Agenda of Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

Wednesday 20 March 2024

Subject: Dangerous dams, Earthquake-prone dams and Flood-prone dams policy review

Reason for Report

1. This item presents the updated policy on dangerous dams, earthquake-prone dams and flood-prone dams to the Committee for consideration and recommendation to the Regional Council, by way of resolution, for its adoption for public consultation.

Officers’ recommendations

2. Council officers recommend that the Committee recommends the updated policy on dangerous dams, earthquake-prone dams and flood-prone dams, as proposed in Attachment 1, to the Council for adoption for public consultation.

Executive Summary

3. The existing Dangerous Dams Policy 2006 needs to be updated to align with requirements under the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022 which are due to come into effect in May 2024.

4. From 13 May 2024, owners of dams that meet the height and volume thresholds introduced in the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022 will need to confirm the potential risk their dam poses, put in place safety plans and undertake regular dam inspections.

5. The Building Act 2004 requires all regional councils to adopt a policy on dangerous dams, earthquake-prone dams and flood-prone dams. The current Dangerous Dams Policy 2006 needs to be updated in accordance with the Building Act 2004 and the Local Government Act 2002 so that it aligns with the new thresholds and safety requirements introduced in the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022.

6. This item is being raised now to seek a decision that enables the MBIE timelines to be met. If the May 13 deadline is not met, there is a risk of not meeting Building Act 2004 requirements and having a policy that does not integrate with new regulations.

Background /Discussion

7. In January this year a project team was formed to update the Dangerous Dams Policy 2006. This policy sets out what Council will do if they are notified of a dangerous, earthquake-prone or flood-prone dam in Hawke’s Bay. New regulatory requirements set out in the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022 would mean our current Dangerous Dams Policy 2006 would no longer reflect the new regulations and what is required from 13 May, 2024.

8. The regulations have introduced height and volume thresholds for classifiable dams and a dam owner is only impacted by the regulations if a dam meets these thresholds. The regulations then require owners of all classifiable dams to know whether their dam is dangerous, earthquake-prone or flood-prone and to take the necessary steps, in a timely manner, to comply with the Building Act 2004 and the regulations. Responsibilities of recognised engineers, who will certify dams, and regional authorities are also set out within the regulations; this is to ensure that the potential risks of dam incidents and failures are reduced (such as loss of life, damage to property, and damage to the natural environment).

9. As Council is responsible for the implementation of these regulations in Hawke’s Bay it was agreed that the existing Dangerous Dams Policy 2006 is no longer fit for purpose and does not reflect Council requirements under the Building Act 2004, dam owner requirements, or definitions under the new regulations.

10. Due to the new regulations coming into effect on 13 May 2024; we are required to seek public feedback as part of consultation on the updated policy on dangerous dams, earthquake-prone dams and flood-prone dams which is intended to be read alongside the new regulations. The submissions period is intended to run from 28 March for one month, and possible hearings are to follow if required.

Project Timeline

Policy development

11. Contact was made in early January with Otago Regional Council (ORC) as they were the first regional council to prepare a draft Dangerous Dams Policy in line with new regulations. This was legally reviewed with the intention of communicating their draft policy to other regional councils ensuring national consistency. Information from this meeting was used as a starting point to inform the drafting of an updated Dangerous Dams Policy.

12. Taking the 13 May deadline into account, drafting of the updated policy began in January. This also included drafting of supporting documents required under the Local Government Act 2002 special consultative procedure.

Changes to the current Dangerous Dams Policy 2006

13. A number of proposed changes are suggested for the updated policy on dangerous dams, earthquake-prone dams and flood-prone dams. These changes, intended to be tested with the public, are incorporated into the draft document and have been summarised in the following table for consideration.

Changes to current Dangerous Dams Policy	Reason(s) for change
The policy has been re-ordered, refined, and reduced in size. Definitions, clauses, and requirements under the Building Act 2004 and the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022 are referenced rather than included in the Policy where possible.	To streamline the policy and make more readable and relevant to dam owners. To align Council policy with requirements under the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022 and Building Act 2004.
New references to the following terms:  classifiable dams  earthquake-prone dams  flood-prone dams	To align Council policy with requirements under the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022. These terms were introduced in 2022 and not reflected within our current policy.
Refining of Council principles when exercising its functions.	To align Council policy with requirements under the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022 and Building Act 2004. (now referencing current terminology and clauses used within these documents).
Refining of Council’s approach to performing its functions.	To align Council policy with requirements under the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022. (now referencing current terminology and clauses used within this document).
Refining of Council’s priorities in performing its functions.	Priorities have been updated to include (in addition to public safety and damage to property) risk to the environment, and cultural values.

Impact on the community

14. There will be impacts in terms of costs on dam owners who have classifiable dams and therefore need to undertake a Potential Impact Classification (PIC). This must be undertaken by a recognised engineer. Owners who have dams classified as medium to high potential impact are then required to develop a certified Dam Safety Assurance Programme (DSAP), an annual dam compliance certificate, and a PIC review after five years (all of which must be undertaken by a recognised engineer).

15. It should be noted that these costs to classifiable dam owners in Hawke’s Bay are unavoidable, as these are requirements under national regulations.

Further considerations

16. In addition to our own policy update, MBIE are currently undertaking targeted consultation on the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2022 around potential changes to the height and volume thresholds for classifiable dams. Although untimely, this targeted consultation is a result of potential issues of the cost and availability of recognised engineers to certify classifiable dams.

17. To accommodate potential changes to height and volume thresholds within the regulations, the updated policy on dangerous dams, earthquake-prone dams and flood-prone dams has been drafted to allow for this (with reference to the Regulations, rather than specific height and volume should they change).

Options Assessment

18. As aforementioned, the current Dangerous Dams Policy 2006 does not align with terminology, or requirements under the new regulations. It is therefore to be discounted as an option for these reasons.

19. The proposed updated policy achieves Council requirements and responsibilities, and it is recommended that the Committee endorses the updated policy to the Council for adoption for public consultation.

Significance and Engagement Policy Assessment

20. Council and its committees are required to make every decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:

20.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset, nor is it inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

20.2. The decision is not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy.

20.3. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, the Committee can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Considerations of Tangata Whenua

21. As part of pre-consultation Post Settlement Governance Entities (PSGEs) and Taiwhenua have been sent a letter informing tangata whenua of the new regulations and the proposal to update and align our Dangerous Dams policy. This letter outlined the new regulation requirements and why we need to update our policy. It also outlined cultural criteria for determining a dam’s potential impact and Council’s intent to notify relevant mana whenua of dangerous, earthquake-prone or flood-prone dams should we receive information.

22. Further participation will be available for tangata whenua to input on the updated policy on dangerous dams, earthquake-prone dams and flood-prone dams through the submissions process during consultation. This was detailed within the letter sent out pre-consultation.

Financial and Resource Implications

23. Existing staff are currently utilised in all aspects of the project.

24. It should be noted that there will be further costs for ongoing compliance.

Consultation

25. As it is the role of Council to inform dam owners about the incoming regulations, an information letter drop has been undertaken. Two sets of letters were sent out, one to potential dam owners informing them of incoming regulations, potential implications, and our policy review, and a second to utility providers, large consent holders, and territorial authorities asking for voluntary feedback on PICs.

26. Planned consultation, including the submissions process, will include the updated policy, a summary of proposal, a summary of information, and website information becoming publicly available to the wider community from 28 March. These documents and information will also be sent via letter to potential classifiable dam owners identified in the initial letter drop.

27. Should any submissions on the updated policy be received and wish to be heard, a hearing will be required to be held to provide an opportunity for probably to present their views.

Decision-making process

28. Council and its committees are required to make every decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:

28.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset, nor is it inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

28.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is prescribed by legislation. The Council must consult directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

28.3. The decision is not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy.

28.4. The persons affected by this decision are all persons who are dam owners that meet the classifiable dam threshold within the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations (2022).

28.5. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and 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

That the Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee:

1. Receives and considers the updated Policy on dangerous dams, earthquake-prone dams and flood-prone dams 2024 staff report.

2. Recommends that Hawke’s Bay Regional Council:

2.1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community or persons likely to have an interest in the decision.

2.2. Adopts the Policy on dangerous dams, earthquake-prone dams and flood-prone dams 2024 as proposed, for consultation from 28 March to 28 April.

Authored by:

Saul Gudsell

Policy Planner

Nichola Nicholson

Team Leader Policy & Planning

Approved by:

Katrina Brunton

Group Manager Policy & Regulation

Attachment/s

1 ⇨	Proposed Dangerous Dams Policy		Under Separate Cover
2 ⇨	Dangerous dams policy Statement of Proposal		Under Separate Cover

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

Wednesday 20 March 2024

Subject: Resilient Rivers Programme update

Reason for Report

1. This paper provides the committee with background on the creation of the IRG programme of work and provides an update on the current status of all projects within this programme. It is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all activities that have been undertaken, however, it provides a formal update to the committee.

Background

2. In the 2020 Budget, Cabinet agreed to provide a $3 billion investment in infrastructure to support New Zealand's economic recovery as part of the 11 May COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund.

3. New Zealand River Managers Special Interest Group collectively put forward an application to this fund for a programme of work associated with flood risk and climate resilience across New Zealand.

4. This bid was successful, resulting in total programme funding of $30m for Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, including co-funding requirements.

The IRG Programme

5. The approved IRG programme consists of 4 main pillars as identified in the table below, together with co-funding requirements.

Work Programme	Programme Cost	Co-Funding (HBRC)	Funding
1. Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme	Up to $20,000,000	Up to $7,200,000	Up to $12,800,000
2. Wairoa River Scheme – River Parade Scour Protection	Up to $1,000,000	Up to $360,000	Up to $640,000
3. Upper Tukituki Flood Control Scheme – SH50 Bridge	Up to $1,000,000	Up to $360,000	Up to $640,000
4. Upper Tukituki Flood Control Scheme – Gravel Extraction	Up to $8,000,000	Up to $2,880,000	Up to $5,120,000
*FUNDING TOTAL: Up to $19,200,000 (+GST)*

Project 1: Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme (Levels of Service) - $20m

6. This programme of work seeks to increase the level of service provided by the scheme to a 1 in 500 year flood level of protection, and includes allowances for climate change and sea level rise, together with improved resilience for the higher velocities anticipated from the increased flood flows.

7. The Heretaunga Plains Flood Control scheme consists of 46 sections of stopbank, which will be a priorities for upgrade on a prioritised basis determined by a Multi Criteria Risk Analysis.

8. HBRC co-funding of $7.2 million was required to match IRG funds of $12.8 million.

9. This funding was considered to be sufficient to complete the upgrade of 5 sections of stopbank and address a section of river bank erosion. These river sections are:

9.1. Taradale

9.2. Moteo

9.3. Omarunui

9.4. Ngatarawa

9.5. East Clive

9.6. Clive River at Farndon Road (erosion site)

Project 2: Upper Tukituki Gravel Extraction Flood Control Scheme - $8 million

10. Gravel aggradation across this scheme has been an area of concern for the last decade.

11. This programme involves the removal of 800,000m3 gravel from Central Hawkes Bay rivers to maintain existing nameplate capacity of 1:100 level of protection from Upper Tukituki scheme.

12. The approach is to utilise the combined funding to subsidise gravel extraction from this region with a focus on competitive tendering and supporting the local economy.

13. Regular surveys of the Makeretu, Mangaonuku, Upper Tukituki, Waipawa and Tukipo rivers will be required to quantify volumes of aggraded gravels and prioritise key extraction sites.

Project 3: Upper Tukituki Flood Control Scheme SH50/Waipawa Erosion - $1 million

14. The left bank of the Waipawa river immediately upstream of SH50 bridge has eroded significantly over the past five years. If left unattended, there is a risk that the southern approach will be compromised and the river may outflank the bridge.

15. This project is intended to provide engineered erosion protection works for the southern approach to NZTA’s SH50 bridge.

16. Due to the specialist nature of the project within the riverbed the HBRC Works Group were involved in developing the construction methodology with a view to then undertaking the work.

17. This project received co-funding from Waka Kotahi to the value of $300,000 (+gst).

Project 4: River Parade Scour Protection, Wairoa - $1 million

18. Over the last five years the Wairoa River has gradually undermined the embankment immediately south of the Ferry Hotel. This has in turn compromised Wairoa District Council (WDC) water assets and more recently, Carroll Street and River Parade.

19. The objective of this project is to provide steel sheet piled erosion protection works on the left bank of the Wairoa river.

20. This project received co-funding from Waka Kotahi to the value of $180,000 (+gst).

Social Procurement

21. In keeping with the purpose of the COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund as an economic stimulus following lockdown, key conditions of the funding agreement with the Government stipulated the requirement to achieve social procurement outcomes.

22. Acceptable social procurement outcomes include:

22.1. New employment

22.2. Preservation of jobs

22.3. Redeployment of workers

22.4. Supplier diversity

22.5. Skills and training

22.6. Environmental responsibility

22.7. Investment toward more productive, sustainable and inclusive economy

Programme Funding Timeframes

23. The funding agreement committed to funding a 3 year programme of work commencing on the date of execution of the agreement being 20 November 2020. The original timeframe deadline for funding for this programme of work was 20 November 2023.

24. Kanoa – Regional Economic Decvelopment and Investment Unit has recognised the significant impact that Cyclone Gabrielle has had on HBRC’s programme and generally has a desire to see the programme completed and so has agreed in principle to an extension to this funding timeframe.

25. The Manager Regional Projects is currently working with Kanoa to develop a variation to the funding agreement.

Current Programme Status

26. The Wairoa River Protection and SH50 Waipawa River Erosion Protection projects were completed in September 2021 and September 2022 respectively.

27. The HPFCS LOS Upgrade and Upper Tukituki Gravel Extraction projects were significantly impacted by Cyclone Gabrielle, which resulted in these programmes of work being placed on hold.

28. Work has recommended on both the HPFCS LOS Upgrade and UTTFCS Gravel Extraction programmes, and to progress these programmes of work further an extension to the funding deadline is being sought.

29. Following Cyclone Gabrielle and the damage caused to the Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme, a comprehensive scheme review has been commissioned to identify what modifications to the flood scheme are required to cater for future over-design events in a manner that significantly reduces potential damage such as that incurred during Gabrielle. Consequently, the increasing in Level of Service for stopbank sections simply by raising the crest height may not be the most appropriate course of action, so physical works on the next sections of work is being paused until the scheme review has been completed and the future of the scheme is better understood.

30. In additional to an extension to the funding deadline, HBRC is requesting a change to the programme to undertake a number of enabling tasks for future Level of Service Upgrade projects.

31. The proposed revised programme consists of predominantly enabling works. The summary below provides project specific information on the proposed variation to programme.

Social Procurement Update

32. The following social procurement outcomes have been achieved in association with the IRG programme to date.

33. HBRC Asset Management:

33.1. 2 x FTE project managers – both employed as a result of COVID-19 relocation to NZ from overseas

33.2. 1 x FTE previously unemployed design engineer

33.3. 1 x FTE female engineer

33.4. 1x FTE female engagement advisor

33.5. 1x FTE female project manager

34. Skills and Training

34.1. 17 x training courses attended

34.2. 98 x staff trained and or upskilled including 23 x Women 12 x Māori and 6 x age 15 – 24

34.3. Working closely with iwi partners

34.4. Tendering workshops for contractors

34.5. One on one tendering assistance

34.6. Wellbeing and situational safety workshop

35. Supplier Diversity, Employment of Targeted Workers & Local Businesses

35.1. 2 x FTE’s (1 x previously unemployed, 1 x Māori) for the duration of the projects

35.2. 10 x Māori Staff King Planting

35.3. 85% local

35.4. 20% women

35.5. Job creation – 10 Kaitiaki Rangers, 6 staff at WSP, 2x staff at Tikokino Contractors

36. Environmental Responsibility

36.1. Project Nurture – riparian and conservation planting projects

36.2. Wairoa Ngahere Nursery – supply of native plants

36.3. Waiohiki Marae Nursey – supply of native plants

36.4. Ecological enhancement - projects dedicated to making a positive environmental impact.

36.5. 37,000 trees planted across 11.4 hectares - will be the largest native alluvial forest once established.

36.6. RDCL using alternative drilling methods like sonic drilling, that require no water usage. Contractors are aware of carbon impact and actively minimise their carbon footprint by carpooling, shutting down machinery when not in operation, etc.

Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme – Status Update

Proposed modifications to the IRG Programme

37. The original funding agreement had a deadline of the 20 November 2023 for the provision of IRG funding.

38. HBRC has an agreement in principle to extend the funding timeframes associated with the IRG programme of work.

39. The Regional Projects team is working with Kanoa to develop the variation to the funding agreement.

40. The following information provides an update on each project that formed a part of the original programme, together with proposed modifications / additions to the original programme.

Taradale Stopbank Upgrade

41. This project was the first upgrade project to be advanced. Construction was completed in November 2022 following the decision to continue with earthworks through the winter months and thus avoid a 3 to 4 month delay in construction.

Ngatarawa Stopbank Upgrade

42. Construction commenced on this upgrade project in late January 2023.

43. Despite significant flows in the Ngaruroro River, the stopbank was not overtopped or damaged during the flood.

44. The contract was suspended following Cyclone Gabrielle.

45. Construction recommended in June 2023 and was completed in November 2023.

Moteo Stopbank Upgrade

46. This project is part of the original programme. This project has a completed detailed design and all tender documentation is completed for the original design. Consenting was due to be completed by March 2023 with construction completed by November 2024.

47. The revised programme includes advancing the project to fully consented status, and primarily includes completing a Cultural Impact Assessment to support the lodging of Earthworks Consent Application. It is envisaged that consents will be achieved by March 2025.

48. This proposal will enable the project to quickly advance through any design modification to construction stage once the scheme reviews have confirmed optimal scheme configuration and funding has been secured.

49. A variation to the original programme funding timeframes is required to ensure the project is funded through the revised timeline.

Omaranui Stopbank Upgrade

50. This project is part of the original programme. This project has a detailed design completed to 60%. Consenting was due to be completed by March 2023 with construction completed by November 2024.

51. The revised programme includes advancing the project to fully consented status, and primarily includes completing a Cultural Impact Assessment to support the lodging of an Earthworks Consent Application. It is envisaged that consents will be achieved by March 2025.

52. This proposal will enable the project to quickly advance through any design modification to construction stage once the scheme reviews have confirmed optimal scheme configuration and funding has been secured.

53. A variation to the original programme funding timeframes is required to ensure the project is funded through the revised timeline.

Clive River Erosion Protection (Farndon Road)

54. This project is part of the original programme. Detailed Design was due to be completed by September 2023 with construction completed by March 2024.

55. The revised programme includes completion of detailed design and construction of river erosion protection, and proposed that detailed design reach completion in September 2024, with construction due to be completed in June 2025.

56. A variation to the original programme funding timeframes is required to ensure the project is funded through the revised timeline and through to completion.

East Clive Stopbank Upgrade

57. This project is part of the original programme. Detailed Design was due to be completed by August 2023 with construction completed by June 2024.

58. The revised programme includes advancing the project to fully consented status, and advancing the design to a level sufficient to support the consenting process. Due to the complex nature of the consenting requirements for this project, it is envisaged that consents will be achieved by June 2025.

59. This proposal will enable the project to quickly advance to construction stage once the scheme reviews have confirmed optimal scheme configuration and funding has been secured.

60. A variation to the original programme funding timeframes is required to ensure the project is funded through the revised timeline.

Upper Tukituki Flood Control Scheme – gravel extraction

61. This project is part of the original programme.

62. Gravel extraction activities under the IRG programme were largely curtailed immediately following the cyclone, as contracting resource was required to assist with the rapid rebuild of stopbanks across the region. (The rapid rebuild did involve the extraction of 250,000m3 of gravel for rebuild activities, a proportion of which came from Central Hawkes Bay Rivers.)

63. Despite cyclone-related delays to extraction, Tranche 3 of extraction is now all but completed and will see the programme targeted volume of 800,000m3 of extraction reached, at a cost of approximately $6m, well below the budgeted amount.

64. Further tranches of extraction are planned with a view to maximising total volume extracted utilising all remaining available funding.

65. It is likely that funding would have been fully consumed by March 2025.

66. A variation to the original programme is required to extend the timeframe of funding availability to enable gravel extraction to be maximised.

Recommission the Maraenui Stopbank

67. This project is not part of the original programme.

68. This project is proposed to recommission the Maraenui Stopbank (previously decommissioned when the current Brookfields upper and lower stopbank was constructed) in order to provide a secondary level of protection from flooding to the Te Awa residential zone in Napier.

69. The work will involve investigation, high level design and construction. It is envisaged that construction will be completed by June 2025.

70. A variation to the original programme is required to reallocate funding away from construction of original programmed works to fund this project through to completion.

Investigations to compile a Catalogue of Available Borrow Material

71. This project is not part of the original programme.

72. Work completed pre and post-cyclone has highlighted that while there is an abundance of silt in the region, not all of it is suitable for construction purposes. Material availability will be a critical element of all successful future flood resilience projects.

73. This proposal involves geotechnical investigation in all reaches of the Heretaunga Plains Flood Protection Scheme, and permanent silt deposit sites created by the Silt Task Force to identify the quality and quantity of available borrow material throughout the scheme.

74. This will enable the volume of suitable available borrow material to be quickly understood and targeted for all future stopbank construction projects.

75. Specific geotechnical investigation results associated with past projects and other know third party projects, together with the work proposed below will be incorporated into the catalogue.

76. It is envisaged this work will be completed by March 2025.

77. A variation to the original programme is required to reallocate funding away from construction of original programmed works to fund this project through to completion.

Investigation and Design for future upgrade works:

78. This project is not part of the original programme.

79. This proposal involves geotechnical investigation and detailed design for the following high priority reaches:

79.1. Raupare Upper and Raupare Lower

79.2. Chesterhope Upper

79.3. Brookfields Lower

79.4. Pākōwhai Park

80. It is envisaged this work will be completed by June 2025.

81. A variation to the original programme is required to reallocate funding away from construction of original programmed works to fund this project through to completion.

Undertake a partial Plan Change to the Hastings District Council District Plan

82. This project is not part of the original programme.

83. This proposal involves completion a plan change process in relation to the Hastings District Council District Plan to modify earthworks consenting rules as they relate to flood protection works within the river margin. This will enable projects such as those identified in above to progress to construction without the need to obtain a resource consent.

84. The proposal is based on classification of land such as horticulture being defined to the centreline of the river within the flood control scheme, such that earthworks controls that are appropriate for highly versatile soils and to the flood control scheme between stopbanks.

Decision-making process

85. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision-making provisions do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the Resilient Rivers Programme update.

Authored by:

Jon Kingsford

Manager Regional Projects

Approved by:

Chris Dolley

Group Manager Asset Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

Wednesday 20 March 2024

Subject: HBRC Recovery Work Programme update

Reason for Report

1. This paper specifically focusses on the recovery of HBRC flood control and drainage infrastructure.

2. The paper provides the committee with background to the formation of Council’s Programme Management Office (PMO) and an update as to the current status of all projects within the recovery programme.

Background

3. Cyclone Gabrielle was the most significant weather event to impact the region on record.

4. The event has been assessed by NIWA as exceeding a 1000 year return period for much of the Hawke’s Bay river management structures which are built to a 1:100 year standard. Rivers rose rapidly and overtopped stopbanks and flood defences in multiple locations.

5. Based on rainfall forecast intelligence from Metservice our flood forecasting processes predicted the event to be a 1:50 year event which informed our preparations for the event.

6. While Cyclone Gabrielle had catastrophic impact on communities and infrastructure across Hawke’s Bay, this paper is focused on the direct HBRC infrastructure activities.

7. Cyclone Gabrielle had a significant impact across the region’s flood control and drainage networks. Specific examples of damage in the broader Heretaunga area included:

7.1. Approximately 5.6 kilometres of breaches in 248 kilometres of stop bank networks across the region, with a further 28 kilometres of the network weakened.

7.2. Deposition of silt across large swaths of land, with these deposits being up to 3 meters deep in some areas.

7.3. Blockages of culverts, drainage systems, streams, and water bodies across the region.

7.4. Damage to drainage pump stations.

7.5. Interruption / destruction of parts of the region’s rainfall and river flow monitoring network.

7.6. Large volumes of wood deposited on coastlines, riversides, bridges, and washed onto land.

8. To build back safer, stronger and smarter, our city and district councils, the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council along with the Regional Recovery Agency and the Government’s Cyclone Recovery Taskforce have been working to reduce future severe weather risk in areas across the region.

HBRC Infrastructure Response

9. At a high level the HBRC Infrastructure response has encompassed

9.1. rapid Recovery of damaged stopbanks and drainage schemes

9.2. rapid damage assessments of infrastructure and creation of work packages to repair

9.3. response to land categorisation of Category 2 land

9.3.1. technical engineering pods system

9.3.2. Crown contract for improved flood resilience

9.3.3. creation of Delivery PMO

9.4. reconfiguration of IRG Flood Program

9.5. acceleration of the Project Lifecycle Management (PLM) component of the Enterprise Asset Management (TechOne) project.

9.6. accelerated infrastructure scheme reviews of:

9.6.1. Heretaunga Flood Control Scheme - due July 2024

9.6.2. Upper Tukituki Flood Control - due July 2024

9.6.3. Pākōwhai Drainage Area - draft complete

9.6.4. Brookfields Mission Drainage Area (Awatoto) - draft complete

Crown Response to Cyclone Gabrielle

10. Following Cyclone Gabrielle, the Government pledged financial support to co-fund a flood resilience programme of work with the objective of reducing flood risk in affected communities to more acceptable levels.

11. The Crown and Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC) entered into the North Island Weather Events (2023) – Hawke’s Bay Crown Funding Agreement on 10 October 2023 (the NIWE Agreement).

12. Under the NIWE Agreement, the Crown reserved aggregate amounts of funding under the National Resilience Plan (NRP) to assist with funding Category 2 Risk Mitigation projects, Regional Transport Projects and Category 3 Voluntary Buyouts to be delivered in the Hawke’s Bay region.

13. The total value of the Category 2 programme amounts to $248m, of which HBRC’s contribution is $44m, which representing a significant investment on behalf of the Hawke’s Bay community.

14. Rating Options for the funding of this contribution was the subject of a separate paper to Council at the extraordinary Regional Council meeting on 13 March 2024 – Funding Category 2 Flood Mitigation.

15. The packages of work funded through this agreement are highlighted below:

Severely Affected Land Areas	Co- Funding	HBRC Funding	Total
Wairoa	$70,000,000		$70,000,000
Pākōwhai	$70,676,470*	$23,373,530*	$94,050,000*
Whirinaki
Ohiti
Waiohiki
Pōrangahau
Havelock North
Sub Total			$164,050,000
Pumpstation Upgrades			$30,000,000
Rapid Repair – stopbank height increases			$30,000,000
Telemetry			$ 5,000,000
Scheme Reviews			$ 3,000,000
Total			$232,050,000

*For the purposed of this table the value for Tangoio (now Cat 3) and Joll Road (to be delivered by HDC) have been excluded from these values

Delivering the Programme

16. The above work programme, when combined with existing delivery commitments totals more than $257m and represents a significant programme of work that far exceeds the delivery capacity of HBRC’s pre-cyclone delivery model.

17. It was recognised that a different approach to programme delivery would be required within the organisation. An independent consultant with national and international experience in delivering significant programmes of capital work was engaged to review this future programme of work, advise on key construction market considerations, and make recommendations on how to best proceed.

18. A programme the size of which HBRC faces will have a significant impact on roles both within the traditional function of the Project Delivery team and across the organisation.

19. As well as a significant increase in demands on project management resources, the programme will require significant input from communications, community engagement, risk, health and safety, procurement and financial resources.

20. To better empower the successful delivery of this programme of work to meet the above objectives, an integrated approach to resourcing this work was proposed. With total programme escalation costs sitting at around $2m per month, to not resource the programme with resources of sufficient capacity and capability presents a significant financial risk to the organisation and the programme as a whole.

21. The key driver for a new delivery model is to create a single integrated delivery structure to provide guidance, support, tracking, reporting services and structure to better enable successful delivery of the programme of projects simultaneously.

22. Delivery models considered included joint ventures, alliancing and programme management office were considered.

23. On this basis, the independent consultants, recommended HBRC move to a Programme Management Office (PMO) approach to deliver the identified programme of infrastructure related projects.

24. The Approved Structure for the PMO represents an integrated team of 30+ professionals. Resources from the original Regional Projects team have transferred into the new PMO which together with recent recruiting success, has filled 5 roles to date. A further 11 roles are in active recruiting processes.

25. A further 7 roles are currently being filled with contract resources to ensure that the framework, controls, systems and process by which the PMO will operate are developed and in place in as short a timeframe as possible.

Programme Governance

26. Development of the Governance framework for the PMO is underway, a draft of which is included below.

27. The key feature of this governance framework is the Programme Governance Board, which includes members of the Executive Leadership team to represent Asset Management, Finance and SCADA, Crown Infrastructure Partners (CIP) and an independent board member providing programme specific oversight expertise.

28. Terms of reference for the Programme Governance Board are currently under development. Once completed the board can be formalised and their oversight of the programme will commence.

29. The proposed inclusion of CIP within the Programme Governance Board fulfils a requirement of our funding agreement with the Crown.

30. In addition to Programme Governance Board Meetings, the PMO Programme Director and Land Category Programme Manager meet with CIP on a monthly basis at an operational level to provide regular updates on various aspects of the programme and individual projects. This also fulfils a requirement of our funding agreement with the Crown.

31. The PMO have commenced drafting CIP Business Cases for land category projects and are on schedule to submit the first business cases at the end of March.

Programme Delivery Approach

32. In the aftermath of Cyclone Gabrielle, a complete picture of the devastation was formed, and perhaps more to the point, when the sheer scale of the recovery effort required was formed, it became clear to HBRC a number of tools would be required to plan, track and control the programmes of work that would ensue.

33. On this basis work began on the creation of a Project Lifecycle Management Framework and related processes that would form the basis of what is now the PMO process and control systems. The framework is based on international best practice for project management.

34. In collaboration with the Asset Management, ICT and Finance teams this framework has been developed into a module within TechOne that is now live and being actively used to form, track and control active projects. This tool is called the Project Lifecycle Management (PLM) tool.

35. The development of the PLM within TechOne enables projects to be linked directly to the financial system, providing integrated financial tracking of project budget, spend and commitments which is of great value when managing projects. When the Strategic Enterprise Asset Management module within TechOne is complete, the PMO tool will also integrate directly with the asset register which is also of immense value and effectively ensures a full integrated Asset Lifecycle management system.

36. The structure of the PLM framework is illustrated below. Gateways requiring Manager/Sponsor approval exist between each phase to ensure that projects are adequately progressed before embarking on the next phase of work.

37. The framework links projects back to LTP funding approval and enables LTP funded projects to be tracked through the full lifecycle of a project at the project level.

38. Work currently being undertaken on the PMO framework and processes will further strengthen the organisations process toward ensuring that a comprehensive, consistent and defensible approach is in place to progress the PMO programme of work.

Project Specific Activities

39. Projects within the PMO programme continue to be progressed as rapidly as possible and are following best practice in tasks planned and undertaken.

40. For example, all projects, including all land category related projects are following the same process:

40.1. Develop long list of options

40.2. Undertake Multi Criteria Analysis to assess the long list options

40.3. Reduce long list to short list

40.4. Engage with community and stakeholders on short list of options

40.5. Select preferred option

40.6. Programme governance to make decision to proceed with preferred option

40.7. Undertake investigations to support design

40.8. Detailed design of selected option

40.9. Consult with stakeholders

40.10. Undertake investigations to support resource consent application

40.11. Develop consent application

40.12. Engage with landowners

40.13. Secure required land access agreements

40.14. Develop contract documentation

40.15. Procurement process through to contract award

40.16. Construction works

40.17. Practical completion and project closeout

41. Where possible, tasks are being brought forward and/or run in parallel. For example geotechnical investigations, survey of project areas and ecological investigations are being progressed earlier than usual to enable project timeframes to be condensed as much as possible.

Project Updates

Land Category Projects

Wairoa

42. Wairoa has been classified as a category 2A.

43. The project team is currently working through the shortlist of options with the Stakeholder Engagement Group who is due to report to the Tripartite Group on the preferred option(s) at the end of March.

44. The Tripartite Group is a unique element of the Wairoa project. The Tripartite Group is a function of the Tātau Tātau settlement and relevant to much of the work HBRC undertakes in the area. Naturally the proposed construction of new flood resilience infrastructure is a key area of input.

45. The project schedule is illustrated below.

Whirinaki

46. Whirinaki, including Panpac is now classified as land category 2C.

47. The project team are currently working with the preferred option, have commenced preliminary design. Site investigations are underway.

48. The project schedule is illustrated below.

Waiohiki

49. Waiohiki is now classified as land category 2C.

50. The preferred solution has been selected and the project team are progressing all planning tasks including detailed design, consenting requirements and landowner discussions.

51. The project schedule is illustrated below.

Ohiti

52. Ohiti is now classified as land category 2C.

53. The preferred solution has been selected and the project team are progressing all planning tasks including detailed design, consenting requirements and landowner discussions.

54. The project schedule is illustrated below.

Pākōwhai

55. Pākōwhai land category has now been finalised with a mix of Category 3 and 2C.

56. This project is still in the stage of developing concepts further.

57. The project schedule is illustrated below.

Havelock North

58. A preferred option has been developed. The delivery of the detailed design and construction will be undertaken by Hastings District Council.

Pōrangahau

59. Pōrangahau is now classified as land category 2A.

60. The preferred solution should be confirmed however we are yet to confirm community support. The indicative timeline to achieve this is by the end of April.

61. The project schedule is illustrated below.

Land Category Project Engagement

62. Community engagement on land category projects has been in place from mid 2023 for all areas. The nature of that engagement has evolved as progress has been made towards finalising land categories and moving into optioneering phase.

63. Comms and engagement of these projects has been led by HBRC’s own Recovery team and has been supported by the relevant District/City Councils.

64. The PMO will be taking the lead on these activities across the whole of the PMO programme, with a primary focus on the land category projects.

65. A calendar of all engagement and newsletter drops undertaken to date for the land category projects is in Attachment 1.

Pumpstation Upgrades

66. This project is in the pre project phase, with infrastructure planning related activities being completed, including catchment analysis, development of standard specifications and the development of project briefs.

67. These projects will provide new replacement drainage pump stations for the Pākōwhai, Brookfields and Mission Pump Stations.

68. Once the project brief has been finalised, loaded into the PLM and approved, a Senior Project Management will be assigned to the project and the project will progress through the initiate phase and into the planning phase. This is scheduled to occur over April and May 2024.

Repair Rebuild Rework

69. This work refers to additional work to stopbanks repaired under the rapid repair program. Stopbanks were repaired to the existing “pre Gabrielle” design standard of 1%AEP. This $30m provision was for any additional work that may be required to bring the repaired areas up to 1%AEP “post Gabrielle”.

70. The finalised NIWA report with confirmation of return period flood flows is required to input into river/flood models for detailed analysis to determine the scope of work that may be required at each of the repair such locations. This new return period information was received by HBRC on 8 March 2024.

Infrastructure Planning Projects

71. HBRC has developed a programme of reviews for our river management, flood control and drainage schemes. The programme will look to review all schemes over a four year period.

72. Funding for the reviews is from the CIP with a portion from HBRC.

73. The objective of these reviews is to assess how the scheme meets its level of service (pre and post Gabrielle), understand the impact of climate change and to recommend both capital and maintenance improvements.

73.1. For the main flood control schemes – Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme (HPFC) and the Upper Tukituki Scheme (UTT) – the reviews will also assess and provide options for how the scheme will manage over design events. Which are events where the scheme rivers receive flows in-excess of the design levels for stopbanks.

73.2. HBRC has engaged Tonkin & Taylor (T&T) to undertake both the HPFC and the UTT scheme reviews. Both reviews were initiated in July 2023 and the final reports are due in June 2024.

73.3. Good progress has been made with both reviews. The HPFC model has been updated and assessments are being made against the current level of service.

73.4. The UTT model has been developed and assessments are also being made against the current level of service.

73.5. A community engagement strategy has been developed for both scheme reviews. This is being ratified currently and community engagement meetings will be undertaken shortly, starting in the Central Hawke’s Bay.

73.6. Reviews are currently being undertaken by Pattle Delamore Partners (PDP) on the Opoho and Ohuia drainage schemes. It is expected that these reviews will be finished by May 2024.

74. HBRC has also engaged Inspiratas Solutions (IS) to undertake an assessment and report on the Awatoto – Brookfield and Pākōwhai drainage areas and the effectiveness of the pumpstations associated with these catchments.

74.1. This has been run against a proposed new level of service which aligns with the Napier City Council design level of service for urban stormwater (2% AEP).

74.2. It had been thought that the review might show that there would be an opportunity to rationalize the number of pumpstations to one large pumpstation. However, the dynamics of the catchment require that two separate pumpstations will be required.

74.3. These pumpstations will also need to be significantly larger than the current pumpstations.

74.4. The Awatoto Industrial Estate have engaged PDP to assess and develop any quick wins for improved performance of the existing drainage system for the industrial area. HBRC are working with the industry Group and their consultants PDP to align our respective models to ensure consistency.

74.5. For Pākōwhai the existing capacity of the pumpstation is sufficient to meet the level of service required for the Pākōwhai catchment. However it will need to be upgraded to ensure sufficient resilience and redundancy.

74.6. A project brief has been created for the upgrade of the pumpstations and associated network. This will be funded through CIP with a portion from HBRC.

Asset Inspection and Prioritisation Process

75. In April 2023, HBRC created an asset inspection and prioritisation process (AIP) in which assets were inspected, their damage assessed and then prioritised for repair.

76. A Work Package was then created which consisted of a project brief and job number.

77. Work packages were then assessed by size and complexity.

78. The small and less complex packages, called Minor Work Packages, were issued to Works Group for delivery.

79. The larger, more complex packages, called Major Work Packages, were issued to the Capital Delivery team for delivery.

80. In total 178 work packages have been created and issued since the programme was created.

80.1. 82 Minor Work packages have been issued to Works Group.

80.2. These mostly consist of repairs to drains, headwalls, culverts and edge protection in our major river system.

80.3. Of the 82 work packages created 70 have been completed to date.

80.4. It is expected that the remaining Minor Work Packages will be completed by June.

80.5. 96 Major Work Packages have been created and issued to the Capital Delivery team.

80.6. Of these, 76 were Retrospective Work Packages associated with the Rapid Rebuild, and all but one has been completed to date.

80.7. Of the remaining 20 Major Work Packages – 4 have been completed, 9 are currently in progress, and 7 have yet to be started and are waiting in priority for available resources.

80.8. This means that 149 work packages of the 178 work packages created post-Gabrielle have been completed to date.

Telemetry Projects

81. The CIP required business case has been drafted and is being reviewed by the PMO business case writer to ensure consistency of approach. The business case should be lodged with CIP by the end of March 2024.

82. Where the necessary equipment has been identified, early procurement of this gear has been commenced.

Order in Council

83. Traditional resource consenting timeframes for new stopbank and pumpstation projects is lengthy and subject to further lengthy appeal processes with no guarantee of success.

84. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, with assistance from the Regional Recovery Authority (HBRRA) has been working with the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Ministry for the Environment (MfE), Land Information New Zealand and the Cyclone Recovery Unit to develop regulatory relief for the land category related programme of work.

85. The purpose of the Order in Council (OIC) is to ensure a streamlined resource consent regime for flood works in eight areas of Hawke’s Bay. This proposed OIC will apply in Wairoa, Whirinaki, Waiohiki, Ohiti Road/Omahu, Pākōwhai, Pōrangahau, Havelock North, and Awatoto (these last two are not part of HBRC’s programme).

86. This proposal has achieved a significant milestone in terms of gaining Cabinet approval, subject to consultation in early March.

87. Under section 9 of SWERLA the Minister must engage with local Māori, local community groups and the general public.

88. MfE will lead engagement on the proposal to create the OIC, supported by key Councils and the HBRRA. This is expected to occur over three weeks from 27 February to 18 March 2024.

89. People will have the opportunity to provide written feedback as well as feedback during webinars and online hui. Information about the proposals will be provided in the consultation documents.

90. Due to the short consultation period of three weeks, there are limited opportunities for face-to-face engagement, however, a small number of targeted hui will be held in the region, alongside online hui and other engagement activities.

91. The timeline and key steps for the OIC is the below flowchart of proposed key milestones and process steps.

A diagram of a flood

Description automatically generated

Decision-making process

92. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision-making provisions do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the HBRC Recovery Work Programme update.

Authored by:

James Feary

Operational Response Manager

Jon Kingsford

Manager Regional Projects

Approved by:

Chris Dolley

Group Manager Asset Management

Attachment/s

1 ⇨

Calendar of engagement events for Land Category Projects

Under Separate Cover

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

Wednesday 20 March 2024

Subject: Outcome of Chilean Needle Grass review

Reason for Report

1. This paper summarises the attached independent review of Council’s Chilean Needle Grass (CNG) management programme, proposes next steps from this review and includes updates on gravel extraction controls.

Executive Summary

2. Pest management is an important part of the sustainable management of natural resources in Hawke’s Bay. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (Council) manages risks posed by pests and other organisms through its Biosecurity programme. The Hawke’s Bay Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) 2018-2038 is the core document behind this and establishes the regulatory basis for pest management in Hawke’s Bay.

3. CNG is listed as a Sustained Control Plant under the RPMP. This classification is intended to ensure:

3.1. That current infestation levels do not increase; and

3.2. Spread to other properties is prevented

4. Staff engaged Kevin Collins, an experienced biosecurity expert, to review the current CNG programme. Kevin has previously undertaken a S17a review of the biosecurity functions for council. Specifically Kevin was asked to:

4.1. to review the status of CNG as a plant pest, with particular regard to considering the impact of cyclone Gabrielle on top of prior underinvestment in the management of CNG, and advise options for alternate objectives and measures for the RPMP if required

4.2. to consider pathway management of CNG and advise the effectiveness of the current programme to manage pathways

4.3. to engage with HBRC Biosecurity staff on views and perspectives on the options for future management of CNG within the Hawke’s Bay region

4.4. to engage with regional Primary Sector leadership on views and perspectives on the options for future management of CNG within the Hawke’s Bay region

4.5. to engage with neighbouring Regional Councils on views and perspectives on the options for future management of CNG within the Hawke’s Bay region

4.6. to engage with the Ministry for Primary Industries on views and perspectives on the options for future management of CNG within the Hawke’s Bay region

4.7. to recommend appropriate resourcing and supporting systems for the options for the future management of CNG within the Hawke’s Bay region

5. Kevin will join the meeting to discuss his report and answer questions.

6. Key findings from Kevin’s review include:

6.1. That the current programme as designed and resourcedwill fail to meet the sustained control objective of holding CNG populations.

6.2. That new populations are found every year and that Council does not have an accurate picture of the plant pest’s current range.

6.3. There is limited evidence available to assess the impact of Cyclone Gabrielle on CNG in the Hawke’s Bay region. In particular if the cyclone has potentially spread CNG material widely across catchments through earth flows and associated flooding. Given the uncertainty about this staff have commissioned further work with AgResearch scientists to examine this in more detail. If it is available in time for the meeting, their expert opinion on this will be provided on the day.

6.4. That we do not understand well enough the risks of gravel extraction on the risks of spreading CNG and that further research on this should be funded.

6.5. That there would be strong objection from neighbouring regions if Council stopped CNG control work. Modeling indicates that CNG would spread to other regions. Neighbouring regions want to engage with Council on the control to ensure that this does not occur.

6.6. That council would need to invest significantly more into the control of this pest than it currently does if it was to achieve the sustained control objectives of the RPMP. These costs have not been fully examined.

6.7. That this work would benefit from stronger Government support. It is like many biosecurity pests that are managed regionally for a national benefit. Council could advocate to Government for them to have a stronger role in pathway management of a wide range of biosecurity pests that fall into the same category as CNG.

7. The details of Kevin’s finding are in his attached document and are not proposed to be reprinted here.

The Regional Pest Management Plan

8. The purpose of the RPMP is to provide for the efficient and effective management or eradication of specified harmful organisms in the Hawke’s Bay region. It builds on the 2013 Strategy and previous pest management programmes. The purpose of the Plan is to:

8.1. minimise the actual or potential adverse or unintended effects associated with those organisms, and

8.2. maximise the effectiveness of individual actions in managing pests through a regionally coordinated approach.

9. Many organisms in the Hawke’s Bay region are considered undesirable or a nuisance. The RPMP only addresses pests where voluntary action is insufficient due to the nature of the pest or the related costs and benefits of individual action or inaction. The Act specifies criteria that must be met to justify such intervention and CNG is listed as a Sustained Control pest in the RPMP.

10. The RPMP empowers Council to exercise the relevant advisory, service delivery, regulatory and funding provisions available under the Act to deliver the specific objectives identified within the Plan.

CNG control work

11. CNG is present at multiple sites across Hawkes Bay. In Central Hawkes Bay, CNG is located to varying degrees in Waipawa, Wakarara, Waipukurau, Porangahau, Omakere, Poukawa, Otane and Patangata. Infestations occur on private land (both arable and urban), within active river channels, and on river berms, stopbanks and roadsides.

12. In Central Hawkes Bay, CNG has been found in the Tukituki River, and adjacent to both the Tukituki and Waipawa rivers.

13. The control of CNG occurs in a variety of ways. It is a land occupier’s responsibility to control CNG under the Regional Pest Management Plan. To incentivise this work, HBRC offers a 50 percent subsidy up to a maximum of $3000 per landowner for those affected landowners to use contractors to conduct the work if they choose to. The other option is that a landowner can choose to conduct control themselves and we supply small amounts of chemical to further incentivise the work. HBRC also conduct service delivery measures where appropriate.

14. Approximately 810 staff hours were spent on CNG as a pest between August and February 2023-24, specific to the Central Hawkes Bay district. This included monitoring of high-risk sites, contractor auditing, plant identification queries, service delivery, landowner liaison for subsidised control and occupier led control, machinery washdown inspections and Controlled Area Notice application assessments and site visits. The breakdown of individual visit data is in the process of being collated.

15. 2 new properties were discovered in Central Hawkes Bay. Of these two, one was a neighbour to a known infestation near Waipawa and the other was in an area where it has never been observed before in Tikokino.

16. The total contractor spend where HBRC have subsidised 50 percent of the cost of control on private land in Central Hawkes Bay alone was approximately $14622, with the land occupier cohort paying the other 50 percent. Other costs outside of that figure include a contribution in conjunction with the Asset Management team to conduct a CNG survey of the Waipawa and mid section of the Tukituki river, and associated legal advice on matters relating to the Controlled Area Notice (CAN).

17. Currently council budgets $89.5K on CNG control external spend and staff hours vary but are around 1400 per year on CNG-related activities. Recent work by AgResearch scientists estimate that council could justify spending at least three times that amount if it wanted any chance of attaining the objectives of the sustained control requirements in the RPMP, it would also need to significantly increase the staff time for this work.

CNG and gravel management

18. In April 2023, a CAN was issued for parts of the Waipawa and Tukituki Rivers to manage the potential spread of CNG while allowing controlled extraction of gravel for rural recovery purposes post Cyclone Gabrielle.

19. There have been 18 applications from local landowners under the terms of the CAN, with 11 of these applications being approved and the rest declined for various reasons. This has led to a total figure of 6350 cubic metres of gravel requested by landowners and then approved for extraction and 2827 cubic metres of gravel removed to date.

20. Of the 11 that were approved, one of the applicants was issued a Notice of Direction for unauthorised use of the gravel and to mitigate the risk of spread of CNG from that usage.

21. Staff are in discussion at a national level with the Biosecurity Working Group about a proposal to collectively fund an AgResearch investigation to determine whether a screening and crushing process for gravel is sufficient to mitigate risk of spreading seeds of multiple weed species. Our goal would be to secure funding via external sources for this in the next financial year. Current funding levels will not be sufficient to fund this proposal.

22. In the meantime, HBRC have engaged a local contractor to conduct a smaller scale screening and crushing trial and we have identified a suitable area of land to run the trial.

23. Recent surveying of the Tukituki river has not detected CNG in the area from the Patangata Bridge downstream for 2km in the active river channel. A small number of plants has been found in the berm areas, but not in areas where gravel extraction typically occurs. This result means that our management approach can change. As a result the following actions will occur;

23.1. The CAN ceases at the end of the month (yellow area in the CAN map) and will not be renewed.

23.2. A Notice of Direction will be put in place/amended that restricts gravel extraction from known CNG areas (river berms and the Tukituki river from 2km south of the Patangata Bridge to the river mouth)

23.3. From 1 April gravel extraction can resume upstream from 2km downstream of the Patangata Bridge noting that applications still need to go through the consent process (Gravels team). There will be no restrictions on the end use of this gravel.

23.4. Surveying will continue annually and if CNG is detected within this area, or any new areas, staff will reassess and consider what restrictions, if any, may be required to gravel extraction.

23.5. Communication of these decisions has occurred internally and to relevant contractors.

Next Steps

24. The review is a technical document that has considered the biology of CNG, the legislative framework, stakeholder feedback and risk of no control of the pest.

25. Staff acknowledge that there is the need for wider consideration of the topic and feedback on options for the future management of the pest.

26. It is proposed that staff prepare an ‘issues and options’ paper for public circulation and feedback on the future control options. Options could range from council not doing anything and directing landowners to act, through to council fully resourcing and running a comprehensive control programme. There are other options in between.

27. Feedback on the options would be assembled and presented to council for further deliberation on a preferred approach. This may or may not precipitate the need to change the RPMP.

28. It is proposed that staff also begin engagement with neighbouring regions on management of CNG and also to engage Biosecurity NZ in this discussion. It is likely that this discussion would widen to a range of plant and animal pests, the way that pathways are managed and the role of Government in supporting this management.

Decision-making process

29. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision making provisions do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the Outcome of Chilean Needle Grass review.

Authored by:

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager Integrated Catchment Management

Approved by:

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager Integrated Catchment Management

Attachment/s

1 ⇨	Colllins Consulting: Review of the HBRC Chilean Needle Grass Control Programme –Post Cyclone Gabrielle		Under Separate Cover
2 ⇩	Chilean Needle Grass Controlled Area Notice Map

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

Wednesday 20 March 2024

Subject: Land for Life business case

Reason for Report

1. This item provides the Committee with progress on the Land for Life (LfL) project: completion of the business case and planning underway for the next stage of the project – preparing to scale.

Executive Summary

2. Following updates to council about the Land for Life project in mid-2023, further work has been completed on the benefits for nature provided by the project and the appropriate strategic targets to apply to planting and other interventions. This information has been added to the business case prior to it being signed off by project partners: MPI, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and HBRC in December 2023. This completes stage 2 of the project.

3. A project plan for Stage 3 is being developed. This stage aims to validate the ability to scale the Land for Life model in the Hawke’s Bay region and nationally. The project plan identifies project workstreams and milestones.

4. Stage 3 is estimated to cost $3.38M over two years. Funding is still being secured but aims to be split between in-kind contributions from HBRC, cash from MPI through an application to the Sustainable Future Farming Fund and TNC through philanthropic donors.

5. Final approvals to move forward with the project will be sought from project partners once the project plan has been completed and funding secured. In parallel, work will continue to identify financial and implementation partners, and further engagement with pilot and other interested landowners.

Project Objectives

6. During the 2021-31 LTP process, Council agreed to fund the Right Tree Right Place (RTRP) project to address the significant erosion problem in Hawke’s Bay through demonstrating a successful RTRP model by refining a planting programme with several objectives. The following objectives and are equally relevant to the LfL programme:

6.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset, nor is it inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

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

6.3. Recover its own costs.

6.4. Encourage planting of trees on erodible land.

6.5. Stimulate the market to invest in trees on farms that strengthens financial and environmental outcomes.

6.6. Reducing the need for whole farm afforestation.

6.7. Plant enough trees to prepare for climate change.

6.8. Provide for significant environmental benefits.

Background

7. The LfL business case was compiled in mid-2023. The compilation process was supported with solid market sounding with potential financial, implementation and supply chain partners. The draft document underwent a quality assessment process involving some 25 subject matter experts across key agencies associated with the project.

8. The business case was presented to council committee meetings and workshops in May, July and August 2023. The final draft was submitted for consultation to project partners, TNC and MPI in August. Feedback from this consultation was that the business case needed to better demonstrate that the LfL model will result in broader outcomes for nature. This will be required to satisfy TNC financial donors and to demonstrate the environmental outcomes sought by HBRC. The steering group asked the project team to identify aspirational policy settings and incentives needed to achieve satisfactory increases in benefits for nature.

Technical paper: Outcomes for Nature

9. Wildlands and the Cawthron Institute were commissioned to work with the project team and HBRC science and biodiversity teams to complete a LfL technical paper: Additional Information on Gains for Nature (attached). The executive summary of this paper describes its findings as follows.

a. The Land for Life (LFL) business case (BC) sets out a range of benefits to nature (aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem health and biodiversity). The potential to maximise these benefits will be progressed during the next stage, which entails preparing the project for full implementation and enhanced resilience across 300 farms (and a further 300 farms that are a stepping-stone/preparation for farms towards full implementation).

b. Benefit estimates in the current version of the BC reflect a bottom-up aggregation based on farm-level data derived from farmer preferences revealed in the 12 pilot farms. These were the initial and conservative preferences of farmers based on 1:1 engagement with consultants at the start of the process and based on current policy settings, and the knowledge and confidence of farmers.

c. This has delivered a highly conservative view of benefits, as opposed to a strategic and aspirational view of what LfL can and needs to achieve to deliver the significant nature-based benefits afforded by this approach.

d. Based on expert assessment provided in this report, it is clear that the conservative benefits set out in the current BC deliver valuable gains for nature and people. This includes gains for aquatic environments (rivers, wetlands, estuaries and the coastal marine area) through the significant reductions identified stressors (e.g., fine sediment, P, and N). As well as gains for terrestrial biodiversity through improving management or protection of existing indigenous forest remnants and other ecosystems. In addition to plantings, with a mixture of exotic and indigenous forest and treeland (and scrub and shrubland), this will create more diverse landscapes across the region and achieve valuable benefits for indigenous biodiversity (noting that exotic planted forest also provides valuable habitats for a reasonably diverse range of indigenous species).

e. However, expert assessment confirms that the benefits described currently in the BC for terrestrial ecosystem health and biodiversity are sub-optimal. The target for indigenous revegetation is too low and needs to be reset to recognise the ecological understanding of the rate of biodiversity loss when indigenous cover drops to below 15-20% of the land area.

f. This report establishes a strategic view of benefits that LfL needs to target, which experts consider aspirational but achievable, and which align with:

· A shorter-term ambition to achieve 10-15% of a catchment area in indigenous vegetative cover.

· A longer-term ambition to achieve 15-20% of a catchment area in indigenous vegetative cover.

· Increasing the proportion of native planting to approximately 40-50% of total new planting area (toward achieving the 15-20% indigenous cover target above).

10. The findings from the technical paper along with feedback were the basis for updating the business case.

Final Business Case

11. The updated business case strengthens the position that accelerating the roll out of LfL accelerates realisation of benefits at scale. With the stretched planting goals, the 300 farms with Comprehensive LfL Farm Plans and their catchments will deliver the following benefits:

11.1. reducing sediment erosion by >25%;

11.2. 21,000 km of rivers with improved management;

11.3. an estimated 15 million tCo2e sequestered over thirty years;

11.4. additional 101,300 tCo2e reduced from livestock emissions over thirty years;

11.5. 16,385 ha of remnant native vegetation under improved management;

11.6. 71,759 ha of land with improved management through afforestation or agroforestry*;

11.7. 4,500 ha of wetlands and lakes under improved management or protection;

11.8. 292,267 ha of land under best management practice and regenerative interventions

*LfL will aim to achieve 15-20% indigenous cover across catchments over time, with indigenous afforestation or agroforestry accounting for 40-50% of total new planting.

12. The steering group, comprising HBRC, TNC and MPI signed off the business case in December 2023. This completes the stage 2 of the project:

13. The business case is undergoing final editing and publishing. It remains commercial in confidence as the project moves to commercial discussions with implementation partners but is available to councillors on request.

Planning for Stage 3

14. Stage 3 of the project aims to validate that it can be scaled across Hawke’s Bay and to other regions. The planning for the next stage is underway with the development of the project plan including securing funding for this stage and associated approvals to proceed. The project purpose, goal and objectives of Stage 3 are outlined below:

11.9. Project purpose:

To validate ability to scale the LfL model in the Hawke’s Bay region and nationally.

11.10. Project goal:

Nurture Thriving Communities by preserving and enhancing the productive link between people and the land.

11.11. Project objectives:

a. Stand up and further develop the LfL model to enable implementation at scale.

b. Understand the resourcing requirements in the longer term and how they can be met, including from within the programme delivery itself.

c. Secure the skills, expertise, influence and commitment of critical partners and opinion leaders.

d. Validate ability to scale the LfL model through implementation across the initial 12 pilot farms and an additional 90 farms across the Hawke’s Bay region.

e. Formalise the pipeline of landowners (the balance of 600 farms) to participate in the programme in the Hawke’s Bay region.

f. Pursue opportunities to drive additional gains for nature, including to strengthen incentives for native planting.

g. Assess opportunities to scale the LfL model to other suitable regions and strengthen conditions for scaling.

15. A project plan for Stage 3 has been drafted that outlines the workstreams and comprises the following steps through to June 2026:

a. Establishing new programme governance arrangements

b. Developing overarching strategy/vision and policies

c. Detailed design for implementation

d. Selecting and appointing key partners, including finance partners

e. Establishing access to key digital tools

f. Standing up new arrangements

g. Implementing a strategic approach to catchment-scale planning, through processes inclusive of landowners, communities, mana whenua and key stakeholders. Note these would align and integrate with existing council policy programmes.

h. Continuing to on-board new farms and associated implementation

i. Securing funding for long-term implementation.

16. Funding requirements for the next stage are currently estimated at $3.38M over the 2 1/2 years to June 2026. The breakdown in envisaged funding comprises:

a. HBRC:

· $240,000 in funding from the current LfL budget in the current 2023/24 financial year

· $1.11M in-kind contribution 2024/25 and 2025/26 financial years from current positions within HBRC (refer roles and responsibilities below) – this has been flagged as part of the current long term plan process

b. TNC:

$800,000 in cash from philanthropic donors for the two financial years 2024/25 and 2025/26 – discussions are underway with interested donors.

c. MPI:

$995,000 in cash will be applied for from the Sustainable Farm Futures Fund – an application has been drafted and discussions underway with the MPI SFFF team.

17. The next stage will further clarify the roles and responsibilities of partners for the project and onboard these partners. The current view is illustrated in the following two tables:

Next steps

18. The immediate focus is to complete and sign off the project plan and secure funding approvals with partners before receiving final approvals from partners to proceed. In parallel the team will engage with potential financing and implementation partners, and pilot with other interested farmers to progress what can be advanced prior to approvals.

19. The main steps in the forward work programme are summarised as follows with go/no go decision milestones to be added.

20. Council can expect to receive the next update after the project plan has been finalised and there is increased surety about the funding.

Recommendation

That the Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the Land for Life business case staff report.

Authored by:

Michael Bassett-Foss

Land for Life Project Manager

Mel Weston

Executive Assistant - Maori Partnerships

Approved by:

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager Integrated Catchment Management

Attachment/s

1 ⇨

Land for Life Technical Report: Additional Information on Gains for Nature

Under Separate Cover