HAWKE’S
BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL
Regional
Planning Committee
Wednesday 11 July 2012
SUBJECT: Delivering the Tukituki Strategy
Reason for Report
1. The purpose of this
report is to brief the Regional Planning Committee on the approach that Council
is proposing to take to deliver the Tukituki Strategy and to co-ordinate the
decision-making elements of the Tukituki Plan Change and the Ruataniwha Water
Storage project.
2. The proposed approach
will be considered by the Corporate and Strategy Committee at its meeting on
Wednesday 18 July with recommendations going to the Council meeting on
Wednesday 25 July 2012.
3. The proposed approach
involves the following:
3.1. Preparation of a
change to the Regional Policy Statement (RPS) to incorporate key elements of
the Land and Water Management Strategy (to be heard by a Council Hearing
Panel).
3.2. Preparation of a
document which identifies choices – a number of different water management
scenarios for the community to consider and understand the implications of
these choices. A ‘Tukituki Choices’ document would be supported by an
assessment of options and their respective benefits and costs. Such an
assessment is essential to meet requirements of s32 RMA in any event for plan
change processes.
3.3. Preparation of
consent and designation application documents for RWS project if deemed
feasible in light of the water management framework in the plan change.
3.4. Having the Minister
for the Environment, through the Environmental Protection Authority, consider
any consent applications associated with the RWS project and the proposed
Tukituki Plan Change as matters of National Significance in order that they
might then be directed to a Board of Inquiry.
4. The Council’s decision
regarding the use of the Environmental Protection Authority process can only be
‘in principle’ because the Feasibility studies for the RWS project have not yet
been completed and considered by either the Investment Company (HBRIC) or HBRC,
and therefore no decision has been made to proceed to the consenting phase.
5. In the absence of the
Environmental Protection Authority/Board of Inquiry option, the status quo
would apply in as much that a council hearing panel for the RPS and plan change
would then occur with the applications for consents for Ruataniwha Water
Storage being a direct referral to the Environment Court.
Hawke’s Bay Land and Water Management
Strategy
6. The 2011 Hawke’s Bay
Land and Water Management Strategy provides a non-statutory overarching
direction for the management of land and water in the region. It was developed
through multi-party Reference Group process reflecting that there are many
agencies that have a role to play in achieving the desired environmental and
economic outcomes. The Strategy has a focus on future viability and resilience
of the region’s land and the regional long term prosperity through sustainable
land use and water management while maintaining overall quality of freshwater
ecosystems for agreed management objectives. It is therefore an important
context for the Tukituki Strategy.
7. Key policies in the
Land and Water Management Strategy in relation to freshwater management
include:
7.1 Land and water
management is tailored and prioritised to address the key values and pressures
of each catchment (Policy 1.5)
7.2 Relevant HBRC
investments are aligned to the Strategy (Policy 1.7)
7.3• Adequate transition
times and pathways for changes to water allocation and to reach water quality
targets are worked out with communities (Policy 1.8)
7.4• Forward thinking
water management decisions are made in the interests of longer environmental,
economic, social and cultural values. (Policy 3.1)
7.5 Large scale
community storage infrastructure which can provide increased water security in
water scarce catchments is recognised as a key element of long term sustainable
solutions. (Policy 3.8)
7.6 Develop an
integrated catchment approach to land and water management. (Policy 3.23)
8. These policies, along
with others, need to be embedded in the statutory documents in order to give
context to the catchment specific objectives and limit setting.
9. It is proposed to
change the Regional Policy Statement to provide the regional context for tailoring
and prioritising the key values and freshwater management objectives across the
region.
10. With respect to the
change to the Regional Policy Statement, the Regional Planning Committee will
consider and make recommendations to the Council on this process. The Regional
Planning Committee will also make recommendations to the Council with respect
to the Hearing Panel that will hear, consider and decide on submissions.
Tukituki Strategy
11. The Tukituki Strategy is
described in Table 1. It sets out what we want to achieve and what HBRC is
proposing to do to get there.
Table 1: Tukituki Strategy
|
Resilient Ecosystems
|
Resilient Economy
|
Resilient communities
|
|
We want:
Improved summer flows
Improved water quality
Improved aquatic and riparian habitats
|
We want:
Improved water security
Increase business certainty
Increased inwards investment
Sustainable economic growth
|
We want:
Improved amenity
Restored mauri
Improved social well being
|
|
How do we get there:
Harvest winter flows for summer use as
replacement to surface and groundwater takes
Review minimum flow and allocation limits
Set water quality limits
Support CHBDC to meet wastewater upgrade
requirements in the current consent through appropriate treatment technology
Land and riparian management (Water and
Nutrient)
|
How do we get there:
Storage based Community irrigation scheme
Plan provides allocation framework (water
quantity and quality)
|
How do we get there:
Flow on effects from business certainty
and security
Flow on effects from allocation framework
|
12. Much of this will be
delivered through changes to the Regional Resource Management Plan and through
the Ruataniwha Water Storage project, should it progress to the next phase.
13. A number of different
options have been explored in terms of how decisions on these two projects
could be made. Key criteria for the options included:
13.1. Transparency –
independent decision-maker from Council
13.2. Certainty – a
decision is made one way or the other within a defined timeframe
13.3. Timeliness –
maintains the momentum of the Storage project
13.4. Cost efficiency –
minimises duplication of processes, allowing funding to be spent in the right
areas
13.5. All strategy
elements on the table - for stakeholders and decision-makers.
Proposed approach
14. The option which met all
the criteria was:
14.1. To prepare a
discussion document ‘Tukituki choices’ which sets out a range of land and water
management scenarios, including storage, along with a cost benefit analysis so
that all parties can consider the implications of different land and water
management regimes.
14.2. To apply to the
Minister for the Environment to call in the Ruataniwha Water Storage consent
application, along with the proposed Tukituki plan change, as a matter of
national significance and to refer it to a Board of Inquiry. This would mean
that:
14.2.1. an independent
body would be making the decision;
14.2.2. the Board of
Inquiry could consider both the plan change and the consent application and all
the submissions received in respect of each one before making decisions on each
one;
14.2.3. under law, the
Board of Inquiry must make a decision within 9 months of the notification.
This provides certainty within a known timeframe;
14.2.4. only one hearing
process would be held and appeals would be limited to the High Court on points
of law.
14.3. The hearing would
still be held in Hawke’s Bay.
14.4. As the Board of
Inquiry is unable to award costs, parties to the hearing are not at risk of
being subject to an appeal on costs by other parties.
Role of the Regional Planning Committee
15. The Regional Planning
Committee has an important role in the consideration of the proposed change to
Regional Policy Statement to give effect to the key principles of the Hawke’s
Bay Land and Water Management Strategy and the National Policy Statement for
Freshwater. This will set the regional context for values across the region
and for competing values within catchments. It is an appropriate regional
level strategic starting point for the Regional Planning Committee.
16. In terms of the Tukituki
plan change, it is noted that a Cultural Values and Uses report has been
prepared by Te Taiwhenua O Tamatea and Te Taiwhenua O Heretaunga and staff will
directly seek feedback from them on the Tukituki Choices document. The
Regional Planning Committee will also have an opportunity to consider it and
provide feedback at its meeting in September.
Time frames
17. Tables 2 and 3 show the
proposed time frame for the Regional Policy Statement and the Tukituki Plan Change
and Ruataniwha Storage Process. Time frames are tight and there is a level of
urgency across all projects.
18. It is important that
decisions on the Regional Policy Statement are made in time for those decisions
to be considered as part of the latter process. Hence the need to notify the
change to the Regional Policy Statement by October in order to have decisions
made by May 2013. It is proposed that a draft Regional Policy Statement change
is consulted on prior to formal notification.
Table 2: Regional
Policy Statement timeframe
Table 3: Tukituki Plan Change and Ruataniwha Water Storage Project
timeframe
Decision Making
Process
19. Council is required to
make a decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act
2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained in Part 6 Sub
Part 1 of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:
19.1. The decision does
not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.
19.2. The use of the
special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation. However, all
matters are subject to formal consultation procedures under the Resource
Management Act.
19.3. The decision does
not fall within the definition of Council’s policy on significance.
19.4. The persons
affected by this decision are all persons with an interest in the region’s
management of natural and physical resources, and specifically those resource
users in the Tukituki River Catchment.
19.5. Options that have
been considered previously by Council include options with different
decision-makers. None met all the criteria listed in this paper.
19.6. The decision is not
inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.
19.7. Given the nature
and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the
persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made,
Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting
directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.
|
Recommendations
The Regional
Planning 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 due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered
and decided.
2. Approves the development of a change to the Hawke’s Bay
Regional Policy Statement to incorporate relevant elements of the Hawke’s Bay
Land and Water Strategy to set the regional context for values associated
with the region’s freshwater resources.
3. Supports the preparation of the ‘Tukituki Choices’ document
which identifies different land and water management scenarios for the
Tukituki catchment.
4. Instructs staff to undertake specific consultation with Te
Taiwhenua O Tamatea and Te Taiwhenua O Heretaunga regarding the Tukituki
Choices document.
5. Approves an approach to the Minister for the Environment
seeking to have the following matters considered as matters of national
significance determined by a Board of Inquiry:
5.1 the proposed plan change for the Tukituki
River Catchment
5.2 applications for all consents relating to
the Ruataniwha Water Storage project.
|
|
|
|
Helen Codlin
Group
Manager
Strategic
Development
|
Liz Lambert
Group
Manager
External
Relations
|
Attachment/s
There are no
attachments for this report.
