the consent application process.  The MWH report was one of the supporting documents to that application.

Costs and Funding

50      The costs of risk mitigation factors such as increased wildlife management have not been calculated.  The cost impact will be as a result of adding more mitigation activities to the current bird risk management activities.  These additional costs will be met by the operational budget of the wastewater scheme.  The cost attributable to the wastewater project will be the marginal cost increase of the revised bird management programme.  This is not expected to be a significant cost in terms of the operational cost of the treatment and disposal system.

51      The potential effects including practicality and costs of operating a long grass strategy need to be considered by the wastewater project team and in conjunction with the airport management agree on the best methodologies to adopt.

52      For comparison purposes there is considered to be no significant difference in the cost of mitigating the risk posed by pivot irrigation application as opposed to sub-surface irrigation.

Policy Implications

53      There are no policy implications.

Analysis

Options Considered

54      This report is not so much about presenting options.  It is primarily about informing those that mange the airport about the potential change in bird strike risk that will occur when Council implement an irrigation scheme on the property known as the Kepler site.

55      The Avisure report does compare a centre pivot irrigation system with a Subsurface Drip Irrigation system and concludes that the centre pivot irrigation system is likely to be slightly more attractive to birds than sub-surface irrigation.

56      The report also mitigation measures and notes if applied well, mitigation could significantly reduce the risk currently created by the site. Such reduction in risk makes it feasible to adopt a centre pivot irrigation system rather than a subsurface option.

Assessment of Significance

57      In terms of Council’s Significance Policy this matter is not significant.

Recommended Option

58      That the report be received.

59      Request Council commence a seasonal bird monitoring programme to better understand bird populations in and around the TEU airspace and provide guidance on wild life management to mitigate the risk to the airport users.

Next Steps

60      The airport wildlife management regime will be modified in response to the change in wildlife behaviour.

61      Commence a seasonal bird monitoring programme to establish a baseline bird activity.

 

Attachments

a             Irrigation Te Anau Bird Strike Assessment.  Avisure- FINAL    

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018

 

Te Anau Airport Manapouri Manager's Report - September 2018

Record No:             R/18/10/23714

Author:                      Matt Russell, Group Manager Services and Assets

Approved by:         Matt Russell, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

1        The Te Anau Airport Manapouri Manager’s Report identifies operational issues, aircraft movement, operator changes and management matters.

2        The Airport Manager’s report is attached.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)        Receives the report titled “Te Anau Airport Manapouri Manager's Report - September 2018” dated 15 October 2018.

 

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

 

c)         Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

 

 

Attachments

a             Te Anau Airport Managers Report - September 2018    

 


Te Anau Community Board

24 October 2018