HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environmental Management Committee

Wednesday 10 August 2011

SUBJECT: Draft Regional Stormwater Strategy

REASON FOR REPORT

1. This paper presents the Committee with a draft version of the Regional Stormwater Strategy and seeks Council’s endorsement of the draft Strategy. If the Council endorses the Strategy, then it is recommended that the Strategy be opened for public feedback in parallel to a similar public feedback period associated with draft changes to the Regional Policy Statement for growth, infrastructure and unsewered settlements.

BACKGROUND

2. A plan change dealing with stormwater has been ‘on the books’ since 2004 when the Council decided to withdraw new stormwater provisions from the then proposed Regional Resource Management Plan (RRMP). In mid 2009, the Council endorsed establishment of a collaborative stormwater working group to work through a number of ‘sticky’ unresolved issues before commencing the RMA’s formal plan change submission process.

Regional Stormwater Working Group (‘the Group’)

3. The stormwater working group met for the first time in August 2009. The Group consisted of representatives from each territorial local authority, Fish and Game Hawke's Bay, Department of Conservation and a cultural representative nominated by the Maori Committee Chairman. The Group’s purpose was to develop an agreed approach to stormwater management and produce a Regional Stormwater Strategy. The current draft Regional Stormwater Strategy is set out in Attachment 1.

4. The Group met initially to definitively identify regional stormwater issues. The Group agreed that stormwater discharges do impact receiving environments in terms of water quantity and water quality and general ecosystem functioning. Section 2 in the draft Strategy lists additional issues agreed by the Group.

5. To date, collaborative work of the Group has resulted in the production of a vision, objectives and overall guiding principles. For the objectives to be achieved, a number of complementary actions need to be implemented by various organisations. There is in-principle agreement within the Group on the objectives, key principles and implementation methods. More recently, some members of the Group expressed concern that the draft Strategy had not sufficient input from iwi interests.

Iwi Engagement

6. To address the concern about input of iwi interests in the draft Strategy, Council staff provided a report to the February 2011 Maori Committee meeting. The report updated progress of the Strategy and sought the Maori Committee’s views on how to best engage iwi interests in further preparation of the draft Strategy. Subsequently, Council staff undertook a series of meetings with regional taiwhenua representatives to better inform development of the Strategy and to seek support for the Strategy’s vision and objectives.

7. Overall, most taiwhenua representatives were supportive of the intent of the Strategy and actively engaged in the development process. The draft Strategy has been modified where appropriate to accommodate feedback from taiwhenua representatives.

PURPOSE OF THE REGIONAL STORMWATER STRATEGY

8. The purpose of the Strategy is to provide a common high-level outline upon which organisations agree and jointly implement for future management of stormwater in the region. Objectives that the Group generally has agreed to in-principle are:

8.1. To review the baseline information and status of stormwater systems and receiving environments;

8.2. To develop a common understanding of the outcomes to be achieved as a result of improved stormwater management;

8.3. To identify the range of strategies that could be used to manage stormwater to achieve outcomes;

8.4. To consider the impacts of regional growth and development in relation to stormwater management particularly in relation to the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy.

9. Where relevant, elements of the draft Strategy are consistent with principles in the recently adopted Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy. It is also consistent with the decision on the Hastings District Council’s stormwater discharge consents. The draft Strategy would also complement the current draft growth management and infrastructure-related plan changes to the Regional Policy Statement (see separate reports in 10 August 2011 Environmental Management Committee agenda).

10. The Strategy itself does not prescribe rules or a regulatory framework, but does provide an agreed principled basis upon which a regulatory framework can be developed. Similarly, the Strategy does not prescribe how stormwater will be managed in location-specific situations. By reaching preliminary agreement between the parties before a regulatory framework is developed, it is intended that policy and rules for the RRMP and RCEP can be crafted in a way to avoid philosophical stand-offs and minimise points of difference during the RMA plan change process.

11. Some of the ‘sticky’ unresolved issues present in 2009 do remain in dispute. For some issues, particularly details on degree of regulation and legal interepretation, the high-level nature of the Strategy was never going to provide the answers, but the collaborative process of Strategy development has assisted improve understanding and awareness of the bigger common picture. For example, the Strategy does not provide a definition of ‘point of discharge’ as that is something suitably provided in the RRMP and RCEP or if necessary, by legal opinion on a case by case basis. Another example is the Strategy’s promotion of an integrated catchment approach to stormwater management. This approach may involve asset and catchment ‘management plans’, but timing and scope of such plans remains to be agreed.

NEXT STEPS

12. The Council has previously agreed that public notification of stormwater-related plan change provisions be staggered, with the Regional Policy Statement (growth and infrastructure) provisions to be notified in October 2011 and the regional plan provisions notified following analysis of submissions received on the RPS change.

13. If the Council agrees to endorse the draft Strategy, then the following are proposed as ‘next steps’:

Indicative timeframe
August - September	The draft Strategy is published and made available for informal public comment (ie: web-based targeted consultation with key stakeholders and interested parties) to coincide with the release of the draft growth and infrastructure RPS change.
September - October	Policies and rules be drafted in form of a draft plan change to RRMP and RCEP, based on the principles of the Strategy.

October

Growth and infrastructure RPS changes publically notified. Public notification of stormwater-related regional plan provisions to be staggered as per April 2011 resolution (notification of a stormwater plan change to occur in early 2012).

October - November

The Stormwater Working Group to reconvene to consider:

1. the draft policies and rules for stormwater;

2. any further modifications to the Strategy arising from public feedback.

3. settlement of any unresolved issues on the Strategy.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

14. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1 of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

14.1. Sections 97 of the Act do not apply as these relate to decisions that significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

14.2. Sections 83 and 84 covering special consultative procedure do not apply.

14.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of the Council’s policy on significance.

14.4. The persons affected by this decision are all those persons with an interest in the management of stormwater in the Hawke's Bay region, but nevertheless, they will have opportunities to make comments and submissions if/when the draft Strategy and subsequent proposed plan changes are publicly released.

14.5. The options considered in relation to advancing the draft Changes were (1) to seek Council endorsement of the draft Strategy before further community engagement; (2) proceed with wider community engagement without initial Council endorsement of the draft Strategy; (3) proceed with final drafting of the Strategy without any wider community engagement; (4) adopt the Strategy as something akin to a ‘memorandum of understanding’ and suggest members of Regional Stormwater Working Group also do likewise.

14.6. Section 80 of the Act covering decisions that are inconsistent with an existing policy or plan does not apply.

14.7. Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision because the Resource Management Act allows people to have an opportunity to submit on a future proposed plan change following a decision by Council to publicly notify it.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Environmental Management Committee recommends that Council:

1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided.

2. Endorse the draft ‘Regional Stormwater Strategy’ (set out in attachment 1) with or without amendments.

3. Instruct staff to undertake further community engagement on the draft Regional Stormwater Strategy in conjunction with engagement associated with draft Growth and Infrastructure changes to the Regional Policy Statement. Engagement should include the following initiatives:

3.1. opportunity for general public input for three week period in August/September;

3.2. media release and promotion of draft Regional Stormwater Strategy on Council’s website; and

3.3. targeted promotion of draft Regional Stormwater Strategy with key stakeholders (for example: NZTA, DHB Public Health Unit).

Esther-Amy Bate

Planner

Gavin Ide

Team Leader Policy

Helen Codlin

Group Manager

Strategic Development

Attachment/s

1 View

Draft Regional Stormwater Strategy

Implementation Matrix

Draft Regional Stormwater Strategy

Attachment 1

Draft Regional Stormwater Strategy

April 2011

1. Introduction & Scope

Introduction

The Stormwater Working Group was established with the following overall project goal:

To Reach Agreement on How Stormwater Should Be Managed in the Hawke’s Bay Region.

Its objectives:

· To review the baseline information and status of stormwater systems and receiving environments.

· To develop a common understanding of the outcomes to be achieved as a result of improved stormwater management

· To identify the range of strategies that could be used to manage stormwater to achieve agreed outcomes.

· To consider the impacts of regional growth and development in relation to stormwater management particularly in relation to the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy.

· To recommend an agreed regional stormwater strategy and present it to a joint workshop of Councils.

Scope of Regional SW Strategy

The Regional Stormwater Strategy is a strategic document for the management of stormwater within the Hawke’s Bay Region. The strategy provides a non-statutory framework from which to address a range of water quantity and quality, and environmental issues in a coordinated, integrated and prioritised manner.

Purpose of Regional SW Strategy

1. Coordinate the operations of the Local and Regional Authorities to achieve an integrated approach to the management of stormwater quantity and quality.

2. Communicate a regional approach to key stakeholders to facilitate improved management of stormwater quantity and quality throughout the Region.

2. Issues

Stormwater discharges impact the receiving environment in two main ways. Firstly they increase the volume and rate of water movement causing scouring of the channel and flooding. Secondly having been mobilised by stormwater runoff, contaminants accumulate within the receiving environment. The result therefore is a gradual decline in the health of the receiving environment. Consequential adverse effects of this decline are social, cultural, economic and environmental.

The following table highlights a number of stormwater issues that this strategy seeks to address.

Issue	Explanation
People	Public health and wellbeing
	Food source and cultural harvesting (watercress, koura and mahinga kai)
	Recreation
	Mauri
	Potential for re-use for drinking, industrial, commercial, irrigation and amenity enhancement
Loss of Habitat & Biodiversity	Reduced riparian vegetation (sedimentation, temperature)
	Loss of vegetation in catchment affects hydrology (sedimentation, quantity)
	Stream Connectivity (ecology, migration, increased impermeable surfaces)
	Altered salinity regimes in marine environments
Contamination of Stormwater	Discharge from onsite wastewater disposal systems
	Discharges from industrial, commercial and domestic activities
	Zoning of development
	Agriculture & horticultural runoff (fertiliser, pesticides and insecticides)
	Runoff from industrial and commercial sites
	Sedimentation
	Impervious surfaces (car parks, roads and other paved surfaces)
Flooding	Risk to human health and property
	Risk to human life and other life.
	Costs of clean up and repair to public and private sector
Erosion and land instability	High sediment release potential
	Increased stormwater flow
	Stream bank erosion
	Risk to established development
Stormwater Management	Must expand to address quantity and quality issues
	Address source controls (Low Impact Design)

3.

Less Flooding

Reduced Contamination

Improved Environments

Resilient Communities

Vision

In 50 years time:

1. Drought and rain events have increased in severity and frequency. The communities of Hawke’s Bay are resilient against flooding and drought. Stormwater is recognised as a valuable resource.

2. Communities in Hawke’s Bay have access to numerous resilient and healthy surface water ecosystems. Riparian planting shades abundant in-stream life. Waterways and their margins are valued by the community for recreation and leisure.

3. The community values local government as a partner and leader in sustainable, practical and cost effective stormwater management. Regional policy and regulation is highly integrated and responsive to social, cultural, economic and environmental needs.

4. Objectives

1. Systems:	Agree that stormwater will be managed taking into account the needs of people and communities, natural and physical resources, amenity values, social and cultural values and asset management.
2. People:	To ensure that the adverse effects of stormwater on social, cultural, environmental and economic wellbeing are avoided, remedied or mitigated.
3. Environment:	To ensure that the integrity, functioning, resilience and intrinsic value of freshwater and marine ecosystems is not compromised by the adverse effects of stormwater.
4. Asset Management:	Provide for the integrated and comprehensive management of stormwater through appropriately maintained assets.

5. Goal for Stormwater Management

Stormwater in the Hawke’s Bay region is managed using comprehensive, catchment based, Stormwater Management Plans that optimise the protection of people, property, culture, and ecosystems while efficiently supporting economic activity.

6. Key Principles

A. Social Wellbeing

1. Recognise that the community has a right to safe enjoyment of contact recreational activities and harvesting of food in freshwater and marine environments.

2. Recognise the intrinsic value of natural environments on social wellbeing.

B. Cultural Wellbeing

1. Establish and maintain partnerships with iwi as kaitiaki of the region’s land and water resources.

2. Acknowledge the relationship Maori has with water and water bodies and the potential impact on mauri from stormwater discharges.

C. Environmental Wellbeing

1. The retention and restoration of open watercourses should be considered in preference to piping.

2. Consider stormwater management as part of total land and water resource management.

3. Stormwater discharges shall not compromise the potability of ground water.

4. The adverse effects of stormwater on land resources and property, such as flooding or erosion or land slippage are minimised.

5. Recognise the benefits of Low Impact Design stormwater solutions.

6. Recognise that some receiving environments are more sensitive to stormwater discharges than others.

7. Recognise that ecosystems have natural function and intrinsic value.

D. Economic Wellbeing

1. Develop integrated Stormwater Management Plans for stormwater management which includes enhancement of the built environment.

2. Consider stormwater as a resource and seek constructive, practical opportunities for reuse.

3. Recognise that ecosystem function contributes to economic wellbeing (e.g. water regulation, erosion control, nutrient cycling etc).

4. Recognise and plan for stormwater issues in the land use planning process.

5. Ensure solutions are practical, adaptive and provide value for the rate payers’ money and if possible provide multi value solutions

6. Plan for the impacts of Climate Change on stormwater management.

7. Maximise inter-council co-operation.

References

Auckland Regional Council. (July 1998) Auckland Region Urban Stormwater Management

Project Strategy Statement. Auckland, NZ: ARC.

Auckland Regional Council. (May 1995) The Environmental Impacts of Urban Stormwater

Runoff. ARC Technical Publication No. 53. Auckland, NZ:ARC.

Auckland Regional Council. (May 2004) An Action Plan to Deliver Improved Stormwater

Outcomes: Final Report. Auckland, NZ: ARC.

Chandra, V. for City Design. (March 2005) Stormwater Contaminant Effects: Review of

available information and its relevance to Hawke’s Bay. Napier, NZ: HBRC.

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (June 2004) Te Karamu Catchment Review and Options for

Enhancement. Napier, NZ: Asset Management/Engineering Section Environmental Management Group, HBRC.

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (2006) Hawke’s Bay Regional Resource Management

Plan (including the Regional Policy Statement). Napier, New Zealand: HBRC.

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (March 2006) Update on Stormwater Policy Review to

the HBRC Environmental Management Committee. Napier, NZ: Policy, HBRC.

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (May 2007) Recreational Water Quality in Hawke’s Bay:

Review of the 2006-2007 Recreational Water Quality Monitoring Programme. Napier, NZ:

Environmental Management Group Technical Report ISSN 1174 3077, EMT 07/03 HBRC Plan

N^o. 3937: HBRC

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (June 2007) Stormwater Discharge Draft Provisions

Workshop Napier, NZ: Policy, HBRC

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (October 2007) Background/ Progress Report Napier,

NZ: Policy, HBRC.

New Zealand Legislation. (2007) Resource Management (National Environmental

Standards for Sources of Human Drinking Water) Regulations 2007. Wellington, NZ: New Zealand Government.

Resource Management Act 1991 (2005) Wellington, New Zealand: Brookers Ltd.

White, S. E. for Bioresearchers Ltd (July 2004) Ahuriri Estuary Environmental Evaluation

for Hawke’s Bay Regional Council. Napier, NZ: EMI 0422 HBRC Plan No. 3503.

Draft Regional Stormwater Strategy

Attachment 2

Implementation Matrix

Key Outcomes

Organisation

Mechanisms

Methods

Actions

Less Flooding

Reduced Contamination

Improved Environment

Resilient Communities

Local Authority

Regional Council

Other

Regional Resource Management Plan

District Plan

Bylaws

Regional Stormwater Strategy

Community Education Strategies

Your Choice Stormwater Education

Treaty Settlements

Hapu Management Plan

Maori Committee

Hawke’s Bay Waterways Design Guidelines

Asset Management Plans

Stormwater Management Plans

Catchment Modelling

Design Codes

State of the Environment

Research & Investigation

Education

Co-ordinate the development of targeted rural and urban education packages

Promote Low Impact Design stormwater solutions

Highlight stormwater issues & promote better community understanding of issues & solutions.

Encourage partnerships with communities in managing waterways.

Partnerships

Establish and maintain partnerships with tangata whenua as kaitiaki of the region’s land and water resources.

Ensure continued involvement off all stakeholders to achieve a multi-disciplinary, co-ordinated approach to address all aspects of stormwater management

Engage with industry & commercial parties to develop appropriate industry standards which include environmental management practices at source.

Policy &

Regulation

Develop an integrated catchment approach to stormwater management that encourages sustainable rural landuse practices.

Consider Low Impact Design mechanisms first when assessing the best practicable option in stormwater management.

Recognise that some receiving environments are more sensitive to the effects of stormwater than others.

Reduce the effects of point & non-point source contamination.

Avoid connections to and discharging into municipal systems unless criteria is met.

Use statutory documents to require the implementation of the principles of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council Waterways Guidelines.

Encourage the rehabilitation of existing urban catchment and avoid further degradation.

Develop an enforcement programme to discourage potential polluters

Investigation

Keep up to date with current knowledge and research and where necessary consider joint initiatives.

Improve monitoring of stormwater quality to better characterise contaminant loads and build up more robust baseline data to inform policy and regulation.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environmental Management Committee

Wednesday 10 August 2011

SUBJECT: Draft Growth and Infrastructure RPS Change

REASON FOR REPORT

1. This report presents the Committee with draft versions of two plan changes to the Regional Policy Statement (RPS).

2. The first draft Change relates to the ‘built environment’ and contains provisions for sustainable urban growth and integrated use and development of infrastructure. Preparation of this Change was a specific action required for implementation of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy (HPUDS). The draft Change also includes a limited number of provisions that are relevant to those parts of the region outside the Heretaunga Plains ‘sub-region.’

3. The second and more succinct draft Change includes provisions improving management of cumulative effects of wastewater systems in existing unsewered communities. A key feature of this draft Change is the proposed ‘targeted rate or similar’ method for fund associated audit monitoring and any further investigative work into wastewater management risks and options for existing unsewered communities.

4. Staff recommend that both draft Changes be endorsed by Council and released for informal public comment (in a similar fashion to release of the draft onsite wastewater change earlier this year). Any public feedback would then be incorporated into further revisions to the draft Changes in time for possible public notification as proposed plan changes in October 2011.

Background

5. The draft ‘Growth Change’ is one of over 60 actions for implementation of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy (HPUDS). Changing the RPS is likely to be the most significant implementation action for which the Regional Council is the lead agency and timing was specified as being 2011. In full, the action stated in HPUDS was:

“prepare a change to the RPS which will provide specific guidance on where growth will occur and include the concept of urban limits. The change will determine the overall extent of HPUDS through setting urban limits and working towards specific rather than indicative lines on the map:

- greenfield growth areas;

- rural residential – a list of criteria for assessing the location and form will be included;

- intensification areas;

- coastal settlements – taking into account coastal hazards and areas of significant natural coastal character;

- other matters as agreed;

- identification of the significant issues for the Heretaunga Plains such as large footprint retail/commercial/ industrial land outside of the growth areas and the expansion of existing settlements;

- the RPS change is to assist in discouraging any proposed plan changes and resource consent applications for retail/industrial land that is outside of the agreed Heretaunga Plains settlement pattern.”

6. Opus International Consultants Limited were engaged to draft a plan change to the RPS to incorporate relevant elements of HPUDS. The Growth Change was drafted to also include region-wide provisions, so in addition to meeting with relevant staff representatives from Napier City and Hastings District councils, discussions have also occurred with relevant staff of Wairoa and Central Hawke’s Bay district councils. Feedback from those meetings have been incorporated and these have also been reviewed by the HPUDS Core Technical Advisory Committee.

7. For several years now, the Council has been investigating ways for regional planning documents to better address the cumulative adverse effects of wastewater discharges. These cumulative adverse effects or potential effects are typically associated with existing unsewered coastal and inland settlements.

Draft Growth Plan Change

8. The draft Growth Change is set out in Attachment 1. Inclusion of extended explanations are deliberate for this draft document, but these explanations are likely to be removed from a publicly notified Proposed Change and instead featured in an accompanying ‘s32 evaluation summary report.’

9. For now, the draft Growth Change is effectively a ‘bundle’ of amendments covering a variety of themes. The predominant themes include:

9.1. embedding principles and direction of HPUDS into the RPS (these include greater clarity and direction regarding urban limits; protection of versatile soils; integration of development and infrastructure; papakainga housing, compact city philosophy and urban form, etc);

9.2. integrated decision-making, particularly in relation to structure plans for further subdivision, use and development and provision of adequate infrastructure;

9.3. integration of urban stormwater management and discharges;

9.4. integration of non-reticulated wastewater treatment and disposal;

9.5. clarity of references and concept of ‘versatile land’ as highlighted through preparation of HPUDS;

9.6. a range of generic principles (applicable region-wide, and not only Heretaunga Plains specific), to guide good integrated and sustainable development; and

9.7. giving effect to national policy statements where relevant.

10. The draft Growth Change does not map ‘urban limits.’ Representatives of Napier City and Hastings District councils favoured this approach where the RPS would not map limits, while still enabling district plans to map such urban limits and adapt those limits over time to accommodate findings of future HPUDS implementation monitoring. The provisions for urban limits are not proposed to apply in Wairoa and Central Hawke's Bay districts.

11. Being a change to the RPS, territorial authorities will have to give effect to the amended RPS through their respective district plans. They will also have to have regard to the amended RPS when considering resource consent applications and the like.

Draft Wastewater Plan Change

12. The draft Wastewater Change is set out in Attachment 2. This is not as comprehensively developed, nor lengthy, as the draft Growth Change but nevertheless, both draft changes complement the other. This draft Change is quite distinct from Change 3 and Variation 3 which were the recently notified proposing amendments to rules for onsite wastewater discharges.

13. The draft provisions build on the concept of the accreditation scheme and audit monitoring that is being established for current consent and compliance monitoring activities. The result of the monitoring will be used to determine whether further investigation is required. The proposed methods indicate that if a community is identified as needing further investigation, that this will be indicated through the Annual Plan consultation process.

14. The key provision that staff are seeking early feedback on is the proposed funding mechanism to fund the monitoring and investigations. A targeted rate would apply to both existing systems currently authorised by a permitted activity rule and those requiring consent. This puts both existing and new discharges on the same footing in terms of audit monitoring and the costs associated with it, therefore addressing cost inequity issues.

15. No detailed work has been undertaken as yet regarding the specifics of such a rate, such as should the rates be pooled as a region-wide scheme for use in targeted investigations, how many ratepayers might be affected and how much the rate might be. Neither has any work yet been undertaken on how much the implementation of such a policy may cost.

16. Alternative policy approaches to addressing the inequity include requiring all discharges in unsewered communities to require a resource consent or keeping the status quo. Costs and benefits of these options also need to be considered alongside the draft policy.

17. This draft Wastewater Change has to date only been circulated internally amongst consents and compliance teams. Staff plan to discuss these draft policy provisions with city and district council staff and the wastewater industry sector. However, as funding is a key element of this policy approach, staff considered it prudent to seek Council comment early.

18. The Wastewater Change is also drafted as a change to the RPS so TLAs will be obliged to consider its relevance in their decision-making.

Community engagement the Growth and Infrastructure Plan Change

19. Previous briefing papers on plan change work programmes have indicated October 2011 as a timeframe for coordinated notification of a Growth and wastewater plan changes. Staff consider this timeframe is still achievable.

20. As noted above, the draft Changes incorporate feedback from each of the territorial authorities. The Hawke's Bay Triennial Agreement specifies protocols for preparation and review of the RPS. Because the draft Changes largely embeds principles arising from earlier joint-council work (ie: HPUDS), the protocols are relatively easily fulfilled.

21. The preparation of HPUDS itself involved several opportunities for public input into the way future growth in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region might be managed. The draft Changes are not revisiting HPUDS’s principles and actions – merely implementing relevant elements of the strategy. Consequently, any further community engagement on the draft Changes can be relatively focussed.

22. Staff recommend that the Council endorse the draft Changes so that further community engagement can take place.

Next steps

23. If the Council agrees to endorse the draft Changes (with or without amendments), the staff will undertake a wider community engagement. That wider engagement process is envisaged to be in a manner similar to the recently notified onsite wastewater plan change. Community engagement would involve inviting public comments over a three week period in August/September. During this time, staff would also target additional key stakeholders (for example: NZTA, HB Primary Producers Roundtable, Chamber of Commerce and others who made submissions on the HPUDS). The HPUDS ‘Reference Group’ could also be re-assembled as a forum for seeking feedback. General public comment will be invited through a media release and promotion on Council’s website.

24. Staff would compile and summarise comments received and any recommended revisions to be made to the draft Changes. Those comments will be used to improve the draft Changes in preparation for presentation to Council on 26^th October (standing committee meeting on 12^th October) for possible adoption as proposed Changes.

25. In addition to broad and targeted community engagement, staff propose the draft Changes being reviewed subject to a legal review and independent planner before being finalised.

Other matters to consider

26. Reporting to one of Council’s committees prior to the Council meeting in October is currently uncertain while terms of reference for committees are being reviewed and also awaiting constitution of the Regional Planning Committee (RPC). Given the relatively advanced form of the draft Changes, it may be appropriate that the final draft Changes be reported directly to Council rather than via the RPC - even if the RPC is constituted before October. Staff seek advice on this matter.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

27. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1 of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

27.1. Sections 97 of the Act do not apply as these relate to decisions that significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

27.2. Sections 83 and 84 covering special consultative procedure do not apply.

27.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of the Council’s policy on significance.

27.4. The persons affected by this decision are all those persons with an interest in the region’s built environments and infrastructure, but nevertheless, they will have opportunities to make comments and submissions when the draft and subsequent proposed plan changes are publicly released.

27.5. The options considered in relation to advancing the draft Changes were (1) to seek Council endorsement of the draft Changes before further community engagement; (2) proceed with wider community engagement without initial Council endorsement of the draft provisions; and (3) proceed with final drafting of the Changes without any wider community engagement on the plan changes.

27.6. Section 80 of the Act covering decisions that are inconsistent with an existing policy or plan does not apply.

27.7. Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision because the Resource Management Act allows people to have an opportunity to submit on a future proposed plan change following a decision by Council to publicly notify it.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Committee recommends Council:

1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision because the Resource Management Act allows people to have an opportunity to submit on a future proposed plan change following a decision by Council to publicly notify it.

2. Endorse the draft plan change for ‘urban growth and strategic integration of infrastructure’ (set out in attachment 1) with or without amendments.

3. Instruct staff to undertake further community engagement on the draft plan change for ‘urban growth and strategic integration of infrastructure’ with that engagement including the following initiatives:

3.1. opportunity for general public input for three week period in August/September;

3.2. media release and promotion of draft Changes on Council’s website;

3.3. targeted promotion of draft Changes with key stakeholders (for example: NZTA, Chamber of Commerce, DHB Public Health Unit, and reassembly of the HPUDS ‘reference group’); and

3.4. targeted promotion of draft Changes to persons who made submissions on HPUDS.

4. Support in principle the draft plan change for ‘Existing unsewered settlements’ (set out in attachment 2) with or without amendments, subject to a full analysis of implementation costs and funding mechanisms.

Gavin Ide

Team Leader Policy

Helen Codlin

Group Manager

Strategic Development

Attachment/s

1 View

Built Environment - Final draft

Built Environment - Final draft

Attachment 1

Text Box: Attachment 1- ‘Draft Growth Change’

Managing the Built Environment

Urban Development and the Strategic Integration of Infrastructure

ISSUES

ISS UD1 The adverse effects of sporadic and unplanned urban development (particularly in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region), on:

a) the natural environment (land and water);

b) the efficient operation, maintenance and upgrading of physical infrastructure or services (particularly strategic infrastructure); and

c) the economic, cultural and social wellbeing of the Region’s people and communities.

Explanation

Unplanned urban form and ad hoc management of urban growth can have adverse effects on people and communities, and on the natural environment (soils and water). Effective management of growth in the region is necessary to ensure development occurs in a planned, sustainable manner and in a way that also does not compromise the planned provision, operation, maintenance and upgrading of regionally significant infrastructure. This aligns with the statutory functions of the Regional Council in giving effect to the Act as contained in section 30 of the Resource Management Act 1991 – in particular:

“(c) the control of the use of land for the purpose of—

(i) soil conservation:

(ii) the maintenance and enhancement of the quality of water in water bodies and coastal water:

(iii) the maintenance of the quantity of water in water bodies and coastal water:

(iiia) the maintenance and enhancement of ecosystems in water bodies and coastal water:

(iv) the avoidance or mitigation of natural hazards:

(f) the control of discharges of contaminants into or onto land, air, or water and discharges of water into water:

(gb) the strategic integration of infrastructure with land use through objectives, policies, and methods;”

Managing urban growth and development is a regionally significant issue because what occurs in one area will invariably have an effect on other places. This is particularly so for the urban centres of Napier and Hastings, and surrounding coastal and rural settlements in and around the Heretaunga Plains. Up to 8,000 households are projected to be required between 2012 and 2045 in the Heretaunga Plains area. Growth in the other parts of the Region is not projected to be significant over that period.

Managed growth intervention recognises the actual or potential effects urban growth can have on people and communities, and the important role that efficient infrastructure (e.g. road, rail, ports, airports, electricity networks, telecommunications, drainage, dams, water and wastewater networks) plays in supporting settlement growth and prosperity. The protection of the region’s strategic infrastructure is essential for growth. A lack of integration between land use and infrastructure can result in poor infrastructure investment decisions, public funding pressures and inefficient land use patterns.

In the past, Hastings and Napier have planned for growth independently. However, in recognising the interrelationship of these key urban centres, and the pressures on shared resources and infrastructure, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, Hastings District Council and Napier City Council embarked on a collaborative approach to urban growth and development out to 2045, culminating in the development of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy (HPUDS)^{^[1]}.

The purpose of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy is to assist, in a collaborative manner, the local authorities to plan and manage growth on the Heretaunga Plains and some additional coastal communities beyond the immediate Heretaunga Plains. The Strategy takes a long-term approach to addressing the key issues facing the Heretaunga Plains in a more integrated way, and focuses on a preferred settlement pattern that will lead to more compact development through gradual restriction on urban boundaries to allow for proper planning and design work.

The Regional Policy Statement seeks to give effect to the general tenets of HPUDS at the regional level, where the outcomes of the HPUDS process align with the statutory functions of the Regional Council.

Much of the urban growth policy in the Regional Policy Statement is therefore directed at a sub-regional level to the Heretaunga Plains and surrounding coastal and rural settlements. The Wairoa and Central Hawke’s Bay Districts, and Hastings District hinterland, have different pressures, which warrant less regional policy direction in terms of urban growth management at this time. This may change over time, requiring further regional policy intervention at a later date.

For the purposes of the Regional Policy Statement, the Heretaunga Plains sub-region is geographically defined in Appendix Xa, matching the geographical extent adopted for HPUDS and the Heretaunga Plains Transportation Strategy.

ISS UD2 The adverse effects from urban development encroaching on versatile land (particularly in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region where the land supports regionally and nationally significant intensive economic activity), and ultimately the adverse effects of this on the economic wellbeing of the Region’s people and communities both now and for future generations.

Explanation

The Heretaunga Plains sub-region contains areas with a high proportion of very high value versatile land. There are competing demands for this valuable finite resource. The diversity and intensity of horticultural and viticultural production on the Heretaunga Plains, for instance, creates a high demand for land which is in short supply, whilst the same land is highly desirable for urban and rural lifestyle development.

The versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains is a regionally, if not nationally, significant resource for primary production and ultimately underpins the economy of the Region. Therefore, pressure from urban development encroaching on this resource is a regionally significant issue.

Urban expansion on to agricultural land continues unless controlled, because the financial incentives are strong. The increased market value of land developed for urban use is considerable and beyond agricultural returns to sustain. Once developed, the economic value of urban and industrial infrastructure normally means this land is permanently removed from primary production. In short, within agriculture, land use conflicts occur around short-term economic incentives and the future sustainability of the soils. Subdivision for urban development removes land from agricultural production but also impacts on the productivity of other land, in particular through reverse sensitivity.

The concentration of highly versatile soils in conjunction with significant concentration of the Region’s population on the Heretaunga Plains, reinforces the focus of urban growth policy in the Regional Policy Statement on the Heretaunga Plains sub-region at this time.

OBJECTIVES

OBJ UD1 URBAN FORM (REGION)

Establish compact, well-designed, and strongly connected urban form throughout the Region, that:

a) achieves quality built environments that:

- provide a range of housing choices and affordability,

- have a sense of character and identity,

- retain heritage values and values important to tangata whenua, and

- that are healthy, environmentally sustainable, functionally efficient, and economically and socially resilient;

b) minimises reverse sensitivity effects at the urban/rural interface;

c) minimises reverse sensitivity effects on existing strategic and other physical infrastructure;

d) avoids unnecessary encroachment of urban activities on the versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains;

and

e) avoids or mitigates increasing the frequency or severity of risk to people and property from natural hazards.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

A sprawling uncontrolled pattern of development does not promote sustainable forms of development and promotes less efficient use of existing infrastructure. High levels of amenity, quality living environments, and retention of significant features and values are harder to achieve when development is not well designed and connected. Sprawling development also leads to unsustainable encroachment onto versatile land which underpins much of the Region’s economy. Transitioning to a more compact, well-designed and strongly connected urban form better supports the economic, social and cultural wellbeing of the Region’s people and communities.

[Refer also:

· OBJ7 and OBJ8 (Chapter 3.2 – Coastal Resources) re: coastal values important to tangata whenua, and development in coastal hazard areas

· OBJ16 and OBJ18 (Chapter 3.5 – Conflicting Land Uses) re: nuisance effects from location of conflicting land uses

· OBJ31 (Chapter 3.12 – Natural Hazards) re: natural hazards

· OBJ36 and OBJ37 (Chapter 3.14 – Matters of Significance to Iwi/Hapu) re: values important to tangata whenua]

OBJ UD2 INTENSIFICATION (HERETAUNGA PLAINS SUB-REGION)

Provide for residential growth in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region through higher density development.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

New development accommodates growth and provides the opportunity to enhance the quality of the environment. More intensive forms of development promote efficient use of existing infrastructure, minimise energy use (as development spreads, the demand for transport and energy use increases), and reduce the need to encroach onto the versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains.

OBJ UD3 PROVISION FOR BUSINESS LAND (HERETAUNGA PLAINS SUB-REGION)

Identify and provide for the land requirements for the growth of business activities in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region in a manner that supports the settlement pattern promoted in OBJ UD1.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

The provision of adequate land for future business activities is important for long term economic growth and the provision of both employment and services to the sub-region’s existing and future communities.

OBJ UD4 PLANNED PROVISION FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HERETAUNGA PLAINS SUB-REGION)

Enable urban development in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region, in an integrated, planned and staged manner, which allows for the adequate and timely supply of land and associated infrastructure.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

Successful long term growth management is dependent on integrating long term land use, the infrastructure necessary to support this and the ability to fund and supply the infrastructure in a timely and equitable manner.

OBJ UD5 INTEGRATION OF LAND USE WITH SIGNIFICANT INFRASTRUCTURE (REGION)

Ensure through long-term planning for land use change throughout the Region, that the rate and location of development is integrated with the provision of strategic and other infrastructure, the provision of services, and associated funding mechanisms.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

Strategic infrastructure in the wider region is essential to the well-being, health and safety of people and communities. Consideration needs to be given to sequencing and costs of infrastructure development in decision making. These can have significant effects on efficiency and the economic well-being of communities. Recognition of the importance of strategic infrastructure will lead to greater weight being given to its requirements and the desirability to reduce incompatibility and conflicts.

OBJ UD6 INTEGRATION OF TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE WITH DEVELOPMENT (REGION)

Ensure that the planning and provision of transport infrastructure is integrated with development and settlement patterns and facilitates the movement of goods and provision of services throughout the Region, while:

a) limiting network congestion;

b) reducing dependency on private motor vehicles;

c) reducing emission of contaminants to air and energy use; and

d) promoting the use of active transport modes.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

Development that is not well integrated with transport infrastructure can result in increased car dependency, higher energy use, greater traffic volumes, and inefficient freight movement. Land use patterns that are integrated with transport infrastructure minimise energy use through network optimisation, and enables greater recognition of the importance of strategic transport networks in supporting the economic and social wellbeing, and health and safety, of people and communities.

[Refer also OBJ32 and OBJ33 (Chapter 3.13 – Maintenance and Enhancement of Physical Infrastructure) re: recognising and providing for operation, maintenance and development of physical infrastructure, and specific locational requirements]

POLICIES

CONTAINMENT OF URBAN ACTIVITIES (HERETAUNGA PLAINS SUB-REGION)

POL UD1 URBAN CONTAINMENT

In providing for urban activities in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region, territorial authorities must place priority on:

a) the retention of the versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains for existing and foreseeable future primary production, and

b) ensuring efficient utilisation of existing infrastructure investment.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

Efficient utilisation of existing infrastructure investment and the retention of the versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains for existing and foreseeable future primary production must underpin all decisions surrounding provision for urban activity in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region in order to achieve the desired settlement pattern outlined in HPUDS.

POL UD2 ESTABLISHING URBAN LIMITS

Within the Heretaunga Plains sub-region, district plans shall identify urban limits for those urban areas and settlements within which urban activities can occur, sufficient to cater for anticipated population and household growth to 2045.

In determining future Greenfield Growth Areas for inclusion within these limits, the following general criteria shall apply:

a) Must form an extension contiguous with existing urban areas and settlements.

b) Land represents soils of lesser versatility, or productive capacity has been compromised by:

c) Size and shape of land parcels that mitigates against productive use

d) Surrounding land uses and reverse sensitivity

e) Lack of water/poor drainage.

f) Clear natural boundaries exist, or logical urban edge greenbelts could be created.

g) Supports compact urban form.

h) Can be serviced at reasonable cost.

i) Can be integrated with existing development.

j) Can be integrated with the provision of strategic and other infrastructure (particularly strategic transport networks – towards limiting network congestion, reducing dependency on private motor vehicles and promoting the use of active transport modes).

k) Promotes, and does not compromise, social infrastructure including community, education and recreation facilities and public open space.

l) Further locational constraints that must be mitigated before a growth area can be considered for inclusion within the urban limits, are where:

i. there is projected sea level rise as a result of climatic changes

ii. there is active coastal erosion and inundation

iii. stormwater infrastructure is unable to mitigate identified flooding risk

iv. flood control and drainage schemes are at or over capacity

v. there are active earthquake faults

vi. there is high liquefaction potential

vii. there are sensitive waterbodies nearby, susceptible to potential contamination from on-site wastewater systems or stormwater discharges

viii. there is currently no wastewater reticulation and the land is poor draining

ix. there are identified water short areas affecting the provision of adequate water supply.

Areas where future greenfield growth has been identified as appropriate and providing choice in location, subject to further assessment, are:

Table 1: Future Greenfield Growth Areas

Location	Number of Households (Expected Yield) 2015 to 2045
Napier City:
Bay View	80
Te Awa/The Loop	600
Taradale Hills	350
Park Island/Parklands	345
Total (Napier City)	1375
Hastings District:
Omahu/Bridge Pa (Marae-based)	48
Haumoana/Te Awanga	130
Maraekakaho Rural Settlement	50
Waimarama	20
Lyndhurst	185
Lyndhurst Rd Extension	230
Kaiapo Rd	350
Irongate Rd/York	270
Murdoch Rd/Copeland	230
Middle Rd/Iona/Hills	140
Havelock Nth Hills (Lower Extension)	100
Arataki Extension	220
Total (Hastings District)	1973

[the indicative location of the areas identified above are shown in Appendix Xb]

Areas where future greenfield growth has been determined as inappropriate, are:

a) Waipatiki Beach (for scale and natural character reasons)

b) Tangoio (for natural character reasons)

c) Whirinaki (no capacity for further expansion)

d) Puketapu (for natural character reasons and servicing issues)

e) Clive (due to stormwater servicing issues)

f) Clifton (for natural character reasons and coastal hazard issues)

g) Ocean Beach (as an outstanding natural coastal environment) – apart from the potential for appropriate growth of the existing Waipuka bach settlement on Maori land inland of areas at risk of coastal hazards

h) Natural detention areas (50 year flood ponding areas) (such as Paki Paki, North Twyford, and parts of the Lagoon and Landcorp farms in Napier)

Principal Reasons and Explanation

Demographic changes to the population within the Heretaunga Plains sub-region will ultimately influence demand for land. Setting urban limits is critical to transitioning to a more compact urban settlement pattern in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region. Projected demographic changes for the sub-region over the 35 year period to 2045 (sourced from Statistics New Zealand) anticipate moderate population growth, an older population, and declining household occupancy rates leading to an increase in household numbers of 8,014 to 58,925 (a 15.7% increase).

In transitioning to a more compact settlement pattern, the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy adopted a gradual move towards a greater proportion of new households being supplied through higher density development over time (refer Table 2, POL UD5). However, these changes were still assessed as resulting in ‘on the ground’ requirements for urban development beyond current supply for this purpose. Of the total 8,014 new households projected over the period, some 3,358 are proposed to be supplied through greenfield development. Urban limits therefore need to encompass sufficient additional land area to accommodate this level of greenfield development. Table 1 above outlines the anticipated additional households to meet that requirement in the locations that have been assessed as appropriate (as established during development of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy).

Any new greenfield growth areas within the urban limits must promote the overall transition to compact settlement philosophy adopted in the Regional Policy Statement; be economically, socially and environmentally sustainable; and provide for locational choice. The areas determined as inappropriate for further greenfield development at this time (for various reasons), have also been identified (also established during development of the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy).

POL UD3 CONTAINING URBAN ACTIVITIES WITHIN URBAN LIMITS

Except as provided for in POL UD4 (provision for Papakainga), district plans shall include policies and methods to avoid urban activities beyond urban limits established in accordance with POL UD2 within the Heretaunga Plains sub-region.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

In containing urban development, it is essential that urban activities are avoided beyond the urban limits established in response to POL UD2.

POL UD4 PROVISION FOR PAPAKAINGA and MARAE-BASED DEVELOPMENT

District plans shall enable papakainga and marae-based development outside existing urban areas and any urban limits, provided development:

a) meets general criteria (e) to (i) in POL UD1 and

b) is not in one of the areas listed in POL UD1 as inappropriate (unless further assessment confirms otherwise).

Principal Reasons and Explanation

Housing and associated activities around rural marae have been in existence for many years. Provision is made for accommodating growth through papakainga and marae-based development on ancestral land, which may fall outside urban limits. The continuation and expansion of papakainga and other marae based activities, subject to relevant statutory processes, gives effect to the requirements of sections 6(e), 7(a) and 8 of the Act and also recognises the statutory provisions in the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993. This policy provides tangata whenua with the potential to meet their housing and economic development needs.

ENCOURAGING INTENSIFICATION (HERETAUNGA PLAINS SUB-REGION)

POL UD5 INTENSIFICATION IN EXISTING URBAN AREAS

In the Heretaunga Plains sub-region, district plans shall include objectives, policies and methods promoting intensification of redevelopment within existing urban areas.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

An increasing proportion of the residential growth of the Heretaunga Plains sub-region is expected to take place through intensification, by redevelopment within existing urban areas, in the move towards more compact urban form for the Heretaunga Plains sub-region. Between 2015 and 2045, the proportion of growth accommodated through intensification is intended to increase from approximately 45% to 60% (refer Table 2 below).

Table 2: Proportion of Additional Households by Type of Development for the Heretaunga Plains Sub-Region 2015-2045

Type of Development	Proportion of Additional Households [No.]
Type of Development	2015-2025	2025-2035	2035-2045	2015-2045
Intensification	45% [1,872]	55% [1,502]	60% [674]	51% [4,048]
Greenfields	45% [1,872]	40% [1,092]	35% [394]	42% [3,358]
Rural Residential	10% [416]	5% [136]	5% [56]	7% [608]
Total	100% [4,160]	100% [2,730]	100% [1,124]	100% [8,014]

POL UD6 DENSITY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREAS

In the Heretaunga Plains sub-region, residential subdivision and development shall generally achieve the following minimum net densities, averaged over the whole of a Greenfield Growth Area or intensification development area:

a) 15 dwellings per hectare in Greenfield Growth Areas;

b) 20 dwellings per hectare for intensification development areas.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

The setting of desirable net densities reflects the promotion of more intensive developments, in transitioning to more compact urban form for the Heretaunga Plains sub-region. It is accepted that achievement of the above desirable net densities may be constrained by various limiting factors, such as orientation, topography and geology, which may lead to areas achieving lower or higher density yields. However, it is expected that developments will set out to achieve these minimum net densities where possible, and that they will be achieved overall.

PROVISION FOR BUSINESS (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL) LAND (HERETAUNGA PLAINS SUB-REGION)

POL UD7 BUSINESS LAND CONTAINMENT

In the Heretaunga Plains sub-region, district plans shall provide for business activities to 2045, in a manner which:

a) Reinforces the role of Napier and Hastings cities as the commercial and business core of the Heretaunga Plains, whilst supporting adequate capacity in defined rural towns and settlements for a range of day-to-day services and activities;

b) Promotes the utilisation and redevelopment of existing commercial land;

c) Promotes the utilisation and redevelopment of existing industrial land, and provides sufficient additional greenfields industrial land on an uptake basis;

d) Utilises existing infrastructure availability, capacity and quality;

e) Avoids unnecessary encroachment onto the versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains;

f) Protects existing and future communities from reverse sensitivity issues; and

g) Ensures close proximity to labour supply, major transport hubs and multi-modal transport networks.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

In achieving a more compact urban settlement pattern, the emphasis should be on utilising and redeveloping existing commercial and industrial land to accommodate business growth, in the first instance. This will ensure efficient utilisation of existing and planned infrastructure, minimisation of reverse sensitivity issues, and efficiencies in utilising the presence of existing labour supply. Across the Heretaunga Plains sub-region there is potential to provide for most anticipated new commercial activity within existing zoned commercial land through redevelopment and uptake of existing commercially-zoned land to 2045. However, there is some expectation that additional industrial land may be required at some point during that period, depending on uptake.

Any provision for new business land should be focussed around existing infrastructure to minimise public costs and in particular to achieve integration with transport networks. Phasing or sequencing of business land for development is not necessary provided that a ready supply is available, as it is expected that the market will dictate its rate of development.

INTEGRATING LAND USE PATTERNS WITH SIGNIFICANT INFRASTRUCTURE (HERETAUNGA PLAINS SUB-REGION)

POL UD8 SEQUENCING

In the Heretaunga Plains sub-region, district plans shall provide for the strategic integration of infrastructure and development through the staged release of new Greenfield Growth Areas.

The sequencing of development for Greenfield Growth Areas shall be based on the following criteria:

a) Availability and costs of infrastructure services (water, wastewater, stormwater and transport);

b) The operational capacity of strategic infrastructure (particularly strategic transport networks);

c) The accessibility and capacity of social infrastructure including community, education and recreation facilities and public open space;

d) The sustainable management of natural and physical resources;

e) Balanced supply and locational choice across the sub-region; and

f) Employment opportunities.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

The market has not always delivered infrastructure or a development pattern in a way that is efficient and cost-effective for the community. Addressing the timing and sequencing of development is designed to ensure, within broad limits, that development proceeds in a way that gives infrastructure service providers time to match demand, and the ability to fund that service delivery, and also to ensure sufficient locational choice. The overall purpose is to provide a broad framework that signals to the market the importance of integrating public and private development decisions.

POL UD9 STRUCTURE PLANS

In the Heretaunga Plains sub-region, development of urban activities within Greenfield Growth Areas shall occur in accordance with a comprehensive Structure Plan. Structure Plans shall be prepared when it is proposed to amend the district plan, and shall be included in the district plan to provide for urban activities.

Structure Plans shall:

a) Be prepared as a single plan for the whole of a Greenfield Growth Area;

b) Be prepared in accordance with the matters set out in POL11 (urban design matters);

c) Show indicative land uses, including:

i. principal roads and connections with the surrounding road network and relevant infrastructure and services;

ii. land required for stormwater treatment, retention and drainage paths;

iii. any land to be set aside for business activities, recreation, community facilities, environmental or landscape protection or enhancement, or set aside from development for any other reason; and

iv. pedestrian walkways, cycleways, and potential public passenger transport routes both within and adjoining the area to be developed;

d) Identify significant natural, cultural and historic or heritage features.

In developing Structure Plans, supporting documentation should address:

a) The infrastructure required, and when it will be required to service the development area;

b) How development may present opportunities for improvements to existing infrastructure provision;

c) How effective provision is made for a range of transport options and integration between transport modes;

d) How strategic infrastructure is provided for;

e) How effective management of stormwater and wastewater discharges is to be achieved;

f) How significant natural, cultural and historic or heritage features and values are to be protected and/or enhanced;

g) Any other aspects relevant to an understanding of the development and its proposed zoning.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

Structure Plans provide a mechanism for integrating urban development with infrastructure, making the best use of existing infrastructure, and identifying and providing for the additional infrastructure required to meet the needs of incoming residents and businesses. They also provide the mechanism for integrating new development with existing urban areas, ensuring urban growth is accommodated in a sustainable way, and that all constraints are investigated and addressed or protected at the time of initial zoning for urban purposes.

REZONINGS and OTHER PROPOSALS FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT (REGION)

POL UD10 REZONING FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Any rezoning for the development of urban activities within the Region should be accompanied by a Structure Plan for inclusion in the District Plan, in accordance with the matters in POL UD9.

POL UD11 MATTERS TO HAVE REGARD TO

In preparing or assessing any rezoning, Structure Plans, or other provisions for the urban development of land, territorial authorities shall have regard to:

a) The principles of the New Zealand Urban Design Protocol (Ministry for the Environment, 2005);

b) Good, safe connectivity within the area, and to surrounding areas, by a variety of transport modes, including motor vehicles, cycling, pedestrian and public transport, and provision for easy and safe transfer between modes of transport;

c) Location within walkable distance to community, social and commercial facilities;

d) Provision for a range of areas of residential densities and lot sizes, with higher residential densities located within walking distance of commercial centres;

e) Provision for the maintenance and enhancement of water in waterbodies, including appropriate stormwater management facilities to avoid downstream flooding and to maintain or enhance water quality;

f) Provision for sufficient and integrated open spaces and parks to enable people to meet their recreation needs, with higher levels of public open space for areas of higher residential densities;

g) Protection and enhancement of significant natural, ecological, landscape, cultural and historic heritage features;

h) Provision for a high standard of visual interest and amenity;

i) Provision for people’s health and well-being through good building design, including energy efficiency and the provision of natural light;

j) Provision for low impact stormwater treatment and disposal;

k) Effective and efficient use of existing and new infrastructure networks, including opportunities to leverage improvements to existing infrastructure off the back of proposed development;

l) Location and operational constraints of existing and planned strategic infrastructure; and

m) Appropriate relationships in terms of scale and style with the surrounding neighbourhood.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

These matters provide general guidance to territorial authorities and developers involved in the preparation and assessment of urban developments, recognising that good urban design will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of urban areas – both in terms of quality of life, and the efficient and effective provision of infrastructure and community services. These matters are considered especially important in achieving quality urban environments given the policy direction towards more intensive development.

POL UD12 SERVICING OF DEVELOPMENTS

Territorial authorities shall ensure development is appropriately and efficiently served for the collection, treatment, disposal or re-use of sewage and stormwater, and the provision of potable water by:

a) Avoiding development which will not be serviced in a timely manner to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on the environment and human health; and

b) Requiring these services to be designed, built, managed or upgraded to maximise their ongoing effectiveness.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

Appropriate provision for sewerage, stormwater and potable water infrastructure is essential to people’s wellbeing, health and safety and to environmental health, as well as ensuring adverse effects on the receiving environment are avoided or mitigated. Developments must manage the disposal and treatment of sewage and stormwater recognising the receiving environment (its receiving capacity, and limitations in terms of environmental quality). Servicing should be considered early in the development process. This will ensure that appropriate decisions are made as to how servicing is to be achieved, whether the proposed development is appropriate, and what site limitations may exist. This also enables consideration of water conservation and water efficiency methods.

[Refer also POL18(d) (Chapter 3.8 – Groundwater Quality) re: connections to reticulated systems]

DISCOURAGING RURAL RESIDENTIAL and LIFESTYLE DEVELOPMENT (HERETAUNGA PLAINS SUB-REGION)

POL UD13 RURAL RESIDENTIAL and LIFESTYLE DEVELOPMENT

District plans shall include policies and methods discouraging or avoiding further rezoning for rural residential purposes or lifestyle development outside existing rural residential zones in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

Similarly to urban development, rural residential or lifestyle development can also act to remove valuable land from agricultural production and can also impact on the productivity of other land, in particular through reverse sensitivity. Provision for rural residential and lifestyle development should be carefully managed to minimise fragmentation of the versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains. There is currently an excess supply of rural residential zoned areas, considered sufficient to cater for projected demand for rural residential lots through to 2045, and further rezoning for this purpose is considered unnecessary for the foreseeable future.

METHODS

Many of the policies in this chapter will be given effect to by Territorial Authorities through inclusion of appropriate provisions in district plans and in decisions on resource consents and designations. The policies in this chapter will also be given effect to through methods in the Regional Resource Management Plan and Regional Coastal Environment Plan.

The following are additional Non-Regulatory Methods applying to the Regional Council:

MET UD1 Advocacy

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council will:

a) Promote alignment of relevant regional and district plan provisions applying to land use management on the versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains.

b) Encourage the replacement of onsite wastewater disposal systems where there are multiple systems in close proximity, with reticulated wastewater systems.

c) Promote awareness of the effects of stormwater discharges on water quality.

d) Promote low impact urban design and development (LIUDD).

e) Encourage the adoption of land based mitigation of stormwater, including the use of wetlands.

f) Advocate a whole-of-catchment approach to the management of water.

g) Promote development setbacks and buffer zones to protect natural character, natural physical processes, amenity and natural hazard mitigation.

h) Promote awareness of natural hazard risk, particularly risks associated with coastal erosion and inundation.

MET UD2 Monitoring and Review

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, in conjunction with the territorial authorities in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region, will update the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy on a regular basis through regular review of the information used, particularly in the forecasting of growth, funding of infrastructure and assumptions. As a minimum, monitoring of the demographic projections upon which HPUDS is based and projected actual uptake rates will be undertaken following each census. These reviews will feed back into monitoring the effectiveness of the Regional Policy Statement.

MET UD3 Cross Boundary Liaison/Collaboration

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council will:

a) Liaise and collaborate on cross boundary infrastructure issues.

b) Promote a collaborative approach to the sustainable management of versatile land.

c) Promote a collaborative approach to the management of the coastal environment.

MET UD4 Transportation Strategies

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council will ensure urban growth management feeds into and informs transportation strategies and funding – such as the Heretaunga Plains Transportation Study, regional transport strategies, and corridor studies.

MET UD5 Provision of Information and Services

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council will continue to monitor, research and map natural hazards, and review hazard and risk information, and provide information and guidance to territorial authorities on natural hazards and natural hazard risk.

[Refer also:

- POL5 and POL6 Non-Regulatory Methods (Chapter 3.5) re: land use conflicts

- POL55 Non-Regulatory Methods (Chapter 3.12) re: natural hazards

- Methods in Chapter 4 – sections 4.3 (Liaison with Territorial Authorities, 4.5 (Works and Services), 4.6 (Research and Investigation) and 4.7 (Monitoring)

- POL56 Non-Regulatory Methods (Chapter 3.13) re: TA liaison and provision of information in relation to regional infrastructure]

ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS

AER UD1

Availability of sufficient land to accommodate population and household growth, as and where required, while retaining versatile land for existing and foreseeable future primary production.

AER UD2

Balanced supply of affordable residential housing and locational choice in the Heretaunga Plains sub-region.

AER UD3

More compact, well-designed and strongly connected urban areas.

AER UD4

Napier and Hastings retained as the primary urban centres for the Heretaunga Plains sub-region.

AER UD5

Encroachment of urban activities (residential, commercial, industrial) onto the versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains is confined to defined greenfield growth areas within specified urban limits.

AER UD6

The retention, as far as is reasonably practicable, of the versatile land of the Heretaunga Plains for existing and foreseeable future primary production.

AER UD7

Efficient utilisation of existing infrastructure investment.

AER UD8

Increased use of active transport modes (public transport, cycling, walking), reduced dependency on the private motor vehicle and reduced energy use.

AER UD9

Planned provision for, and protection of, infrastructure to support existing development and anticipated urban growth in defined growth areas.

AER UD10

No reduction in groundwater and surface water quality and habitat health as a result of urban growth.

AER UD11

Urban growth is avoided in areas identified as being at unacceptable risk from natural hazard (flooding, coastal inundation, coastal erosion, liquefaction, land instability).

Text Box: Attachment 2- ‘Draft Wastewater Change’

Wastewater Systems in Unsewered Settlements

ISSUES

1. The potential public health and environmental risks from non-reticulated wastewater systems in unsewered settlements in Hawke's Bay.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

[yet to be drafted]

OBJECTIVE

OBJ WW1 PUBLIC HEALTH and THE ENVIRONMENT

Adverse effects on public health and on the quality of water in rivers, lakes, wetlands, coastal waters and groundwater bodies arising from the collection, treatment and disposal of wastewater in existing unsewered settlements, are avoided, remedied or mitigated.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

[yet to be drafted]

[Refer also:

· OBJ UD4 and OBJ UD5 re: integration of land use with significant infrastructure]

POLICIES

POL WW1 MANAGING CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

Cumulative effects of discharges into or onto land from non-reticulated wastewater systems in unsewered settlements will be managed by:

a) Assessing wastewater servicing requirements in any rezoning proposals, structure plans and growth management strategies;

b) Implementing accreditation schemes for on-site wastewater system manufacturers, designers, installers and maintenance service providers;

c) Audit monitoring (operation and maintenance) for wastewater systems on residential properties within unsewered settlements, authorised by both resource consents and permitted activity rules;

d) Standard compliance monitoring requirements for wastewater systems on non-residential properties, authorised by resource consents.

Principal Reasons and Explanation

[yet to be drafted]

POL WW2 FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS

Audit monitoring will be used to determine whether further investigation is required of the wastewater systems and the potential public health and environmental effects that might be arising from the discharges. Other factors that will be considered in this determination include:

a) suspected wastewater contamination issues

b) size of the settlement

c) housing density

d) development pressure

e) physical constraints to on-site wastewater servicing (eg: soil condition/type, seasonal water table levels)

Principal Reasons and Explanation

[yet to be drafted]

[Refer also:

· POL UD8, POL UD9, POL UD10, POL UD11 and POL UD12 re: servicing urban development and integrating land use patterns with significant infrastructure]

METHODS

MET WW1 Regional Plan

In relation to land use activities having actual or potential adverse effects on the environment arising from the collection, treatment and disposal of wastewater, include objectives, policies and methods (including rules allowing, restricting or prohibiting discharges of wastewater) in regional plans.

MET WW2 Audit Schedule

Develop a schedule of unsewered settlements to be audited.

MET WW3 Funding Mechanisms

Implement a regional targeted rate scheme or similar to fund the audit monitoring and the further investigation work.

MET WW4 Annual Plan

Use the special consultative procedure of the Annual Plan to consult on the need to do further investigation work in a particular unsewered settlement.

MET WW5 Research and Investigations

Undertake research and investigations using one or more of the following methods:

a) use of a model to establish potential risks to the environment and public health.

b) undertaking community consultation including with landowners, to determine the values of an area (e.g. recreational, cultural and environmental) and the preferred approach to address any problems in relation to these.

c) carrying out quadruple bottom line assessment to compare and rank wastewater servicing and treatment options such as onsite, private or public decentralised or centralised systems based on social, cultural, economic and environmental criteria.

MET WW6 Financial Incentives

Use financial incentives to encourage reticulation of existing unsewered settlements.

MET WW7 Advocacy

Where new development is proposed within or adjacent to existing unsewered settlements, advocate for decisions on rezoning, subdivision and land development proposals which fully integrate wastewater solutions for development in both the existing settlement and new proposal.

[Refer also:

· Methods in Chapter 4 – sections 4.3 (Liaison with Territorial Authorities), 4.4 (Economic Instruments), 4.5 (Works and Services), 4.6 (Research and Investigation) and 4.7 (Monitoring)]

ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS

AER WW1

Improved integrated management of non-reticulated wastewater systems in unsewered settlements in Hawke’s Bay.

AER WW2

Reduction in public health and environmental risks from non-reticulated wastewater systems in unsewered settlements in Hawke's Bay.

9 Glossary

Add the following terms:

In this Plan, the following terms have the meaning as described. Terms shown with an asterisk (*) have the meaning provided in the Interpretation section (s 2) of the Resource Management Act 1991.

· Heretaunga Plains sub-region

means the part of the Hawke's Bay region identified in Appendix Xa.

· Net Density

The number of lots or household units per hectare (whichever is the greater).

The area (ha) includes land for:

- Residential purposes, including all open space and on-site parking associated with residential development;

- Local roads and roading corridors, including pedestrian and cycle ways, but excluding State Highways and regional arterial roads;

- Local (neighbourhood) reserves.

The area (ha) excludes land that is:

- Stormwater retention and treatment areas;

- Geotechnically constrained (such as land subject to subsidence or inundation);

- Set aside to protect significant ecological, cultural, heritage or landscape values;

- Set aside for esplanade reserves or access strips that form part of a larger regional or sub-regional reserve network;

- For local community services and retail activities, or for schools, hospitals or other district, regional or sub-regional facilities.

· Social Infrastructure

Assets that accommodate social services such as health (hospitals), education (schools and universities), state housing, justice (police stations, courts and prisons), places of assembly and community recreation (for example, halls, sport stadiums and parks).

· Strategic Infrastructure

Those necessary facilities, services and installations which are of greater than local significance, and can include infrastructure that is nationally significant. The following are examples of strategic infrastructure:

- Strategic transport networks

- Hawke’s Bay Regional Airport

- Port of Napier

- Omarunui Regional Landfill

- Strategic telecommunications and radiocommunications facilities

- The Electricity Transmission Network and electricity distribution networks

- Renewable electricity generation activities

- Pipelines and gas facilities used for the transmission and distribution of natural and manufactured gas

- Public or community sewage treatment plants and associated reticulation and disposal systems;

- Public water supply intakes, treatment plants and distribution systems

- Public or community rural water storage infrastructure, including distribution systems

- Public or community drainage systems, including stormwater systems

- Flood protection schemes

- Other strategic network utilities.

· Strategic Transport Networks

Transport networks and operations of national or regional significance. These include the strategic road network including State Highway and major arterial roads (as defined in district plans and the Regional Land Transport Strategy) and the rail network, along with the region’s core public passenger transport operations and significant regional transport hubs such as the Hawke’s Bay Regional Airport and the Port of Napier.

· Structure Plan

A plan that guides the development (or redevelopment) of an area by showing proposed future development and land-use patterns, areas of open space, the layout and nature of infrastructure (including transportation links), and other key features for managing the effects of development.

· Urban Activities

- Residential activities at a density of more than one dwelling per 2500m² of site area;

- Commercial and industrial business, retailing and other commercial activities;

- Use of social infrastructure;

- Papakainga or other marae-based housing;

- Any other land use within the urban limits.

· Urban Limits

The outer extent of the areas within which urban activities are located or which are committed for future urban expansion.

· Versatile Land of the Heretaunga Plains

Contiguous, flat to undulating terrain within the Heretaunga Plains sub-region that acts collectively to support regionally (and nationally) significant intensive primary production and associated secondary services on the Heretaunga Plains, based around:

- an exceptionally high proportion of versatile Class 1-3 soils (comprising almost 90%);

- Class 7 soils that are internationally recognised as having very high value for viticultural production (comprising almost 7%);

- its close proximity to a cluster of national and international processing industries and associated qualified labour force; and

- its close proximity to the Port of Napier and other strategic transport networks providing efficient transport of produce.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environmental Management Committee

Wednesday 10 August 2011

SUBJECT: Special Consultative Process - Dangerous Dams Policy Review

REASON FOR REPORT

1. To seek approval to release the Proposed Dangerous Dams Policy and the Summary of Information for public consultation in accordance with the Building Act 2004.

2. The Building Act 2004 (the Act) specifies that the policy must be adopted in accordance with the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Background

3. The Act gave Regional Authorities (Regional Councils and Unitary Authorities) responsibilities pertaining to large dams^{^[2]}. As well as requiring building consents, codes of compliance etc, the Act introduced a dam safety regime that applies to existing dams and new dams, once commissioned.

4. One of the provisions of the dam safety scheme required Regional Authorities to develop a Dangerous Dam policy and review the policy at intervals of not more than five years. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council adopted it’s first dangerous dam policy in October 2006. It is therefore time to review the policy.

5. Amendments to the Act in 2008 introduced two additional categories of dam; earthquake-prone and flood-prone. Section 161 of the Act also requires Hawke’s Bay Regional Council to develop a policy on these categories of dam in conjunction with the dangerous dam policy.

o The Act requires the policies to state:

o The approach the regional authority will take in performing its functions

o The regional authority’s priorities in performing those functions, and

o How the policy will apply to heritage dams.

o The Proposed Dangerous Dams Policy 2011 (Statement of Proposal) is attached as Attachment 1.

6. When the initial dangerous dams policy was developed in 2006, the requirements of the Act were relatively new and regulations prescribing the standards and criteria for the dam safety scheme were still being formulated. The 2006 policy was drafted in a broad manner to take account of the standards and criteria that would eventually be set in regulation.

7. The 2011 proposed policy has the same intent as the 2006 policy in that it aims to minimise potential risk to people and property and it provides information on how dams will be assessed and what action will be taken.

Definitions

8. The Act defines a dam as dangerous if it is a high or medium potential impact dam (as defined by regulations); and

8.1. is likely to fail –

8.2. in the ordinary course of events; or

8.3. in a moderate earthquake (as defined by regulations); or

8.4. in a moderate flood (as defined by regulations).

9. An earthquake-prone dam and a flood prone dam are also high or medium potential impact dams (as defined by regulations); and

9.1. is likely to fail –

9.2. in an earthquake threshold event (as defined by regulations); or

9.3. in a flood threshold event (as defined by regulations);.

10. Regulations defining a high and medium potential impact dams have been developed. However, there are still no regulations prescribing the standards and criteria for moderate earthquake, moderate flood, an earthquake threshold event or a flood threshold event.

11. In July 2012, regulations come into force requiring large dam owners to undertake an assessment of the potential impact of their dam. If the dam is a medium or high potential impact dam the dam owner must develop a dam safety assurance programme and send Hawke’s Bay Regional Council an annual dam compliance certificate.

Proposed Policy Approach

12. The proposed policy takes a more proactive approach to identifying dangerous, earthquake-prone or flood-prone dams than the 2006 policy. In identifying dams of concern, the policy proposes to investigate dams:

12.1. That have not complied with the requirement to supply a complying annual compliance certificate, or

12.2. Where complaints have been received, or

12.3. Where through other related work (such as undertaking compliance work), Hawke’s Bay Regional Council becomes concerned about a dam.

13. Where a dam has been identified as potentially dangerous, earthquake-prone or flood-prone, further investigations will be undertaken by Hawke’s Bay Regional Council in conjunction with the dam owner to establish whether the dam meets the dangerous, earthquake-prone or flood-prone criteria.

14. If a dam is deemed to be dangerous, earthquake-prone or flood-prone Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (with the dam owner) will take action to reduce or remove the danger. The range of actions proposed varies depending on the risk and potential impact should the dam fail.

15. At each stage of the process, the proposed policy allows dam owners to dispute Hawke’s Bay Regional Council’s assessment of the dam and provide information to Hawke’s Bay Regional Council that may influence the assessment.

16. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council also has the ability to recover costs for inspection work under the policy.

Communication

17. The required special consultative procedure on the review of the Dangerous Dams Policy will be run in conjunction with consultation on the Proposed Navigation Safety Bylaws Review.

18. A public notice will be published on 1 September 2011.

19. The Statement of Proposal and the Summary of Information (Attachment 2) will be included on the Council website.

20. The submission period will run concurrently with the Proposed Navigation Safety Bylaws review between 1 September 2011 and 15 October 2011.

21. The full Statement of Proposal will be sent to all large dam owners in the Hawke’s Bay region, all national dam owners who have expressed interest in Councils previous policy, the regions territorial local authorities, as well as interest groups such as Irrigation New Zealand, Federated Farmers, Historic Places Trust, and the New Zealand Society on Large Dams.

National Consistency

22. In order to improve national consistency within regional government policy, regional authorities have worked collaboratively while developing dam policy. This Proposed Dangerous Dams Policy is a duplication of the final policy recently released by Greater Wellington and is also being used as a basis for other regional council’s policies.

23. It is important to acknowledge the work produced by Paula Hammond of Greater Wellington Regional Council and the reduced cost to this Council by being allowed to use Greater Wellingtons final policy.

24. By using Greater Wellington’s final policy, it is expected that the majority of national interested parties will support this Councils proposed policy. This assumption is based on those national interested parties’ views having been reflected in the Greater Wellington policy.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

25. The recommendations in this paper cover the proposal to carry out a special consultative process for the Proposed Dangerous Dams Policy. This special consultative process is in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Environmental Management Committee recommends that Council approve:

1. The content of the Summary of Statement of Proposal and the Statement of Proposal for the Proposed Dangerous Dams Policy.

2. The proposed consultation process and timeline as outlined in paragraphs 17-21 above.

Ian Lilburn

Environmental Officer, Pollution Response

Bryce Lawrence

Manager Compliance & Harbours

Darryl Lew

Group Manager

Resource Management

Attachment/s

1. Proposed Dangerous Dams Policy 2011	Under Separate Cover
2. Summary of Information for Dangerous Dams	Under Separate Cover

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environmental Management Committee

Wednesday 10 August 2011

SUBJECT: Strategic Approach to Wetland Management

REASON FOR REPORT

1. This agenda item will inform Council on the value of wetlands as they relate to Council’s strategic goals and provide an update on how Council is currently fulfilling obligations in respect to these goals. The report further discusses limitations in our current approach to wetland management and provides rationale for the creation of a regional wetland inventory.

Background

2. The vast majority of New Zealand’s wetlands have been drained or irretrievably modified for coastal land reclamation, farmland, flood control, and the creation of hydro-electricity reservoirs. This occurred mostly between 1920 and 1980 but still continues to a limited degree in some areas (MfE, 1997).

Wetland Values

3. Wetlands perform vital ecosystem services such as improving water quality and mitigating against land use change (demonstrated high capacity for stripping nutrients), reducing flood risks (by buffering the intensity of runoff), retaining water in the landscape (thereby improving resilience to drought) and acting as carbon sinks. Wetlands have high biodiversity values by supporting a greater diversity of native birds, fish, invertebrates and plants than most other habitats. Wetlands are also of cultural and spiritual significance to Maori and can have very high educational & recreational values.

Policy

4. Wetlands are a ‘waterbody’ under the RMA. That means the same decision-making powers and responsibilities applicable to rivers, lakes, streams and aquifers also apply to wetlands. The RMA does not automatically protect wetlands nor require their preservation. Nevertheless, councils must consider the values of wetlands and effects of activities on wetlands when preparing plans and making decisions on resource consent applications. Those considerations have been significantly strengthened by the 2011 National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management with the objective that:

4.1. The overall quality of fresh water within a region is maintained or improved while:

4.2. protecting the quality of outstanding freshwater bodies and

4.3. protecting the significant values of wetlands.”

5. A proposed National Policy Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity, while yet to be finalised, also provides a strengthened focus and direction on the indigenous biodiversity values of wetlands.

6. Amongst many objectives and policies in the Regional Policy Statement, Objective 15 is “the preservation and enhancement of remaining areas of significant indigenous vegetation, significant habitats of indigenous fauna and ecologically significant wetlands.” (The RPS states non-regulatory methods will be the primary means for achieving preservation and enhancement of ecologically significant wetlands and the relevant overall anticipated environmental result being:

6.1. “no further loss of ecologically significant wetlands where the indicator is the extent of wetlands in the region using the Council’s GIS data sources”.

7. The Department of Conservation prepared a report (Adams, 1995), which selected the ten “best” wetlands in Hawke’s Bay that would benefit from restoration and enhancement work. Council established policy for each of these wetlands in the mid 1990’s with the aim of preventing further degradation and enhancing biodiversity values in line with Objective 15 of the RPS. This has been achieved through taking direct ownership and / or management responsibility of wetlands or through advocacy - educating and encouraging existing owners to enhance their wetlands. However, the RRMP’s ‘priority’ wetlands represent only a very small percentage of wetland ecosystems that currently exist across Hawke’s Bay.

SUMMARY OF COUNCIL’S WETLAND ACTIVITIES

Engineering

8. Council has been conducting ecological restoration and enhancement works along the regions’ waterways, including enhancement or creation of riparian wetlands. Major projects along Te Karamu Stream, Plantation Drain, Taipo Stream, the Ngaruroro River and the Tutaekuri River all include a wetlands component. In many cases, Council is creating wetlands, either as habitat or to serve as filtration devices for the waterway. The Ngaruroro Ecological Management and Enhancement Plan (EMEP) and the upcoming Tutaekuri (EMEP) make specific recommendations towards preservation or creation of existing and potential wetlands along these rivers.

Biosecurity

9. Biosecurity are actively providing advice and support to community groups for pest control on a number of the regions wetlands with a particular emphasis on Opoutama and Whakaki.

Operations

10. Of the ten priority wetlands, Council now have full management responsibility for Pekapeka Swamp and the Waitangi wetland complex. Council also manages the Tukituki Estuary for ecological enhancement. These three wetlands, totalling 398ha, are referred to as the “Council owned wetlands”. Their protection and enhancement has been guided through a series of five year management plans drafted in consultation with the local community. The first plan was implemented in 1998 for the Pekapeka Swamp. Management outcomes for these wetlands have evolved over time and now include enhancing their open space and champion values as well as ecological enhancement.

Land Management

11. Land Management retains an advocacy and advisory role in promoting the preservation and enhancement of wetlands across the wider region. These programmes help to fulfil Council’s obligations to wetland environments under the RMA and resulted from a realisation that significant gains could be made working with farmers to protect wetlands on their properties.

12. The current RLS policy can provide a grant for on farm wetland projects where these provide wide benefit for water quality, ecosystem and biodiversity enhancement. The programme has been very popular and has been fully subscribed in some years.

13. To date the RLS has funded 138 ‘on farm wetland’ projects on no fewer than 110 properties. $496,748 of grant has been allocated. When combined with landowner contributions, the total value of these projects exceeds $1.3 million.

14. In 2005 a separate grant category for ‘significant wetlands’ was introduced through the RLS. Since 2005, 33 significant wetland projects, on 22 properties have been funded to the value of $230,812..

15. Landowners applying for a ‘significant wetland’ grant are required to have a management plan and covenant for the wetland concerned. The eligibility of a project for significant wetland funding is to a degree open to interpretation. The need for a more prescriptive and informed assessment has been identified.

RESOURCE SCIENCE

16. The Resource Science section has undertaken monitoring to assess the effectiveness of the management actions on the wetlands identified in the RRMP (2006). This is the only wetland monitoring that the Regional Council has undertaken. Information from these surveys is used to report on the state of the regions wetlands to fulfil Council’s State of Environment reporting obligations.

17. A review of the current wetland monitoring and enhancement programme was carried out in 2009 with the aim of:

17.1. Assessing how well the current programme addresses our objectives and policies in the RRMP & RCEP;

17.2. Looking at how well our programme fits with national protocols; and

17.3. Addressing how the current programme can be developed to provide a more comprehensive and representative monitoring programme that will report on the state of Hawke’s Bay wetlands.

18. From the findings of the review, the current monitoring strategy does not allow council to effectively report on the true state of the regions wetlands. This is due to the fact that only the priority wetlands, representing only a small percentage of Hawke’s Bay wetlands are monitored and the full spectrum of wetlands (extent and type) within the region are not considered or documented.

FUTURE STRATEGIC DIRECTION

19. To adequately identify the region’s wetland assets and allow wetland’s specific values to be determined, and support prioritisation of Council investment through the RLS as well as being able to effectively monitor the state of the regions wetlands, development of a comprehensive inventory of Hawke’s Bay wetlands is recommended.

20. The inventory would consist of a GIS database that utilises new techniques and approaches to mapping wetlands via aerial mapping. This would provide Council with detailed information to classify wetlands. This would then be used as a basis to assess the wetland for its ecological, cultural, social and economic values thus enabling a more strategic approach to how we manage our wetland assets outside of the ten priority wetlands already recognised in the RPS. The GIS wetland inventory database would provide the tool required under Objective 15 of the RPS – to identify “the extent of wetlands in the region using the Council’s GIS data sources”.

21. Using the overall strategic goals of a vibrant community, a prosperous region and a clean and healthy environment, the wetland inventory will assist with these objectives under the following goals:

Strategic Goal	Objective
Water Futures	Investigating mechanisms for valuing water bodies.
Land Use Change	Informing mitigation of land use changes in the region Develop financial competencies to improve land management advice Investigate options for integrating carbon sequestration with other land uses
Climate Change	Identify potential opportunities arising from climate change
Open Space	Fulfil open space needs in partnership with the Department of Conservation, Territorial authorities and private landowners where appropriate
Partnerships with Maori	Acknowledge and explore issues impacting on the economic, environmental, social and cultural well being of Maori in Hawke’s Bay.

22. A complete inventory of the region’s wetlands would assist ongoing Council programmes by:

22.1. Assisting the Land Management section in terms of targeting and managing applications through the RLS.

22.2. Providing a regionally representative sample of wetlands where long term monitoring can be set up enabling detection of regional trends and robust State of Environment reporting;

22.3. Providing an information resource of consent applications decisions;

22.4. Informing any future plan policy on areas for protection.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

23. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

23.1. Sections 97 and 98 of the Act do not apply as these relate to decisions that significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

23.2. Sections 83 and 84 covering special consultative procedure do not apply.

23.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of the Council’s policy on significance.

23.4. Section 80 of the Act covering decisions that are inconsistent with an existing policy or plan does not apply.

23.5. Council can exercise its discretion under Section 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Act and make a decision on this issue without conferring directly with the community or others having given due consideration to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be effected by or have an interest in the decisions to be made.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Environmental Management Committee:

1. Agree that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided.

2. Instruct staff to prepare a single ‘whole of Council’ strategic plan for the ongoing investigation, management and investment into the Hawke’s Bay region’s wetlands together with estimated costs for consideration in the 2012-2022 LTP process

Fiona Cameron

Data Analyst

Steve Cave

Environmental Manager Operations

Warwick Hesketh

Land Management Advisor

Gavin Ide

Team Leader Policy

Adam Uytendaal

Principal Scientist, Water Quality & Ecology

Graham Sevicke-Jones

Manager Enviromental Science

Campbell Leckie

Biosecurity Manager

Darryl Lew

Group Manager

Resource Management

Mike Adye

Group Manager

Asset Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

Climate change effects

Attachment 1

Table 1: Local government functions and possible climate change outcomes (MfE, 2008)

Function	Affected assets or activities	Key climate influences	Possible effects	Section in Table 2 giving type/explanation of effects
Water supply and irrigation	Infrastructure	Reduced rainfall, extreme rainfall events, and increased temperature	Reduced security of supply (depending on water source) Contamination of water supply	See Rivers, Groundwater, Water quality, Water availability, Coastal areas. (Note that there are also rainfall effects in areas dependent on rain water.)
Wastewater	Infrastructure	Increased rainfall	More intense rainfall (extreme events) will cause more inflow and infiltration into the wastewater network. Wet weather overflow events will increase in frequency and volume Longer dry spells will increase the likelihood of blockages and related dry weather overflows	See Drainage
Stormwater	Reticulation Stopbanks	Increased rainfall Sea-level rise	Increased frequency and/or volume of system flooding Increased peak flows in streams and related erosion Groundwater level changes Saltwater intrusion in coastal zones Changing flood plains and greater likelihood of damage to properties and infrastructure	See Rivers, Drainage, Coastal areas
Roading	Road network and associated infrastructure (power, telecommunications, drainage)	Extreme rainfall events, extreme winds, high temperatures	Disruption due to flooding, landslides, fallen trees and lines Direct effects of wind exposure on heavy vehicles Melting of tar	See Drainage, Natural hazards
Planning/ policy development	Management of development in the private sector Expansion of urban areas Infrastructure and communications planning	All	Inappropriate location of urban expansion areas Inadequate or inappropriate infrastructure, costly retrofitting of systems	See particularly Rivers, Groundwater, Drainage, Coastal areas, Natural hazards
Land management	Rural land management	Changes in rainfall, wind, and temperature	Enhanced erosion Changes in type/distribution of pest species Increased fire risk Reduction in water availability for irrigation Changes in appropriate land use Changes in evapo-transpiration	See Water availability, Erosion, Biodiversity, Biosecurity, Natural hazards
Water management	Management of watercourses/lakes/ wetlands	Changes in rainfall and temperature	More variation in water volumes possible Reduced water quality Sedimentation and weed growth Changes in type/distribution of pest species	See Rivers, Lakes, Wetlands, Water quality, Drainage, Erosion, Biosecurity
Coastal management	Infrastructure Management of coastal development	Temperature changes leading to sea-level changes Extreme storm events	Coastal erosion and flooding Disruption in roading, communications Loss of private property and community assets Effects on water quality	See Coastal areas, Natural hazards
Civil defence and emergency management	Emergency planning and response, and recovery operations	Extreme events	Greater risks to public safety, and resources needed to manage flood, rural fire, landslip and storm events	See Natural hazards
Biosecurity	Pest management	Temperature and rainfall changes	Changes in range of pest species	See Biosecurity, Biodiversity
Open space and community facilities management	Planning and management of parks, playing fields and urban open spaces	Temperature and rainfall changes Extreme wind and rainfall events	Changes/reduction in water availability Changes in biodiversity Changes in type/distribution of pest species Groundwater changes Saltwater intrusion in coastal zones Need for more shelter in urban spaces	See Groundwater, Drainage, Water availability, Biodiversity, Coastal areas
Transport	Management of public transport Provision of footpaths, cycleways, etc.	Changes in temperatures, wind and rainfall	Changed maintenance needs for public transport (road, rail) infrastructure Disruption due to extreme events	See Drainage, Natural hazards
Waste management	Transfer stations and landfills	Changes in rainfall and temperature	Increased surface flooding risk Biosecurity changes Changes in ground water level and leaching	See Biosecurity, Natural hazards
Energy	Transmission lines	Extreme wind, high temperatures	Outages from damaged lines	See Natural hazards

Table 2: Sensitivity of natural resources to present climate and climate change (MfE, 2008)

Natural resource	Key climate influence	Impacts of climate change	Present sensitivity to climate
Rivers	Rainfall	River flows likely to, on average, increase in the west and decrease in the east of New Zealand More intense precipitation events would increase flooding (by 2070 this could be from no change, up to a fourfold increase in the frequency of heavy rainfall events) Less water for irrigation in northern and eastern areas Increased problems with water quality	Strong seasonal, interannual and interdecadal fluctuations
Lakes	Temperature and rainfall	Lake levels likely to increase, on average, in western and central parts of New Zealand, and possibly to decrease in some eastern areas Higher temperatures and changes in rainfall, particularly in areas such as the Rotorua Lakes, could result in a range of effects, including: · an increased degree of eutrophication and greater frequency of algal blooms · altering of lake margin habitats, including wetlands, with either increased or decreased rainfall · negative impacts on aquatic macrophytes, particularly native species, if lake levels fall · a decrease in the range of trout with increased water temperatures · increased ranges of pest species (eg, carp), placing even more pressure on aquatic ecosystems	Seasonal and interannual fluctuations
Wetlands	Temperature, rainfall, sea-level rise	Coastal and inland wetlands would be adversely affected by temperature increases, rainfall increases or decreases and sea-level rise	Many already under threat
Groundwater	Rainfall	Little change to groundwater recharge is expected in eastern New Zealand, but increased demand for water is likely Some localised aquifers in northern and eastern regions could experience reduced recharge. For example, small coastal aquifers in Northland would be under threat from reduced rainfall	Seasonal fluctuations; but at present, generally stable over the longer term
Water quality	Temperature and rainfall	Reduced rainfall and increased temperatures could have significant impacts on the quality of surface water resources in northern and eastern New Zealand Lower stream flows or lake levels would increase nutrient loading and lead to increased eutrophication	Most sensitive during summer months and in drier years
Drainage	Rainfall	Increased frequency of intense rainfall events could occur throughout New Zealand, which would lead to increased surface flooding and stormwater flows, and increased frequency of groundwater level changes	Natural year-to-year variation in the location and size of heavy rainfall events
Water availability	Rainfall	Decreases in rainfall, which are most likely in the north and east of New Zealand, coupled with increased demand, would lead to decreased security of water supply	Dry summers, or extended droughts
Erosion	Rainfall and wind	Increased rainfall in the west, and more intense rainfall events throughout New Zealand, could lead to increased soil erosion, including landslides	Intense rainfall events can arise with subtropical lows, and localised low pressure cells
Biodiversity	Temperature, rainfall, wind	Increased temperature, reduced rainfall and more frequent drying westerly winds (possible in the east) would lead to changes in distribution and composition of native forest ecosystems throughout New Zealand Most vulnerable will be fragmented native forests in the north and east of New Zealand An increased biosecurity risk, with invasive temperate and subtropical species, would also have negative impacts on native flora and fauna	Drought can have a severe impact, eg, some native vegetation was adversely affected in Hawke’s Bay with the 1997/98 El Niño drought
Biosecurity	Temperature and rainfall	Even small increases in temperature will significantly increase the incidence of pest outbreaks in New Zealand, particularly in the North Island and the north of the South Island Both existing and potential new plant and animal pests could become established more widely, even with a slight increase in temperature	Pest outbreaks can be triggered by specific weather events, or from steadily changing conditions, eg, spread of Tasmanian grass grub in Hawke’s Bay was triggered by the warmer, drier conditions in the late 1980s and early 1990s
Coastal areas	Sea-level rise, storm frequency and intensity, wave climate, sediment supply	Effects of sea-level rise and other changes will vary regionally and locally Coastal erosion is likely to be accelerated where it is already occurring and erosion may become a problem over time in coastal areas that are presently either stable or are advancing	Short- and medium-term fluctuations in sea levels (ie, up to about 30 years) are dominated by ENSO and IPO variations
Air	Temperature, rainfall, wind	Increased temperatures in Auckland might increase photochemical smog Fewer cold nights may reduce particulate smog problems in winter in affected towns and cities
Natural hazards	Temperature, rainfall, wind	The general indications are that New Zealand could experience more climatic extremes in the future. These could include: · more intense rainfall events, and associated flooding, in most parts of the country · more frequent and/or intense droughts in the east · more damaging windstorms · more heat waves · increased fire risk in drier eastern areas	There have been more frequent and intense El Niño events in recent decades, possibly associated with the IPO. The worldwide cost of extreme weather damage has increased owing to a mixture of climatic, economic and social factors

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environmental Management Committee

Wednesday 10 August 2011

SUBJECT: Ruataniwha Groundwater Model Scenarios

REASON FOR REPORT

1. This paper provides a summary of the development and results of the Ruataniwha groundwater predictive modelling (scenarios modelling).

Background

2. The Ruataniwha Basin is one of the main sources of water supply in Hawke’s Bay. Rivers and aquifers are highly inter-connected and thus, groundwater abstraction may significantly affect the surface water flow.

3. It is important to understand the relationship between groundwater and surface water and to predict the impact of water resources development on river flows and aquifer storage.

4. Four future scenarios for water resources management in the Ruataniwha Basin over the coming five years have been developed and simulated using the newly developed numerical model.

5. It must be emphasized that the four scenarios are hypothetical only and do not represent possible or recommended management options for the Basin.

6. The first scenario assumes a gradual increase of the actual abstracted water to reach consented volume by 2015. The current actual abstraction is estimated at 31% of the consented volume.

7. According to the proposed National Environmental Standards, the groundwater abstraction should not exceed 35% of annual average recharge. The long-term average recharge is estimated at 255 million m³ (MCM) per year. Therefore, the second scenario assumes gradual increase of groundwater abstraction from the current 10% of recharge to 35% of recharge in 2015.

8. The third scenario assumes gradual intensification of land-use from the current 7,000 ha to 13,000 ha over the coming five years.

9. The fourth scenario assumes no change in the current abstraction and examines when the system will stabilise i.e. reach a new steady state.

SCENARIO 1: Gradual increase in abstraction up to 100% of consented volume in 2015

10. According to scenario 1, the total loss in storage for the period from 2010 to 2015 is 17 MCM. This amount is added to the loss we already have for the period from 1990 to 2010, which is 66 MCM. This makes the total loss of storage 83 MCM.

11. The decline in rivers gain rate as a result of groundwater abstraction in scenario 1 is approximately 190L/s. This rate adds to the rate of decline at the end of 2010, which was 650 L/s. The overall decline in river gain is 840 L/s. On the other hand, the stream losses to the aquifer have slightly increased

12. The groundwater abstraction based on scenario 1 also shows affects on the springs flow. The decline in springs flow is approximately 46 L/s. This decline in springs flow adds to the 50 L/s, which has already occurred in the period 1990-2010. Thus, the total spring losses are 96 L/s.

SCENARIO 2: Gradual increase in abstraction up to 35% of recharge (Draft National Environmental Standard) in 2015

13. The loss of storage for the period from 2011 to 2015 is 53 MCM. This loss adds to the storage loss at the end of 2010, which was estimated at 66 MCM. Thus, the total storage loss from 1990 to 2015, based on scenario 2, is 119 MCM.

14. The decline in rivers gain rate as a result of groundwater abstraction is approximately 690L/s. This rate adds to the rate of decline at the end of 2010, which was 650 L/s. Thus, the overall decline in river gain from 1990 to 2015 is 1340 L/s. This is high, compared to the previous scenario. The stream losses to the aquifer have slightly increased.

15. The impact of groundwater abstraction on springs flow, based on scenario 2, is significant. The decline in springs flow is approximately 115 L/s. This decline in springs flow adds to the 50 L/s, which has already occurred in the period 1990-2010, making a total loss of 165 L/s.

SCENARIO 3: Gradual increase in abstraction to irrigate 13,000 ha in 2015

16. The loss of storage for the period from 2011 to 2015 is 24 MCM. This loss adds to the storage loss at the end of 2010, which was estimated at 66 MCM. Thus, the total storage loss from 1990 to 2015, based on scenario 3, is 90 MCM.

17. The decline in rivers gain rate as a result of groundwater abstraction is approximately 209 L/s. This rate adds to the rate of decline at the end of 2010, which was 600 L/s. Thus, the overall decline in river gain from 1990 to 2015 is 859 L/s. This decline in rivers flow is slightly higher than scenario 1. The stream losses to the aquifer have slightly increased.

18. The decline in springs flow is approximately 58 L/s, based on scenario 3. This decline in springs flow adds to the 50 L/s, which is resulted from the period 1990-2010, making a total loss of 108 L/s.

SCENARIO 4: No change in current use to see when the new “steady state” will be reached.

19. Scenario 4 shows that the loss of storage has been almost constant starting from 2011)until the end of simulation, in 2017. The loss of storage when the system stabilizes is 62 MCM. The later loss is composed of two components; the 66 MCM at the end of 2010 (resulting from the transient model) and 4 MCM increase in the storage over the period from 2010 to 2017. This increase in storage (or recovery) is a result of not increasing groundwater abstraction over time.

20. It was found that the rate of river gain and loss is almost stable, especially in the last few years of simulation, based on scenario 4. The average loss in stream gain rate at the end of 2017 is approximately 450 L/s. This total reduction of stream gain from aquifer is composed of two components: the total loss of 650 L/s at the end of 2010, and a recovery of 200 L/s by the end of 2017. The stream losses to the aquifer are almost constant.

21. Based on scenario 4, the spring flow has recovered (increased) by 30 L/s. Thus, the total spring flow loss at the end of scenario 4 simulation (year 2017) is 20 L/s. This decline in springs flow is the 50 L/s, which resulted from the period 1990-2010, and 30 L/s recovery.

SCENARIO RESULTS

Component	Models
Component	Transient⁽¹⁾	Scenario 1	Scenario 2	Scenario 3	Scenario 4
Time	1990-2010	2011-2015	2011-2015	2011-2015	2011-2017
Cumulative groundwater abstraction⁽²⁾	215	202	344	219	184
Average annual recharge	255	255	255	255	255
Cumulative Storage loss⁽²⁾	66	17	53	24	-4⁽³⁾
Average rate of reduction in stream gain	650 L/s	190 L/s	690 L/s	209 L/s	-200 L/s⁽³⁾
Average rate of reduction in spring flow	50 L/s	46 L/s	115 L/s	58 L/s	-30 L/s⁽³⁾

(1) This is based on the results of the transient model and presented here for comparison only.

(2) This is a cumulative over the indicated period.

(3) Negative values mean the system gains instead of losing.

All values are in million m³ per year, unless if it is mentioned otherwise.

CONCLUSION

22. Scenarios 1 and 3 were found to have less impact on the respective weather resources than scenario 2, with 17 and 24 MCM loss in storage for scenario 1 and 3; respectively. Scenario 2 results in a loss of storage of 53 MCM.

23. Scenarios 1 and 3 results in a reduction in stream flow of 190 and 209 L/s, respectively, while scenario 2 results in 690 L/s. Similarly, scenarios 1 and 3 results in decline of stream flow equals 46 L/s and 58 L/s; respectively.

24. Results of scenario 4 shows the system will stabilize in 2017, with a small recovery of storage and rivers gain, given all components of flow are constant. Scenario 4 results in a storage recovery of 4 MCM, rivers flow recovery of 200 L/s and springs flow recovery of 30 L/s.

25. The results of this study inform the policy and decision makers on the likely impact of each different scenario on the environment and to decide which management scenario is appropriate.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

26. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the Environmental Management Committee receives the report titled “Ruataniwha Basin Groundwater/ Surface water predictive Modelling”.

Husam Baalousha

Senior Groundwater Scientist

Graham Sevicke-Jones

Manager Enviromental Science

Darryl Lew

Group Manager

Resource Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

Council Update

Attachment 1

Statutory Advocacy Update

Received	TLA	Map Ref	Activity	Applicant/ Agency	Status	Current Situation
4 July 2011	NCC	7	Notice of Requirement The requirement is for a designation in respect of airspace protection in the vicinity of Hawke’s Bay Airport. The Notice of Requirement proposed to designate airspace in the vicinity of the Airport to ensure the safe operation of aircraft.	Hawke’s Bay Airport Limited	Notified	5 July 2011 · The designation replaces existing ‘flight path height control‘ provisions in the District Plan. · It will restrict the height of structures in the designated airspace and require approval from Hawke’s Bay Airport should any structure penetrate this airspace. · The designation relates to the extension of the main airport runway and is intended to provide certainty as to height limits for all properties within Napier City. · No impact on Regional Council’s resource management or asset management interests so no submission made.
29 June 2011	HDC	6	Plan Change 54 – Havelock North Village Centre The proposed Plan Change will establish a new Havelock North Village Centre Zone that has four distinct precincts – Retail, Employment, Mixed Use and Industrial.	HDC	Notified	1 July 2011 · The policy team has undertaken an assessment of the policies and rules contained in the Plan Change and found them to be consistent with the RRMP and HPUDS. · There is no reverse sensitivity, passenger transport or other issues that would be of interest to this council. · No submission made.
6 May 2011	WDC	5	Resource Consent – Subdivision The applicant seeks to subdivide Town Section 32 Mahia Township into two (2) Lots. The subject site sits immediately below Mokotahi on Newcastle Street, Mahia Beach.	Dardie Ormond Consultant – Dagg & Thorn	Non-notified	24 May 2011 · WDC has asked for comments from HBRC on the geo-technical report supplied by the applicant, the location of the proposed building in Coastal Hazard Zone 3 and if the Council perceived any issues with the proposed wastewater solution. · The Engineering team reviewed the geo-technical report and found that the Report appeared to be satisfactory though highlighted the fact that this Councils engineers are not experts in this field. · There are no rules in the RCEP that restrict construction of dwellings in CHZ3, such controls and regulation is exercised under the Building Act and Building Code. · Wastewater is able to be serviced from both proposed Lots. A reticulated sewerage scheme is to be provided to the Township in the near future. The Council commented that conditions should be included in the Consent to require connection to the scheme once it becomes available.
5 November 2010	NCC	4	Notice of Requirement – Te Awa Structure Plan Notice of requirement for designation to allow for the construction of public works in the Te Awa Structure Plan area by Napier City Council.	NCC	Notified by NCC	6 December 2010 · The Council’s Engineering Team has provided comment. The Engineering Team believes that the proposed second pump station is unnecessary due to sufficient infrastructure already available in that there is scope to utilise infrastructure previously built for the Cross Country drain. · A submission was made in general support for the designation subject to further assessment of stormwater pumping stations options. Council recommended that the construction of a further pumping station be delayed while alternatives could be considered
5 November 2010	NCC	4	Plan Change 6 – Te Awa Structure Plan The purpose of the plan change is to rezone the area from Main Rural to Main Residential and incorporate the outcomes sought in the Te Awa Structure Plan into the District Plan.	NCC	Notified by NCC	20 June 2011 · Council has received a Summary of Submissions from NCC. It is not considered necessary to make a further submission 6 December 2010 · The Engineering Team has provided comments. The proposed stormwater solution does not consider the principles of Low Impact Urban Design. · Council made submission supporting in-principle the application and also suggested some design principles that NCC could take into account when further developing the proposal. In particular the Council has recommended: 1. That decision making criteria and/or guidance be added that supports and encourages the principles of Low Impact Urban Design, and 2. That NCC develop a landscape plan that includes aspects to enhance the ecology, culture, recreation, health and safety along Willowbank Avenue and the Serpentine Drain drainage corridor.
9 September 2010	NCC	3	Resource Consent - Subdivision The applicant seeks to undertake a 2 Lot subdivision to create one (1) 0.178 hectare residential Lot (being proposed Lot 1) and a balance Lot which will be 3.31 hectares (being proposed Lot 2). The address for the subdivision is 45 Rogers Road, Bay View, legal description Lot 4 DP 7344.	Cindy McKinnie Consultant – Consult Plus	Notified Restricted Discretionary	24 May 2011 · Mediation between the applicant and NCC was held. Applicant will apply for certificate of compliance from HBRC for wastewater disposal. 21 February 2011 · Council joined as Party to Proceedings with the Environment Court opposing the applicant’s appeal that the NCC decision be overturned. 31 January 2011 · Received notice of an appeal by applicant against NCC decision seeking that the NCC decision to decline the application be overturned. 7 December 2010 · Application Hearing held on 24th November, Application declined by NCC. 8 October 2010 · HBRC lodged submission opposing application. Consent should be declined unless the proposed 2 residential lots are fully serviced or sufficient information is provided to show that adverse effects of on-site wastewater discharges (particularly in combination with the proposed soak-pit means of stormwater disposal), will be adequately avoided, remedied or mitigated. · Submission stated installation of a reticulated sewage system for the Bay View community to be a sustainable long-term solution for the treatment and disposal of wastewater. · Submission also seeks clarification of floor level for flooding risk also requested.
23 August 2010	NCC	2	Resource Consent – Subdivision The application seeks to subdivide 58 McElwee Street, Jervoistown Certificate of Tile HBM2/1351 into two separate lots.	Mr B. Joseph Consultant – Consult Plus	Notified Restricted Discretionary	1 August 2011 · Further mediation is scheduled on 4 August 2011. Councils position remains unchanged. 24 May 2011 · Mediation with the applicant and NCC to be held today. · Council staff will maintain the position that: o No further discharge of stormwater will be accepted into the Jervois Drain, and o The option of discharging stormwater via the Claudatos scheme is only viable if a number of conditions are met. 27 January 2011 · Council has become a party to the appeal lodged by the applicant under Section 274 of the Resource Management Act 1991. The Council is interested in all of the proceedings but in particular is interested in issues relating to the effects of increased site coverage and stormwater collection, treatment and disposal. 16 December 2010 · Council has received a Notice of Appeal from the applicant on the NCC decision. 17 November 2010 · Application was declined at Hearing held 17 November 2010 as it was decided that the creation of two 2000m²lots was contrary to the intent of the Napier District Plan. 20 September 2010 · HBRC lodged submission opposing application. · Reasons for submission include: o No provision for stormwater disposal and will likely result in adverse conditions in terms of flood levels and duration of flooding at a local level and the wider Jervoistown community. o Proposal to increase maximum site coverage from 10% to 25%. Concern that this will also increase adverse conditions in terms of flood levels and duration of flooding. · A 2009 report prepared by this Council (Jervoistown Drainage Analysis, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, April 2009) outlines the drainage issues and provides the conclusion that incremental development at Jervoistown will continue to result in reduced drainage standard for the existing houses. A copy of this report was provided to Napier CC shortly after its publication.
24 May 2010	NCC	1	Resource Consent - Subdivision The application seeks to subdivide an area of land currently zoned as main rural on 66 Franklin Road, Bay View into 6 lots and undertake earthworks.	Gerald Howe Consultant – Alan Petersen	Notified Restricted Discretionary	26 July 2011 · NCC Planning staff have informed HBRC that they are waiting on further information from the applicant. 2 August 2010 · Policy staff have met with the applicant’s consultant. Options and scenarios for wastewater consenting and servicing are under consideration. 14 July 2010 · Council submitted in opposition to the application seeking that the application be declined unless all of the 6 Lots were fully serviced.

[1] Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy, Adopted August 2010

[2] A large dam is defined as a dam that retains 3 or more metres depth, and holds 20 000 or more cubic metres volume of water or other fluid.

Agenda Item	Action	Person Responsible	Due Date	Status Comment
7	Proposed Onsite Wastewater Plan Change Policy to be developed, for dealing with consent renewals that fall within the ‘transition’ period Communication Strategy to be documented	Darryl Lew		Communication Strategy developed and emailed to all Councillors on 23 June 2011.
12	Update on Unwanted Agrichemical Collection Programme A media release to be prepared.	Darryl Lew		Media release sent out Monday 27 June.
14	General Business Makara Flood Protection Scheme An issue of the scheme being in need of maintenance was raised from within the community.	Mike Adye		Staff have met with the Makara Scheme liaison committee. Urgent repair work has been completed.
14	General Business Cartage of silt around Gibraltar Road The costs of carting the silt to the disposal site was raised as an issue from within the community.	Mike Adye		Staff have worked with CHBDC staff to resolve silt disposal issues.
14	General Business Membership of the Ruataniwha Stakeholder group There is an apparent gap in the Tukituki representation on the group, particularly irrigators from the lower catchment (mid and lower reaches of the river).	Andrew Newman		Ongoing – verbal Update at meeting

Notice Number:	4136
Year:	2011
Publication Date:	23 June 2011
Page Number:	2098
Title:	Resource Management (Measurement and Reporting of Water Takes) Notice 2011
Notice Text:	Resource Management (Measurement and Reporting of Water Takes) Notice 2011 Pursuant to section 360(2) of the Resource Management Act 1991, the Minister for the Environment makes the following notice. N o t i c e 1. Title-This notice is the Resource Management (Measurement and Reporting of Water Takes) Notice 2011. 2. Commencement-This notice comes into force on 24 June 2011. 3. Interpretation-In this notice, date for compliance means the date from which the Regulations apply to a permit under Regulation 13. 4. Scope-This notice provides for the application of the Resource Management (Measurement and Reporting of Water Takes) Regulations 2010 (the "Regulations") to any person who: (a) is or was the holder of a water permit which: (i) commenced before the Regulations commenced; and (ii) is or was due to expire before the relevant date for compliance in Regulation 13 (whether or not expiry occurred before the Regulations commenced); and (b) is or was granted a new water permit for the same activity after the Regulations commenced but prior to the relevant date for compliance in Regulation 13. 5. Revised application for certain permit holders-Despite Regulation 13, the Regulations apply to water permits held by the class of persons described in clause 3: (a) if the new water permit allows water to be taken at a rate of 20 litres/second or more, on and from 10 November 2012 or the date the new water permit commences (whichever is the later date); (b) if the new water permit allows water to be taken at a rate of 10 litres/second or more, but less than 20 litres/second, on and from 10 November 2014 or the date the new water permit commences (whichever is the later date); (c) if the new water permit allows water to be taken at a rate of 5 litres/second or more, but less than 10 litres/second, on and from 10 November 2016 or the date the new water permit commences (whichever is the later date). Dated at Wellington this 23rd day of June 2011. HON DR NICK SMITH, Minister for the Environment.

Item	Topic	Councillor / Staff
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.