Agenda of Environment and Services Committee

Meeting of the Environment and Services Committee

Date: Wednesday 12 August 2015

Time: 9.00 am

Venue:

Council Chamber

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

159 Dalton Street

NAPIER

Agenda

Item Subject Page

1. Welcome/Notices/Apologies

2. Conflict of Interest Declarations

3. Confirmation of Minutes of the Environment and Services Committee held on 13 May 2015

4. Matters Arising from Minutes of the Environment and Services Committee held on 13 May 2015

5. Follow-ups from Previous Environment & Services Committee Meetings 3

6. Call for any Minor Items Not on the Agenda 7

Decision Items

7. HBRC Works Group (9.15am) 9

8. 2015-16 Land Management Operational Plan 25

9. Regional Park Network Improvement Programme 57

Information or Performance Monitoring

10. 2015 National Horticultural Field Days Event Report (10.45am) 81

11. Cape to City Update 91

12. CHBDC Wastewater Treatment 95

13. Clifton to Tangoio Coastal Hazards Committee update

14. HB Hazards Portal 117

15. Minor Items Not on the Agenda 119

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 12 August 2015

Subject: HBRC Works Group

Reason for Report

1. This report covers two issues relating to the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council Works Group.

2. Section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002 requires that a local authority must review the cost effectiveness of current arrangements for meeting the needs of communities within its district or region for good quality local infrastructure functions, and requires that such a review be undertaken within two years before the expiry of any contract or other binding agreement relating to the delivery of that infrastructure function. The Asset Management Group enters into a contract annually with the Works Group for the delivery of maintenance works associated with flood protection and drainage schemes administered by HBRC.

3. A review has been carried out of this service delivery option in accordance with the Local Government Act. This report provides a su

mmary of the findings of that review.

4. The HBRC Works Group has completed another successful year of maintenance and improvement to HBRC’s flood control and drainage schemes as well as undertaking external work in accordance with the mandate provided by Council. This report provides a summary of the HBRC Works Group performance for the 2014-15 financial year.

Review of Service Delivery Options

5. The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Act 2014 resulted in the insertion of new section 17A (Delivery of Services) into the Local Government Act 2002. In accordance with this new clause a review of the service delivery options for meeting community needs for good quality infrastructure has been undertaken as section 17A (2)(B) requires such a review to be undertaken within two years before the expiry of any contract relating to the delivery of that infrastructure function.

6. Each year the Group Manager Asset Management enters into a contract with the HBRC Works Group for undertaking a range of maintenance and improvement works on the 25 flood control and drainage schemes, public access to rivers and regional open space areas. In the 2014-15 year this contract was valued at $3,260,785.18.

7. A copy of a report commissioned by the Group Manager Asset Management summarising the findings of an independent review including advantages and disadvantages of a range of service delivery options is attached for Councillor consideration. The reviewers recommend that HBRC retain the existing service delivered by Works Group, as their review concludes that the Works Group business unit is the most appropriate option for the delivery of services for the following functions.

7.1. Civil and structural contracting work associated with river and drainage maintenance

7.2. Emergency response to natural disasters and environmental spills

7.3. Minor capital works associated with ratepayers schemes, and

7.4. Maintenance and management of major plant and resources associated with business activities.

8. It should be noted that Section 17A (5) of the Act requires the local authority to consider governance, funding, and delivery of this function. Currently HBRC Works Group is a business unit of Council falling within the responsibilities of Council’s Chief Executive and under the governance of Hawke’s Bay Regional Council. Funding is determined through Long Term Plan and Annual Plan processes. It is not proposed that these be changed and therefore the review of these was not included as part of the scope of this review.

9. Section 17(A) requires such a review to be undertaken no more than every 6 years.

Works Group Performance 2014-15 Year

A very satisfactory result for the Works Group this year. An overall turnover of $4,728,396.00 was achieved, with a return of $506,149.00 to HBRC. $180,423.00 of this return has been generated from external activities by the Group.

10. The core activities of the Group are first and foremost to fulfil the contractual obligations required under the Flood Control and Drainage Schemes Asset Maintenance Contract. This involves managing and maintaining the HBRC assets, land drainage works, river control works, civil defence, and emergency response for oil spills and flood events.

11. The work that is undertaken by the Works Group is very much dictated by the seasonal conditions, affecting not only the ability to do the work, but also grass, weed, and plant pest growth all vary considerably from year to year. These variations in seasonal conditions do have a significant impact on the time that it takes to complete the various core tasks such as drain and stop bank mowing, drain spraying, plant pest spraying, and river control works. This does have a significant impact on the costs incurred and therefore a significant effect on the associated annual return to Council.

12. All external works tendered for is based on HBRC core business, and is in accordance with Council policy established in March 2003. A significant portion of this work is undertaken for other TLAs such as HDC, CHBDC, and NCC.

13. The review conducted by PJ & Associates shows that having an in house business unit is cost effective, also returning all operating surpluses, including those generated from external sources on an annual basis to HBRC.

Decision Making Process

14. 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:

14.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

14.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

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

14.4. There are no persons directly affected by this decision.

14.5. Options that have been considered are set out in the report.

14.6. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

14.7. 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 Environment and Services Committee considers this report and 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. Endorses the findings of the independent review of Council’s service delivery arrangements of its infrastructure functions completed in accordance with Section 17(A) of the Local Government Act 2002, and agrees to retain the existing service delivery arrangements for Council’s infrastructure functions through annual contracts between the Group Manager Asset Management and the HBRC Works Group.

3. Notes the performance of the HBRC Works Group for the 2014-15 year.

Paul Atkins

Business Development Manager (Works Group)

Mike Adye

Group Manager
Asset Management

Attachment/s

PJ and Associates Report

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 12 August 2015

Subject: 2015-16 Land Management Operational Plan

Reason for Report

1. The Land Management Team (LMT) has primary responsibility for the delivery of the sustainable land management function within Council. The land management operational plan outlines the range of activities that will be undertaken in the 15-16 financial year to progress Council’s strategic goals of resilient communities, resilient ecosystems, resilient economy and a resilient organisation. The operational plan is prepared annually and staff report back on the plan within six months of the end of the financial year. The Operational Plan attached to this paper for Committee reference is available to other parties on request.

2. This agenda item seeks Council adoption of this operational plan for the 2015-16 financial year.

Comment

3. This operational plan should be read in conjunction with Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-25, specifically part 4 pages 36 to 42.

4. Key work programmes included in the 2015-16 operational plan are:

4.1. Supporting the implementation of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management in Hawkes Bay.

4.2. Leading the development of a more strategic approach to hill country natural resource management.

4.3. Supporting the protection and enhancement of the region’s ecological assets and biodiversity.

4.4. Improving the environmental performance of forestry in the region.

5. The operational plan outlines operational activity for the next 12 months and should be considered in conjunction with the annual report, and wider Land Management strategy that is currently being developed and programmed for completion within the 2015-16 year.

Financial and Resource Implications

6. This operational plan takes into account the 2015-16 budget provision in the Long Term Plan 2015-16. This budget provision includes a sum of $120,000 carried forward from the 2014-15 financial year. The budget provision is expected to be fully expended if the programme of work set out in the Plan is completed.

Decision Making Process

7. 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:

7.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

7.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

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

7.4. There are no persons directly affected by this decision.

7.5. Options have been considered and consulted on through the development of Plan Change 6 and the Long Term Plan.

7.6. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

7.7. 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 Environment and Services Committee recommends that Council:

2. Endorses the Land Management Ream Operational Plan for the 2015-16 financial year.

Nathan Heath

Team Leader – Non Regulatory Strategy & Implementation

Mike Adye

Group Manager
Asset Management

Attachment/s

Land Management Operational Plan 2015-16

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 12 August 2015

Subject: Regional Park Network Improvement Programme

Reason for Report

1. The Long Term Plan 2015/25 includes provision of $160,000 per year for funding improvements to open space areas and new open space opportunities. This is to be funded from money remaining in the Regional Open Spaces Reserve borrowing facility ($545,000 as at 30 June 2015); and a further borrowing facility up to a further $1M commencing in the 2018/19 financial year.

2. This paper seeks agreement from Council for proposed improvement work within the Regional Park network planned for the 2015/16 year to be funded from drawing down the borrowing provision. Staff will provide a brief presentation on the proposed works.

Background

3. At its meeting on 10th December 2014 the Environment and Services Committee (E&SC) adopted Individual Park Plans (IPP’s) for Pekapeka, Pakowhai and Waitangi Regional Parks. The IPP’s guide the management, maintenance and development of each regional park asset. The briefing paper to that meeting outlined 44 developments, both small and large, included within the IPPs proposed to be progressed over the next 10 years derived from historical management objectives, ecological monitoring recommendations, operational need and consultation with community.

4. Of these proposed developments, 16 are selected to be initiated and/or completed over the next 1-3 years. Priority is given to those developments that protect, promote and enhance park values. As developments are completed, lower ranking developments will then be selected to be progressed the following financial year, and thereafter, as funding and staff resourcing permits. The potential list of developments will be reviewed and revised from time to time.

5. An IPP for Tutira Regional Park is yet to be completed. However signage and boundary fencing is in need of improvement and 3 proposed projects to address this have also been included to be funded in the 2015/16 year.

6. To aid the prioritisation process a weighted attribute system was used to score each development item based on its anticipated contribution to regional park network and individual park values. The following attributes and values were used for scoring:

6.1. Attributes; Strategic Importance, Timing, Effort, Stakeholders, Cost.

6.2. Values; Natural, Cultural & Heritage, Recreation, Education, Economic.

7. Development philosophy is based on capital works occurring to an agreed plan, and when both HBRC and external funding permits.

8. Staff constantly seek opportunity to fund developments externally or collaborate with other agencies to reduce the overall development cost to HBRC.

Regional Park Developments

9. The table below lists the prioritised developments, in order of highest priority first for each park, for which funding is requested this financial year. More detail on each development is provided in the text following.

Pekapeka Regional Park

10. The Western wetland enhancement is to be progressed jointly with the adjacent landowner. Initial work proposed involves tree clearing (Lombardy poplars) and rubbish removal (vehicle bodies). The adjacent landowner has agreed to cover the full cost of boundary fencing as well as supplying excavation equipment support.

11. Funding is proposed to be reserved to facilitate a potential land swap between the neighbouring landowner and the HBRC with the objective of retiring Waireporepo Pa from cattle grazing.

12. Riparian planting of the Poukawa Stream requires funding to top up the expected $4,000 Honda treefund contribution. The funding will be used for site preparation and purchasing of plants. Forest and Bird Hastings/Havelock North will complete the planting. This equates to a financial contribution of $3,500.

13. Agreement has been reached with the landowner owner adjacent to Island Pa, the wetlands kaitiaki, Waa Harris, and HBRC to lightly graze Island Pa with sheep as a management strategy to manage excessive vegetation growth over the Pa. Fencing is required to facilitate the grazing and prevent stock accessing the railway corridor.

14. The need for a toilet facility at the wetlands interpretation site was identified through community consultation. A low cost, low maintenance facility is proposed. Staff are working with DOC to confirm the design. The Friends of Pekapeka have expressed an interest in fund raising for this development.

15. CANTEEN have identified a site within Pekapeka Regional Park suitable for members to visit, providing outdoor opportunity in a unique environment for reflection and have requested the installation of a table and bench seat. The components are available (surplus from the initial construction) and the use is consistent with park values and will be available to all park visitors. Funding is needed to cover the installation cost. CANTEEN will assist with the construction of a pathway to the table and seat.

Pakowhai Regional Park

16. Gateway signage will be replaced to reflect transition of a country park into a regional park and inclusion in the regional park network. The exact location of new signage will be determined in conjunction with HDC as part of the Whakatu Arterial project.

17. The need for a toilet facility was identified through consultation. Staff recommend a low cost, low maintenance facility situated inside the park. Staff are working with DOC to confirm the design. Staff further recommend HBRC funds the construction of this structure.

18. The construction of ten tree enclosures is proposed within the Ngaruroro River berm within which ten exotic specimen trees will be planted. This initiative forms part of a long term strategy allowing for park expansion (dog friendly) toward the Ngaruroro River.

Waitangi Regional Park

19. Gateway signage will be replaced to reflect transition of this space into a regional park.

20. East Clive/Tukituki Estuary interpretive signage is proposed adjacent to the cycleways and main park entry points to educate and remind park users of the fragile nature of the coastal zone along East Clive, the ecological significance of the habitat that remains, and the fact that it is a no vehicle zone and dogs need to be under control at all times.

21. An erosion control planting program/trial is proposed to slow down rate of coastal retreat at East Clive which threatens the Muddy Creek wetlands. The value of earthworks completed by Higgins Ltd, at no cost to HBRC, is estimated at $30,000. Funding is required to purchase and plant appropriate erosion control vegetation.

22. Identified within the development plan for Waitangi Regional Park is the enhancement of Waitangi Estuary. The objectives include promoting respectful use, enhancing ecological, educational and cultural values, providing managed recreational access and constructing a celestial compass. A concept plan has been completed and is receiving positive feedback from those who have viewed it. A copy is attached for Councillor information. A detailed construction plan is now required to enable accurate cost estimation and for fundraising for the project should it be given approval to proceed. To date planning related work has been subsidised by the NZTA and MWH as the work integrates with the construction of the new cycle bridge across the Tutaekuri River channel.

23. NZTA have committed to excavate a significant area for wetland habitat. NZTA will use the cut to construct a new cycleway alongside SH2, adjacent to the enhancement site. The value of this work is estimated conservatively at $32,000.

24. A refurbishment of the bird viewing hide looking over the horseshoe wetland on the western side of the railway at Waitangi Estuary is proposed as the existing structure is not fit for purpose.

25. Funding for a cycleway connection to the bird viewing hide is requested. While, the bird viewing hide is in close proximity to the main cycleway by the Ngaruroro SH2 bridge at Waitangi, cyclists currently need to leave their bikes unattended and out of sight if they wish to use the bird viewing hide.

Tutira Regional Park

26. Gateway signage will be replaced to reflect transition of a country park into a regional park. Note, staff are currently consulting with the community on a potential name change from Tutira Regional Park to “Tutira Lakes Regional Park”.

27. Track junction signage on the park is in need of updating and replacing.

28. Boundary fencing between DOC and HBRC land adjacent to the campground area, requires replacement. Total cost is estimated at $15,000. DOC have agreed to contribute $5000 toward this in the current financial year on the basis of HBRC matching. The balance of the work will then be completed the following financial year.

Other Commitments – Aramoana Environmental and Education Charitable Trust

29. As part of their LTP deliberations Council resolved to grant funding of $10,000 for the development of the Ouepoto Reserve at Aramoana from the existing open spaces borrowing facility to the Aramoana Environmental and Education Charitable Trust.

Potential new open space areas

Hawea Park

30. Staff are continuing to work with Hastings District Council, owners of Maori land within the proposed Hawea Park footprint, and local iwi towards securing the necessary land and agreement for the development of Hawea Park at the confluence of the Karamu and Raupare Streams and the Clive (Ngaruroro) River. The park concept was developed with hapu to resolve long standing issues over past treatment of the Pakowhai area and to progress the flood control work identified in the Te Karamu report.

31. While discussions are progressing it is too early to determine a programme for any potential work at this site. At this stage however it is hoped that a significant portion of the excavation works necessary for the realignment of the Karamu Stream can be undertaken and be utilised as filling material for the construction of the Whakatu Arterial Road. Staff will report back to Council regarding this proposal once negotiations have reached a stage when it is appropriate to consider a development plan for the area.

Waipatiki Reserve

32. Chris Tremain made a submission to Council’s LTP setting out a proposal to establish a Trust to purchase and manage the current Waipatiki camping ground. Unfortunately Mr Tremain did not present his proposal verbally to Council. While staff have not communicated with Mr Tremain since he made his submission, they are aware that he is continuing to pursue the establishment of such a Trust. Staff expect that at some time in the future Mr Tremain will wish to update Council on this initiative and expect that some funding towards the purchase of the land will be sought from Council.

Decision Making Process

33. 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:

33.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

33.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

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

33.4. The persons affected by this decision are users of the Regional Parks.

33.5. Options were considered during the development of Individual Park Plans.

33.6. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

33.7. 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 Environment and Services Committee considers the Regional Park Network Improvement Programme report and recommends that Council:

2. Endorses the list of projects proposed to be funded from the $160,000 borrowing provision budgeted in the 2015-16 year of the Long Term Plan.

Steve Cave

Manager, Open Space Development

Mike Adye

Group Manager
Asset Management

Attachment/s

Waitangi Regional Park - Primary Arrival Area Vision Document

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 12 August 2015

Subject: Cape to City update

Reason for Report

1. The Cape to City project, which along with its sister project Poutiri Ao o Tane, commenced in early 2015 and will continue over a 5 year period at a total cost of $6.1 million. In December 2014 Council approved funding of $1.5m from biosecurity budgets over a five year period for Cape to City and Poutiri Ao o Tane. Other funders include Aotearoa Foundation, Landcare Research, Department of Conservation and Cape Sanctuary.

2. The project is potentially transformational both in terms of biodiversity and community engagement. The two most significant impacts on NZ and HB’s unique biodiversity are plant and animal pests and loss of habitat. Part of the project is designed to see if predator control can be integrated into HBRC’s possum control area programme. If successful it will act as the large scale predator pest layer that can sit alongside other HBRC and community biodiversity restoration initiatives such as riparian planting.

3. The concept of native species thriving where we live, work and play will only be achieved if a cost effective way of reducing the impact of predators on our native fauna can be found and implemented.

4. This report updates Council on the Cape to City project. Campbell Leckie, project manager, for the project, will provide a presentation to the meeting.

National Engagement and Alignment

5. There is significant interest in Cape to City and Poutiri Ao o Tane projects. The project manager and members of the project governance group have met or expect to meet with a number of interested groups and individuals. These include:

· Minister of Conservation, Director Generals of the Department of Conservation and Ministry for Primary Industries and the Chief Executives of OSPRI, Beef and Lamb, Federated Farmers and the Callaghan Innovation Institute.

· Local Members of Parliament and Mayors of Hastings, Napier and Central Hawke’s Bay Councils.

· Chief Executive of Zero Invasive Predators (ZIP) which is a $20m funded ten year project supported by the NEXT Foundation. ZIP have a strong focus on advancing predator control tools and technologies.

· Chairman of the Biological Heritage National Science Challenge (BHNSC). This is one of the ten National Science challenges. Significant amounts of Crown Research Institute money will directed to science challenges over the next ten years. One of the themes of the BHNSC is improving efficacy of pest management by scaling-up control operations.

· Predator Free New Zealand Trust which is a philanthropic funded organisation with a vision of removing predator pests from New Zealand.

It is expected that interest in the project will continue. It is therefore possible that the project will be referred to by local MP’s and/or government ministers or departments in public statements in the future.

Cape to City Project Workstreams

Pest Management

6. The pest management workstream includes the full scale field trial of cost effective widescale predator control (feral cats, mustelids and hedgehogs) integrated into possum control across 26,000 ha. If successful, integrated predator control could be considered as part of the Regional Pest Plan Review which is proposed in 2018.

7. The full scale trial involving laying out an extensive predator trap network fitted with wireless technology will begin in early-mid 2016. Further field trials of wireless technology will continue for the remainder of 2015.

Habitat Restoration and Enhancement

8. Significant habitat restoration and enhancement forms part of the project. The majority of this is along the riparian margin of the Maraetotara River where historically HBRC have undertaken significant willow clearance and fencing. This programme has been done in collaboration with the Maraetotara Tree Trust who have funded and undertaken planting with land owner support.

9. An opportunity is being explored to use Afforestation Grants Scheme (AGS) to fund planting of a range of tree species including high performance Manuka within the project area.

10. Planning to deliver the contract targets of 215,000 trees within the project area over the next five years is underway.

Research and Monitoring

11. The current understanding of the impacts of predators and the economic and biodiversity benefits of their management will be tested through the project as will the potential use of different technology to cost effectively reduce and manage predator numbers.

12. A range of outcome monitoring programmes are being put in place including:

12.1. lizards and invertebrates

12.2. Birds (particularly rare and threatened species outflow from Cape Sanctuary)

12.3. Toxoplasmosis

12.4. Public engagement surveys for urban and rural residents.

Community Engagement / Education

13. A public launch has been undertaken for the project with just under 200 people attending. This also included the launch of the education programme. There has been strong regional media interest including a two page spread in Hawke’s Bay Today.

14. A communications plan has been prepared. An expected key outcome of the project is significantly increased community understanding and engagement in biodiversity enhancement. There is a particular focus on involving Maori, the urban community and schools.

Species Restoration

15. The opportunity to restore a range of species to mainland Hawke’s Bay will be available if the predator control and habitat enhancement undertaken under the project is successful. Species translocations proposed include Tomtits and Blue duck.

Governance

16. The project governance group is made up of:

16.1. Andy Lowe, land owner including part of Cape Sanctuary

16.2. Bruce Wills

16.3. Richard Gordon, CE Landcare Research

16.4. Tania Hopmans, Maungaharuru Tangitu Trust

16.5. Reg Kemper from the Department of Conservation

16.6. Mike Adye.

Decision Making Process

17. 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:

18. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

19. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

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

19.2. The persons affected by this decision are the ratepayers and residents of Hawke’s Bay.

19.3. Options have been canvassed as part of the development of the HB draft Biodiversity Strategy and previous reviews of the Regional Pest Management Strategy.

19.4. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

19.5. 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.

Recommendation

1. That the Environment and Services Committee receives and notes the Cape to City project update report.

Campbell Leckie

Manager Land Services

Mike Adye

Group Manager
Asset Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 12 August 2015

Subject: CHBDC Wastewater Treatment

Reason for Report

1. This report is to provide an update on the progress of assisting Central Hawke’s Bay District Council to rectify the problems surrounding the discharge of treated wastewater from their Waipawa and Waipukurau wastewater treatment facilities.

Background

2. The Municipal wastewater treatment plants situated at Waipawa and Waipukurau have resource consents to discharge treated municipal sewage. Those discharges make their way to the Tukituki River.

3. Those resource consents allow for a certain number of limit exceedences over a 12 month period, to remain compliant, however, sampling on the 18 December 2014 determined that the plants were in breach of their respective resource consents.

4. Abatement notices were served on Central Hawke’s Bay District Council to rectify the situation. Those abatement notices outlined an agreed process and timeframe to rectify the situation and to bring the discharges in line with the resource consents granted.

5. CHBDC are employing a two-pronged approach to addressing the issue. The first is to install Lamella clarifiers that will remove excess organic matter that is preventing the sand filters from operating correctly. The second is to continue working to find other ways to improve the operation of the plants.

6. A secondhand Lamella clarifier has been purchased, refitted, installed and is operating at the Waipawa plant in accordance with an abatement notice that required this to be installed and operational by the 8 May 2015. An independent report on the results of this installation has been provided to HBRC within the abatement notice timeframe of 8 July 2015.

7. That report is attached and states that based on the results of the commissioning and testing, the plant is now considered to be capable of full compliance with the resource consent standards for both SRP and E.Coli. HBRC will continue to monitor the consent closely.

8. Another two Lamella clarifiers were built overseas and have been installed at the Waipukurau plant. Due to circumstances beyond control of CHBDC, the final installation and operation of the clarifiers was delayed by 5 weeks. One was installed and operational on time but the other required further installation work. Independent reporting of the plant operation could have been provided to HBRC by 19 August 2015 but this would only allowed two sets of sampling to be considered. Permission has been given to CHBDC to allow the independent report to be submitted by the 19 September 2015 to allow a full month of sampling data to be analysed by the independent reporting company.

9. Central Hawke’s Bay District Council have supplied information in regards to the capacity of the oxidation ponds at both Waipawa and Waipukurau. Based on that data, we can provide a response to a question from this Council on what effect there is on the ponds due to storm events [flash flooding].

10. By way of background, there is a degree of stormwater infiltration to the sewage network, that finds its way into the ponds, but the sewage and stormwater networks are not structurally connected and operate separate from each other. Under normal circumstances the difference between the dry weather flow and a wet weather flow into the Waipawa pond is 840 cubic metres. At Waipukurau the difference is 2,400 cubic litres. The NZ waste water industry tool for establishing wet weather flow volume is based on 4 times the dry weather flow volume.

11. Each pond has a storage buffer capacity, where waste water is stored until it can be treated via the usual chemical dosing and filtration treatment process. This storage capacity is used when the inflow to the ponds exceeds the capacity of the treatment plant, for whatever reason. At Waipawa, the extra storage capacity is 8,505 cubic metres and at Waipukurau 18,912 cubic metres.

12. Based on the wet weather flow data, the number of days extra storage at the Waipawa plant is 72.3 days and at Waipukurau 15.3 days. CHBDC have reported that the storage buffer at Waipukurau has been identified as smaller than they would like and are taking steps to increase this.

13. In the past 4 years, the highest number of consecutive days when wet weather flow volumes were exceeded, were 19 days at Waipawa and 7 days at Waipukurau. These events did not result in a bypass discharge.

14. CHBDC have installed flow meters that measure all flows through the treatment plants, including the outflows. This data is monitored by the plant operations team and available to the Regional Council.

15. Under normal circumstances, all discharge from the plant will go through the normal treatment process. Should there be a significant flood event that causes the ponds to be flooded and overflow it must be stressed that any overflow from the pond will not be raw sewage. The overflow will be water from the ponds that has already undergone a level of treatment via a pre-screening of coarse solids and the pond oxidation process.

16. If such a flood event was to occur, the river would also be in a state of flood and be contaminated with sediment, debris and other runoff from the land and any discharge from the ponds is unlikely to have an adverse environmental effect and be occurring in a time where human contact recreation is not advised.

Decision Making Process

17. 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 Environment and Services Committee receives the CHBDC Wastewater Treatment report.

Wayne Wright

Manager Resource Use

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager
Resource Management

Attachment/s

Cardno report - Waipawa Wastewater Treatment Plant - Performance Assessment Report

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 12 August 2015

Subject: HB Hazards Portal

Reason for Report

1. The storage, communication and dissemination of hazard information is an important piece of risk reduction work for Hawke’s Bay.

2. One of Hawke’s Bay Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Plan objectives requires:
“By the term of the Group Plan (2019), develop a publicly accessible Geographic Information System (GIS) regional web-based ‘home of hazards’ as a platform for both public and inter-organisational sharing.”

3. This paper outlines the development of a publically accessible hazard GIS system – the Hawke’s Bay hazard information portal, and provides an opportunity for the Committee to understand the information made available through the initiative.

Comment

4. A report was prepared for the HB CDEM Group November 2012 “Management of hazard information in the Hawke’s Bay region” and put to the Coordinating Executive Group on 30 November 2012 with recommendations to improve future hazard information management in Hawke’s Bay. It recommended the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council should be the lead agency for this work given it holds most of the hazard information for the region. The Coordinating Executive Group supported the recommendations, and they were subsequently incorporated into the Group CDEM Plan.

5. More recently the Local Government NZ Think-piece has cited the need for an enhanced and more integrated approach to making natural hazards information available http://www.lgnz.co.nz/assets/Publications/Managing-natural-hazards-LGNZ-think-piece.pdf.

6. An Information Management Specialist was employed to commence and manage the launch of the Hawke’s Bay portal over 2014/15, with the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council as the lead agency driving this work.

7. The work has coordinated initiatives in conjunction with the HB GIS Local Authority Shared Service team.

8. The hazard information portal was launched online on 20 July 2015 which has two audiences:

8.1 Professional natural hazard managers seeking authoritative information to make regional and local hazard management decisions; and

8.2 General public seeking information on hazards that is relevant to their individual needs and risk management decision-making. It also can produce a natural hazard property report.

9. The project has been launched with the integration of regional level natural hazard information held by the regional council, and now launched will grow gradually over time.

10. A short presentation will be given on current regional hazard research initiatives and to demonstrate the portal. http://www.hbemergency.govt.nz/hazards/portal

Decision Making Process

11. 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 Environment and Services Committee receives the HB Hazards Portal report.

Lisa Pearse

Emergency Management Coordinator

Mike Adye

Group Manager
Asset Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

	Follow-up/Request	Person Responsible	Status/Comment
1	CHBDC Wastewater Treatment Compliance Update; report back to the Committee, calculations on sizeable events	W Wright, I Maxwell	Update report is part of this agenda.