Meeting of the Hawke's Bay Regional Council Maori Committee



Date:                 Tuesday 26 June 2012

Time:                10.15am


Council Chamber

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

159 Dalton Street





Item      Subject                                                                         Page


1.         Welcome/Notices/Apologies 

2.         Conflict of Interest Declarations

3.         Short Term Replacements  

4.         Confirmation of Minutes of the Maori Committee held on 24 April 2012

5.         Matters Arising from Minutes of the  Maori Committee held on 24 April 2012

Decision Items

6.         Maori Committee Appointments to other Council Committees

Information or Performance Monitoring

7.         Verbal Update by CEO

8.         Wairoa Affco Consent Appeal

9.         Verbal Tukituki Catchment Update

10.       Tukituki River Catchment Cultural Values and Uses Report

11.       Afforestation

12.       Verbal Report - Shingle Extraction

13.       Statutory Advocacy Update

14.       General Business  



Please Note - Pre Meeting for Māori Members of the Committee begins at 9 am

1.       Two hour on-road parking is available in Vautier Street at the rear of the HBRC Building.

2.       The public park in Vautier Street on the old Council site costs only $4 for all day parking. This cost will be reimbursed by Council.

3.       There are limited parking spaces (3) for visitors in the HBRC car park – entry off Vautier Street - it would be appropriate that the “Visitors” parks be available for the Members travelling distances from Wairoa and CHB

N.B. Any carparks that have yellow markings should NOT be used to park in.


Maori Committee  

Tuesday 26 June 2012

SUBJECT: Short Term Replacements        



1.      Council has made allowance in the terms of reference of the Committee for short term replacements to be appointed to the Committee where the usual member/s cannot stand.




That the Maori Committee :

That ______________  be appointed as member/s of the Maori Committee of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council for the meeting of Tuesday, 26 June as short term replacements(s) on the Committee for ________________





Viv Moule

Human Resources Manager



Andrew Newman

Chief Executive



There are no attachments for this report.   


Maori Committee  

Tuesday 26 June 2012

SUBJECT: Maori Committee Appointments to other Council Committees        



Reason for Report

1.      With the establishment of the Regional Planning Committee the Council has disestablished the Environmental Management and Asset Management and Biosecurity Committees.

2.      Any Council operational activities that would have previously gone to either of the two disestablished committees will now go to a new Committee, the Environment and Services Committee. The first meeting of this Committee will be on 15 August 2012.

3.      Accordingly the Maori Committee has been asked to nominate two representatives from the Maori Committee to sit on the new Environment and Services Committee.

4.      In addition, with the resignation of Jan Aspinall from the Maori Committee, the Committee needs to appoint a new member to represent the Maori Committee on the Corporate and Strategic Committee. Jan represented the Maori Committee on the Corporate and Strategic Committee along with the Chair of the Maori Committee.



That the Maori Committee recommends to Council that :

1.    That ............................................and appointed to represent the Maori Committee on the Environment and Services Committee.

2.    That...................................................... be appointed to replace Jan Aspinall as the Maori Committee’s representative on the Corporate and Strategic Committee.






Viv Moule

Human Resources Manager



Andrew Newman

Chief Executive



There are no attachments for this report.  


Maori Committee  

Tuesday 26 June 2012

SUBJECT: Wairoa Affco Consent Appeal         



Reason for Report

1.      This paper is to inform the Maori Committee of progress that has been made on the settlement of the appeal on the resource consent conditions of AFFCo Wairoa’s discharge permit. 


2.      A hearing was held on 22 and 23 June 2009 in relation to two resource consent applications to discharge wastewater and stormwater into the Wairoa River from the AFFCo Meatworks and fellmongery. These applications replaced existing resource consents held by AFFCo. Staff recommendations to the hearing panel, which was comprised of two councillors and Mr Morry Black, were to grant the applications with conditions, including those relating to effluent quantity and quality, ecological and health risk assessment monitoring, and reporting.

3.      After hearing all of the evidence, the hearing panel agreed with the staffs’ recommendations and granted the applications for a term expiring on 31 May 2025, with similar conditions to those recommended by staff.

4.      AFFCo Limited appealed the conditions of the resource consent authorising the discharge of wastewater to the Wairoa River.  The appeal objected to four conditions of the resource consent, specifically conditions 10, 17 (c), 20 and 28.  The relief sought by AFFCO related to annual reporting of wastewater discharge records, a relaxing of the ammonia concentration limit, and the deletion of conditions 20 and 28 which related to the faecal coliform concentration of the discharge. 

5.      Two parties joined the appeal as s 274 parties, being the Department of Conservation, and Mr David Renouf.

Wairoa Taiwhenua involvement in process

6.      The Wairoa Taiwhenua were one of nine parties that made submissions on the applications, which were publicly notified.  Six of the submitters opposed the application to discharge wastewater to the Wairoa River.  Two submissions were in support of the application, and one was neutral. 

7.      The Wairoa Taiwhenua submission opposed the application citing concerns about the impact of the discharge on the marine environment and ecology of the Wairoa River.  The submission requested a study be undertaken on the impact of the discharge on the river; more consultation with river users in advance of future resource consent applications; and discharge of wastewater to land (rather than the river) during summer months when the river is used for recreational purposes.

8.      A number of the Taiwhenua’s concerns were addressed by conditions that were included in the consent granted by the hearing panel.  Conditions 24, 25 and 27 required AFFCo to undertake a number of studies into the effects of the discharge on the Wairoa River.  Specifically these studies were to examine the effects of the discharge on dissolved oxygen concentrations in the river when the river bar is closed, a quantitative and qualitative assessment of the effect of the discharge on fish, and also an assessment of the effect of the nutrient concentration of the discharge on algae growth in the Wairoa River estuary.

9.      Condition 32 of the new consent requires the consent holder to establish a liaison group which is to include representatives from the Wairoa Taiwhenua (amongst other parties) and meet at least once every 12 months.  Condition 33 of the consent also requires the consent holder to invite liaison group representative(s) from the Taiwhenua to pre-arranged audit sampling undertaken by Regional Council staff.

10.    These conditions should help ensure that the Wairoa Taiwhenua remains involved with AFFCo and regularly engages with representatives from the company.

11.    Regarding the proposed discharge to land issue, AFFCo had investigated this option but were unable to acquire suitable land in proximity to the plant to make this a viable option for them.

12.    The Wairoa Taiwhenua did not appeal the hearing panel decision, nor did they join the appeal as a s 274 party.

Settlement of the appeal

13.    The following changes have been made to the consent conditions to address the points raised by AFFCo in their appeal:

13.1.    Condition 10: The condition has been changed to require information to be provided by AFFCo monthly if there is an exceedence of any of the parameters set in the consent, or at any other time upon request.  This change ensures that any exceedences are still reported, but decreases the additional work this condition requires when the discharge is occurring in accordance with the conditions of the consent.

13.2.    Condition 17(c): The effluent standard has been deleted, and a series of conditions (conditions 17A-17C) included which set an in-river total ammonia-nitrogen standard in the interim, and require AFFCo to carry out sampling to gather data that will allow an appropriate effluent standard to be identified for total ammonia-nitrogen that can be measured at the point of discharge.  A specific review condition has been included in the consent that allows an effluent standard for total ammonia-nitrogen to be inserted into the consent.

13.3.    Condition 20: This condition has been deleted. AFFCo has now undertaken a quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) which has quantified the potential health impact of the AFFCo discharge into the Wairoa River.  The QMRA found that the risk of illness as a result of the discharge was generally low but may occasionally be appreciable (such as when swimming occurs late on a summer day when the concentration of effluent is high).  The study found that Campylobacter is the pathogen of greatest potential concern in the discharge, and that it would be useful to quantify the magnitude of high concentrations of Campylobacter in the effluent, and feed this data into a re-run of the QMRA.  Conditions 16A and 26 now require this.

13.4.    Condition 28: This condition has now been deleted, as a consequence of condition 20 also being deleted.  Conditions 20 and 28 were originally included in the consent because AFFCo had not provided any site specific information about the potential health risk that the discharge presented.  The faecal coliform limit was based on the guideline from the Regional Resource Management Plan which applies to all surface water bodies across the region.  In instances where site specific information is provided by an applicant, the broad guidance in the RRMP has effectively been superseded. 

14.    There have been a number of other changes made which were either necessary to ensure consistency throughout the document, and/or were consequential changes required as a result of changes to other aspects of the consent.  None of the conditions that address concerns raised by the Wairoa Taiwhenua, or directly involve them, have been amended as part of the mediation that has been ongoing since the appeal by AFFCo was lodged.

15.    Agreement was reached between the four parties to the appeal (HBRC, AFFCo, the Department of Conservation and Mr David Renouf), and their respective technical experts, on a set of conditions.  On 5 June 2012 this set of revised conditions were lodged with the Environment Court.  Subject to being satisfied, the Environment Court Judge will then make an order in accordance with section 279 of the Resource Management Act that amends the conditions of AFFCo’s consent (DP070670W) in accordance with the changes that have been agreed between the parties to the appeal.  The appeal will then be dismissed, and AFFCo will be required to comply with the conditions of the new resource consent.  Until that date AFFCo are required to comply with the conditions of their existing consent, DP960067W.


16.    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.




1.    That the Maori Committee receives the report titled “Wairoa AFFCO consent appeal”.





Charlotte Drury

Senior Consents Officer



Iain Maxwell

Group Manager

Resource Management



There are no attachments for this report.


Maori Committee  

Tuesday 26 June 2012

SUBJECT: Tukituki River Catchment Cultural Values and Uses Report        


Reason For Report

1.      As part of the policy development for the Tukituki River Catchment, Te Taiwhenua O Tamatea and Te Taiwhenua O Heretaunga were engaged to prepare a Cultural Values and Uses Report. 

2.      They agreed to produce this in the form of a single joint report.  The report is some 100 pages long and is currently being finalised.  Attachment 1 provides the Executive Summary, the Table of Contents, and Section 6 in full.  Once finalised, the full report can be made available to the Maori Committee.

3.      As part of that process, Te Taiwhenua O Heretaunga did produce a separate Cultural Values and Uses Report which incorporated a Cultural Impact Assessment of the Ruataniwha Storage Project.  This report is provided in Attachment 2.  This report was used to inform the Joint report.

4.      Marei Apatu will be presenting the latter report to the Maori Committee.


5.      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.



1.    That the Maori Committee receives the extracts from the Tukituki Cultural Values and Uses Report as provided in Attachment 1 and the Tukituki Cultural Values and Uses Report incorporating the Cultural Impact Assessment for the Ruataniwha Storage Project as prepared by Te Taiwhenua O Heretaunga.

2.    That the Maori Committee acknowledges the presentation given by Marei Apatu on behalf of the Te Taiwhenua O Heretaunga .





Helen Codlin

Group Manager Strategic Development



Graeme Hansen

Group Manager Water Initiatives




Tukituki River Values and Uses Report




Cultural Values and Uses of the Tukituki Catchment




Tukituki River Values and Uses Report

Attachment 1


Cultural Values and Uses of the Tukituki Catchment

Attachment 2



Maori Committee  

Tuesday 26 June 2012

SUBJECT: Afforestation        




1.   To provide Maori Committee members with an overview of the proposed regional     afforestation investment in the Long Term Plan (LTP).




2.   Pastoral farming occurs over approximately 750,000 hectares of Hawke’s Bay hill country land.  Approximately 150,000 hectares of this is steep and highly erodible.  The economic health of the primary productive sector is vitally important to the Hawke’s Bay economy.


2.1. Nationally, agricultural activities are responsible for about 34% of all soil loss.  The remaining bulk of the erosion is due to natural ecological and geological conditions. 64% of the region’s rural land is classed as erodible-to-highly-erodible hill country.  Approximately one third of this land is under a land use that is likely to exceed the sustainable capacity of the soil. It follows that soil erosion is a key issue for Hawke’s Bay.  Extract from HBRC’s Land, River Us


3.   Since the middle of the 20th century (Soil conservation and Rivers Control Act 1941) HBRC and its predecessor organisation the Hawke’s Bay Catchment Board have recognised the need for soil conservation to minimise the loss of soil and to prevent it entering waterways. 


4.   In 1995 HBRC established the Regional Landcare Scheme to subsidise land owners with soil conservation and environmental enhancement work on their land.  Many farmers recognise the benefit of trees in reducing soil erosion on their land, and have done excellent work which has improved the resilience of their farm to storm events and reduced the amount of sediment leaving their land and entering the region’s waterways . 


4.1. The scale of the region’s hill country erosion is significant and our current approach through the regional landcare scheme (alone) is not making a big enough difference quickly enough, having only delivered some 10,000ha of forest and/or space planted tree cover since 1995.  We estimate that approximately 150,000ha of class VIIe (highly erodible) land in the region could benefit from some form of forest cover.  This indicates the scale of the challenge.  Work undertaken suggests that a more integrated mix of land use within the extensive hill country can offer both improved returns for landowners as well as benefits for the environment. Extract from HBRC Strategic Plan


The question is: are we making a difference fast enough?





5.   Impact of 1938 storm. 



6.   Impact of 2011 storm



7.   Another way



The photography is better in the second photo. The result (in terms of erosion post storm event) is very similar.



8.   The challenge for HBRC is to provide significantly greater influence in leading this change. The right debate chapter of the HBRC draft 10 year plan sets out the following proposal for HBRC to play an active role to encourage afforestation integrated into pastoral farming:


8.1. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC) proposes to work in partnership with landowners with highly erodible land to promote afforestation of the steepest and least productive portion of their land in return for a share of carbon credit revenue.  Afforestation of steep, highly erodible hill country in Hawke’s Bay is seen as an important tool in protecting our most vulnerable landscapes. Water quality in our rivers is likely to be greatly improved as a result of reduced sediment from erosion.

8.2. Forests also soak up greenhouse gas emissions, providing an opportunity to support world-wide efforts to reduce their environmental effects. Trading in greenhouse gas emission carbon credits assigned to forest plantings has been developed internationally. The amount of greenhouse gas emissions soaked up can be calculated as carbon units, which can be traded under the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).  This provides an opportunity for an alternative income for landowners.

8.3. Carbon is subject to significant price volatility, however expectations are that as a consequence of the Durban Climate Change Meeting in December 2011, a second Kyoto Protocol-type commitment period will be achieved and a globally binding agreement will apply to developed and developing countries by 2020. Hence the prognosis is that carbon prices are here to stay. The risks around the volatility of the price will need to be managed.

8.4. Through this afforestation proposal HBRC wants to reduce the amount of soil eroding from our most vulnerable landscapes and therefore the amount of sedimentation of our waterways. This proposal is seen as an important tool in restoring and enhancing Hawke’s Bay’s vital ecology as well as providing sustainable and profitable land use.

8.5. The proposal is subject to final approval by Councillors.  This will only be given once they are satisfied with a detailed operating plan for the project implementation, and a carbon trading strategy and protocol. In addition, Council will require an annual review of the project including forecasts of costs and potential returns.

9.   The Strategy and implementation plan will be finalised for Council adoption once Council has considered submissions on the Draft LTP and confirmed the inclusion of the project in the final 2012/22 LTP.


Trees on Farms Project


10. Trees on Farms is the brand coined for the proposal set out in the LTP.  There has been considerable work done to investigate and develop this proposal.  The work has shown that the project is feasible and has the potential to provide benefit to individual landowners and well as to the regional community, while providing HBRC with a commercial return on investment.





Outcomes of the Trees on farms project


11. For the farmer

11.1.     Economic - Trees on farms individual farm economic scenarios show stronger farm cashflow and environmental resilience longer term.

11.2.     Less erosion, more resources for productivity on higher quality land.


12. For the regional community:

12.1.     Reduced Erosion and better water quality within target catchments due to lower     sediment levels in streams.

12.2.     Increased biodiversity. Both directly in the areas with trees established and at a landscape scale by connecting a wider network of tree fragments in the broader   landscape.

12.3.     Increased regional economic benefits through direct inputs from the forest          establishment programme and secondary support activities.

12.4.     Increased regional infrastructure resilience to severe rainfall events.

12.5.     Long term increased regional resilience to downturns in pastoral commodity       cycles.


13. As part of the overall due diligence process a number of reports and financial models have been commissioned by HBRC. A brief overview of each of these is below:


On Farm Economic returns


14. Financial modeling shows that this proposal has the potential to improve farm income and in the longer term cashflow as well as to meet the criteria for HBRC investment. (ie a 7% return on funds invested).


15. Broad scenarios showing the impact on farm returns have been assessed by Mike Knobloch (accountant and farmer). 


HBRC Forest business proposition – Hardwood Management


16. This report provided an overview of the conceptual use of forestry in effecting land use change in the hill country and reviewed other forestry based land use change schemes in NZ. It modeled broad options for investment and likely returns from both land user and HBRC perspective. It concluded that the AGS option was the most beneficial to both parties with annualized returns from forestry of $280-360 per ha being possible.



Risk management for carbon assets under the Emissions Trading Scheme – Charles Rau BDO Spicers

17. This report focused on ETS related risks, where possible identified risk mitigation options, and made high level recommendations for risk management. The report highlighted the need for a carbon policy of which a carbon trading strategy is a significant element. It noted that there are risks for the landowner that need to be well managed including those to liability for carbon credits received by the HBRC. It recommended spreading risk by adopting a balanced portfolio approach that did not place reliance solely on an AGS option.




18. This report  reviewed the effective farm surplus (EFS) and land rental returns from pastoral farming on the harder hill country that is proposed to be targeted by the regional afforestation programme. It used a sizeable database of farms to indicate that returns per hectare ranged from approximately $40 -$190/ha EFS for very steep to medium contour land. Land rentals ranged from $30 - $140.


Project framework - Operating/implementation Plan


19. There is a range of key areas currently being progressed as part of the development of the operational plan. The proposed project framework includes:

19.1.     the annual investment review process,

19.2.     legal documentation for AGS or lease style investments,

19.3.     operational process implementation from site selection to post tree establishment     work,

19.4.     financial management and reporting systems,

19.5.     communications strategy and communications process,

19.6.     on farm economic benefit analysis,

19.7.     stakeholder engagement.


20. An important aspect of the operational implementation is ensuring that the Regional Landcare Scheme investment and implementation supports and is aligned well to the proposed afforestation investment. This alignment is what will deliver the whole of farm sustainable land management solution.


Carbon Trading Strategy


21. Staff have commissioned a report to assist with the development of a carbon trading strategy. The carbon trading strategy sits within and is a significant part of the carbon policy recommended by BDO spicers risk management report. Subject to the project proceeding the additional elements of the full carbon policy such as insurance against risks like fire, the role of carbon pooling (if any) and trading beyond the safe carbon will be presented to council for discussion and agreement.


22. Bruce Miller of Carbon Farming New Zealand is the author of the report.  The report states that :

22.1.     although current carbon prices have been at record low levels in New Zealand,   the market fundamentals both domestically and internationally paint a positive      picture for the medium to long term outlook for carbon. 

22.2.     The highest risk period for trading carbon is in the short term, through until at           least 2015, with the short term outcomes being heavily influenced by the    continuing financial turmoil created by the European financial crisis.


23. The graph below highlights the of carbon yield for a 10 year planting programming beginning in the winter of 2013 with planting ceasing after the winter of 2022. While a small amount of carbon is sequestered by forest growth as early as 2017/18 reasonable volumes of carbon credits are not being generated for 7-8 years ie 2019-2020. This highlights the need to take a forward view of the carbon market and carbon as a means to making a return on investment.




24. The report details four different strategic approaches that HBRC can consider for its carbon trading strategy, namely:


1. A regional Afforestation Grant Scheme (AGS)

2. A joint venture or partnership model (JV)

3. In-house estate management (Estate)

4. Third party management (Lease) contract


25. The features, benefits and risks of each of these options are assessed in the table below. The report highlights that the highest risk period for carbon is in the short term – through to at least 2015-16, and suggests that a conservative approach be taken by HBRC over this period.


26. The fourth option (Lease) would therefore offer in the short term while the carbon market is weak as a result of global economic conditions, the greatest flexibility coupled with the lowest risk, complexity and required involvement.


27. The rates of return for the lease option are set out in the report and indicate that a 15-20 year initial lease commitment for early forests established will provide cashflows that meet a 7% IRR investment return.


28. The lease option would operate with HBRC and the landuser entering into an AGS agreement for forest establishment. HBRCs carbon would then be leased to a third party that provides the defined cashflows and takes the price risk for carbon.


29. Any strategy should be reviewed annually for the next 3 years. 


The role of tree species in the forestry portfolio


30. The report also indicates that tree species composition for the portfolio is important. In the early years of the afforestation programme staff believe a greater proportion of the forestry portfolio should be planted in Pinus radiata. There is an existing harvest market for this species with existing wood processing infrastructure within the region.


31. Over time as the carbon market matures a greater proportion of the portfolio could be planted in other species such as eucalyptus that sequester more carbon more rapidly than P. radiata, and/or other slower growing species. Staff believe an initial species composition split of 80% Radiata and 20% other species to be prudent in the early years.


32. Having a significant proportion of the initial planting programme established in a species that is likely to have a profitable harvest option also gives HBRC the opportunity to share in a proportion of the harvest proceeds.  This option will be looked at closely.


Communications and early stakeholder engagement


33. The afforestation proposal was introduced to the Mana Whenua Forestry and Land Development Hui in December 2011, the Farm Forestry Association field day at Wallingford, McRae Trust, and the Wairoa Hill Country Erosion field day.  The proposal has been well received at each of these events with generally positive feedback and interest.


34. Specific enquiries have been responded to from Maori trusts, farmers, consultants and Landcorp.  Awareness of the advantages offered by Trees on Farms is acute after April 2011 storms and more recent events. 


35. A comprehensive communications plan will be developed if the project proceeds, including field testing the implementation process with farmers, bankers, farm advisors and professionals.


36. Future process:

36.1.     Confirm provision for ToF through LTP process, with final go ahead subject to:

36.2.     A draft operational plan outlining establishment process and investment options

36.3.     Agreed economic and environmental outcomes and indicators in alignment with the land and water strategy and Long Term Plan community outcomes,

36.4.     Council final approval by 30 August 2012 and order sufficient seedlings to Plant      500 ha in the winter of 2013




1.    That the Maori Committee receives this report.





image description


James Powrie

Forestry planner



Mike Adye

Group Manager

Asset Management



There are no attachments for this report.


Maori Committee  

Tuesday 26 June 2012

SUBJECT: Statutory Advocacy Update        



Reason For Report

1.      This paper reports on proposals considered under Council’s statutory advocacy project and the Resource Management Act 1991 between 8 March and 6 June 2012




1.    That the Maori Committee receives the report.





Esther-Amy Bate




Gavin Ide

Team Leader Policy



Helen Codlin

Group Manager

Strategic Development





Statutory Advocacy Update




Statutory Advocacy Map




Statutory Advocacy Update

Attachment 1


Statutory Advocacy Update  (as at 31 May 2012)



Map Ref


Applicant/ Agency


Current Situation

17 February 2012



Trade Waste & Wastewater Bylaw 2012

Proposed technical Bylaw to regulate the WDC wastewater and trade waste system.


Notified under the Local Government Act 2002 special consultative process

24 April 2012

·  Council lodged a submission in support of WDC’s intent to gain greater control over the quality of wastewater received at the WDC wastewater treatment plants as it will result in positive environmental outcomes for the district.


23 November 2011



Resource Consent – Subdivision

Proposal to subdivide a property at 790 Mahia East Coast Road to create 48 residential lots, 1 undeveloped farm lot, 1 lifestyle lot, 3 balance lots, 2 lots to vest as road, 2 access lots and 1 lot for the purpose of establishing a campground to accommodate 400 people.

Pongaroa Land Co. Limited


Consultant – Consult Plus Ltd




(hearing pending)

16 May 2012

·  Pongaroa Land Company lodges an appeal to grant the application in its current form, or on a smaller scale.


29 March 2012

·  Council advised that the application has been declined.


16 February 2012

·  Hearings for the application held in Wairoa.  Council does not attend hearing.


30 January 2012

·  Lodged a neutral submission on 11 January 2012. Submission made various comments relating to proposed servicing of the subdivision, public access to the coast, natural character and landscape values.  In particular the submission sought:

1.      further geotechnical assessment be undertaken with respect to ability of the site to dispose of wastewater on-site and conditions should be imposed on owners to enter into a waste management contract, or alternative arrangement, and

2.      an independent peer review be undertaken on natural character and visual effects of the subdivision on the Mahia Peninsula coastline.


12 August 2011



Draft Plan Change 7 – Jervoistown

The purpose of the plan change is to create a new zone with new policies and rules for Jervoistown.  The plan change seeks to counteract the effects of adhoc development within Jervoistown.




11 May 2012

·  Formal notification of Plan Change 7.

·  Submission period closes 22 June 2012.


17 November 2011

·  NCC held an “informal” hearing for the Hearing Committee to informally discuss the comments received on the draft plan change.  HBRC staff gave brief presentation at ‘hearing’ and responded to NCC’s questions.


19 September 2011

·  Council staff provided comments to NCC on the draft plan change.  In general the Council is supportive of the broad intention of the plan change however noted servicing constraints as a limiting factor.  In particular a high water table contributing to the cross contamination of wastewater and stormwater, at capacity stormwater drains and cross boundary runoff and flooding.

·  Council staff noted that Jervoistown is not included in the preferred settlement pattern included in the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy.


5 November 2010



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.


Notified by NCC


(hearing pending)

30 January 2012

·  Hearing by NCC’s independent commissioner scheduled for 31 January.  NCC’s hearing report makes recommendations that adequately take Regional Council’s concerns into account.  Commissioner’s decision anticipated late February.


6 December 2010

·  Submission lodged.  Submission generally supportive, other than commenting 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.

5 November 2010



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.


Notified by NCC


(hearing pending)

30 January 2012

·  Hearing by NCC’s independent commissioner scheduled for 31 January.  NCC’s hearing report makes recommendations that adequately take Regional Council’s concerns into account.  Commissioner’s decision anticipated late February.


6 December 2010

·  Submission lodged. Submission generally supportive, and also suggested some design principles that NCC could take into account when further developing the proposal.  In particular, the submission 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


24 May 2010



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.

Brian Nicholls

Notified Restricted Discretionary


(hearing pending)

6 December 2011

Planning staff have met with the applicant and NCC planning staff to discuss stormwater and wastewater design for the proposed subdivision.  Further information is required from the applicant as applicant now likely to modify his proposal.


26 July 2011

·  Almost 12 months since Planning staff met with the applicant’s consultant.  Options and scenarios for wastewater consenting and servicing are under consideration.  NCC Planning staff have requested further information from the applicant.


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.


12 June 2010

·  Comment has been sought from the Regulation and Engineering teams.  The stormwater solutions for the site are acceptable due to the free draining nature of the soils.  The same soil types present an issue with on-site wastewater disposal and insufficient treatment.  Coupled with the proximity of the subdivision to the coastal marine environmental it is likely that the Council will submit against the application.  Submissions close 24 June 2010.

23 August 2010



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 Ltd

Notified Restricted Discretionary


(subject to appeal)

14 November 2011

·  Further mediation held 3 November.  No immediate resolution.

·  Mediator has stated that the next step is to appeal to the Environment Court.  Applicant to decide whether to uphold the appeal by February 2012.


24 May 2011

·  Mediation with the applicant and NCC held.

·  Regional Council position maintained that:

No further discharge of stormwater will be accepted into the Jervois Drain, and

the option of discharging stormwater via the neighbouring ‘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.


17 November 2010

·  Application was declined at Hearing held 17 November 2010 as it was decided that the creation of two 2000m2 lots was contrary to the intent of the Napier District Plan.  Applicant subsequently appealed NCC’s decision.


20 September 2010

·  HBRC lodged submission opposing application.

·  Reasons include:

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. 

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.


Statutory Advocacy Map

Attachment 2



Maori Committee

Tuesday 26 June 2012

SUBJECT: General Business        



This document has been prepared to assist Councillors note the General Business to be discussed as determined earlier in Agenda Item 6.



Councillor / Staff