Meeting of the Hawke's Bay Regional Council Maori Committee

Date: Tuesday 13 December 2011

Time: 10.15am

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. Short Term Replacements

4. Confirmation of Minutes of the Maori Committee held on 25 October 2011

5. Matters Arising from Minutes of the Maori Committee held on 25 October 2011

6. Consideration of General Business Items

7. Action Items from Maori Committee meetings

Information or Performance Monitoring

8. Verbal update on Economic Development by Councillor Alan Dick, Mr Michael Bassett Foss, Economic Development Manager and Mr Murray Douglas, President Hawke's Bay Chamber of Commerce. 10.15am

9. Verbal Update by CEO

10. Update on Regional Sector Freshwater Management Initiatives

11. Water Quality Trends in Hawke's Bay 1998-2011

12. Heat Smart Verbal Update Report by Mr Mark Heaney, HeatSmart Programme Co-Ordinator

13. Statutory Advocacy Matters

14. General Business

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

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

2. The public park in Vautier Street on the old Council site costs only $6 for all day parking. This cost will be reimbursed by Council.

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

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

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 13 December 2011

SUBJECT: Update on Regional Sector Freshwater Management Initiatives

Reason for Report

1. In May 2011 Council received a report outlining the introduction of a National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS) and its implications for regional council water management. The report also outlined the initiatives being undertaken by the regional council sector, as a whole, to achieve a consistency of approach in both implementation of the National Policy Statement and when dealing with wider water management issues.

2. The purpose of this report is to update the Committee on progress since May, noting that work underway nationally will have a major impact on how things get done regionally in the near future.

Strategic Fit

3. Through a combination of both the Hawke’s Bay Land and Water Management Strategy and the Ruataniwha Plains water storage investigations work we are in effect confronting all of the issues addressed at a national level by both the regional sector work and LAWF e.g. collaborative governance, adaptive management, water allocation, water quality and so on.

Land and Water Forum

4. Following the release of its report to the Government in March 2011 the Land and Water Forum has agreed to continue work on generating consensus between key groups on some of the major policy issues in the further work programme.

4.1. In March 2012, the Forum will make recommendations on:

4.1.1. what is needed to put in place the limit-setting aspects of the NPS, including what central government needs to do versus what local government needs to do, the roles and responsibilities of water users, and the nature and scope of limit-setting tools; and

4.1.2. better processes for making decisions on limits, especially for involving iwi and other interest groups.

4.2. In September 2012, the Forum will develop recommendations on how to manage within limits, including:

4.2.1. what tools could be used to manage within limits, including managing the effects of land use on water

4.2.2. methods for allocating rights to discharge into water once limits are set

4.2.3. methods for the initial allocation of the right to take water once limits are set

4.2.4. transfer systems that allow these rights to take and discharge water to be moved to higher value uses

4.2.5. instruments that encourage efficient use of water in rural and urban areas

4.2.6. compliance and enforcement issues

4.2.7. transition issues.

Regional Sector Collaboration

5. A programme has been developed by the regional sector with a number of deliverables which are due for completion between now and late March/early April 2012. It is important to note that the programme will need to adjust and change in response to the emerging political environment and the work of both the Ministry for the Environment and the Land and Water Forum (LAWF). The timetable for the revised programme should enable regional councils to have considered collective positions before the LAWF produces further work. However, if the government implements a more rapid reform agenda now that the election is concluded, the programme will need to be revised.

6. The key elements of the Regional Sector Group freshwater management programme are as follows:

6.1. Legal Opinion – to resolve the status of policies A1 and A3, specifically how they and the requirement to have rules “where permissible” that require the adoption of a best practicable option to addressing water quality issues fit with the RMA requirement to avoid, remedy or mitigate environmental effects. A draft opinion has been circulated for comment to the working group

6.2. First Principles on Allocation of Water – a think piece taking a first principles look at the methods for the allocation of freshwater to activities. It also involves consideration of the possible transition paths from current allocation methods to possible future ones. The project comprises an initial scoping paper that will identify a number of possible approaches that will then be refined for detailed consideration of a limited number of approaches. The initial scoping paper has been received by the working group.

6.3. Reasonably foreseeable impact of Climate Change – a simple, authoritative report on the reasonably foreseeable impacts of climate change, with the intention of allowing all regional councils to discharge their NPS obligations from the same set of consistent national assumptions. A proposal has been received and funding is now being sought for the work from Envirolink. The work cannot commence until funding is confirmed.

6.4. Non-statutory tools to assist water quality – the idea is to bring together a tool kit of best practice in non-statutory programmes designed to improve water quality. This work will commence in January 2012.

6.5. Plan changes to implement the NPS – this work stream is designed to support regional councils to come to a considered and joint position on the key elements of the NPS that they are required to implement by way of plan changes. This includes a shared view on freshwater objectives, various methodologies and integrated management. It is proposed to develop a “straw man” approach that will prompt a debate within the sector.

6.6. Policy Agility – this comprises a policy paper and related advocacy tool and advice to support the regional sector to engage in a process to improve the ability of councils to implement RMA policy more quickly. The scope includes appropriate liaison with Local Government New Zealand. A first draft of the paper is well underway.

6.7. Advocacy and Communications – to provide communications to all stakeholders within the regional council sector.

Financial and Resource Implications

7. The Hawke’s Bay Regional Council is providing oversight of the programme on behalf of the Regional Sector Group. A reference group is being used to ensure that the programme remains connected to the sector and has the benefit of sector expertise. The overall implication of these two actions is that HBRC is making a significant contribution in terms of staff time through the contributions of the Chief Executive, Group Manager External Relations, and the Manager Environmental Science.

8. External costs are being incurred through the various work streams and the coordination of these via McGredy Winder and Co as consultants. These costs are being shared by the 16 regional and unitary councils. The HBRC share through the balance of the financial year is expected to cost between $10,000 to $15,000.

Decision Making Process

9. 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 Maori Committee receives the report.

Helen Codlin

Group Manager

Strategic Development

Liz Lambert

Group Manager

External Relations

Andrew Newman

Chief Executive

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 13 December 2011

SUBJECT: Water Quality Trends in Hawke's Bay 1998-2011

REASON FOR REPORT

1. The purpose of this report is:

1.1. To inform Council on the current state and trends of key surface water quality parameters using the examples of nitrate-nitrogen (NO₃) and soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP).

1.2. To highlight some weaknesses in the existing water quality monitoring programme that limit Council’s ability to deliver on their strategic goals.

1.3. To highlight the importance of the State of the Environment (SoE) programme in supporting Council’s Regional Goals and Strategic Direction.

Background

2. The current Hawke's Bay Regional Council's SoE river monitoring programme consists of 72 sites monitored routinely throughout the region. The standard sampling regime is quarterly water quality measurements. Analysis and reporting of the results follows a 5 yearly cycle. The next detailed regional SoE review of surface water quality is due in 2014.

3. The programme reflects recommendations from the 2006 SoE review and NIWA commissioned frequency analysis.

4. An interim, region wide analysis of state and trends was undertaken to inform Council to support strategic development and to assist in providing information to operational activities e.g. land services for prioritisation and effectiveness of programmes. Preliminary results will be part of the presentation.

Methods

Trend and State Analysis

5. Key water quality variables were analysed for state and trends based on the following:

5.1. Summaries of state, based on percentage of compliance with Regional Resource Management Plan (RRMP) and Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (2000) (ANZECC) guideline levels, were assessed for the period September 2008 to September 2011 (last 3 years approximating current state).

5.2. Trends were analysed for SoE sites (54 in total, including 6 sites sampled by NIWA) containing data spanning the period 1998-2010. At least ten years of data is generally required for a robust trend analysis in light of the historic and current quarterly sampling frequency (discussed in more detail shortly).

Data Display

6. Sites were classified into “increasing”, “decreasing” and “stable trend” classes, when significant trends were determined. Symbols where assigned for each trend class (displayed as: arrow up, arrow down and square respectively). Remaining sites were defined with “no significant trend” and displayed as a circle.

7. Water quality ‘state’ classes were defined using the percentage of compliance (as described under 5.1) in line with the following: >80% compliance, 80-50% compliance, <50% compliance (displayed in green, amber and red respectively).

8. Classes described in 6 and 7 were merged and displayed in ArcGIS for each variable. One coloured symbol being displayed for each site (e.g. green arrow up, upward trend, but >80% compliance with guidelines). Maps were generated for each variable and selected examples will be shown as part of the presentation.

Results

In the Case of NO₃ and SRP

9. In the case of NO₃ and SRP, the trend analysis resulted in “no significant trend” for a large number of the SoE sites. This reflects an indeterminate result with no capacity to conclude an increasing, decreasing or stable trend over the time period analysed.

10. Nine sites showed a significant increasing trend for NO₃and four sites a significant decreasing trend; seven sites showed a significant increasing trend for SRP and seven sites a significant decreasing trend. No sites returned a significant stable trend.

11. Four NO₃-sites and five SRP-sites that returned significant trends were sampled by NIWA at a higher (monthly) frequency returning roughly 4 times more data points than HBRC sampled sites. HBRC sites at which trends could be determined were generally sites where data was also collected monthly (e.g Taharua).

12. The lack of statistically significant trends (increasing, decreasing or stable) is largely an artefact of the frequency of sampling. Increasing sampling frequency from quarterly to monthly for key SoE sites would greatly improve Council’s capacity to report on trends, and in turn plan effectiveness.

13. The current standard SoE surface water sampling routine, based on quarterly sampling, does not provide sufficient data for sound statistical analysis over the five yearly reporting cycle. Monthly sampling is more likely to provide for robust data aligned with the regional reporting period and enable consistency with national monitoring.

14. Increased sampling frequency and subsequently robust trends and state analysis would provide for:

14.1. The opportunity to report “changing state and trend”, based on a fixed (defined) time period to inform Council and the public of the most recent state and trends of their water resources.

14.2. Iterative decision-making: Evaluating results of actions (e.g. land management) and adjusting actions on the basis of state and trend analysis. This could be coupled with historic and current landuse information to ensure legacy effects were appropriately characterised.

14.3. Improved capacity to assess trends over the SoE reporting period (5 years).

14.4. Stronger statistical conclusions.

14.5. Sound data for decision making process (strategic development, operational activities and statutory processes).

14.6. Straightforward cause-effect evaluation (e.g land management).

Strategic Context

The Council has confirmed its proposed strategic directions with soon to be released Strategic Plan. Land and Water Quality are focus areas under the strategic goals of Resilient Ecosystems.

The Strategic Plan’s proposed outcome is a proactive integrated management of Land and Water through ‘Better understand(ing) trends and risks for each catchment’. ‘Keeping communities well informed’ is one of the proposed approaches in the focus area of people and communities.

Proposed Science Programme Objectives to support these strategic goals include:

· To support sound strategic decisions in identifying areas for enhancement and improvement of water quality.

· To provide catchment based robust information to support management and policy decisions, promoting integrated management.

· To identify potential for efficient land management actions and report on effects of land use changes.

· To identify potential WQ changes due to climate change and to assess likely effects of climate change on aquatic ecosystems.

· To provide support to effectively deliver on Council’s statutory responsibilities, projects and services as approved by Council through its Long Term Plan (LTP).

· To implement routine reporting on “Water Quality - State and Trends” in the Hawke’s Bay region.

· To introduce targeted reporting on plan effectiveness to communities and focus groups with sound data to enhance community support.

· To inform and guide the setting of priorities in relation to the activity of a local authority and other organisations.

· To increase and improve stakeholder engagement through better reporting and defined outcomes.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

15. 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 presented to the Maori Committee 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 Maori Committee receives the report entitled “Water Quality Trends in Hawke’s Bay 1998-2011”

Nina von Westernhagen

Environmental Scientist Freshwater Quality and Ecology

Adam Uytendaal

Team Leader Water Quality & Ecology

Graham Sevicke-Jones

Manager Enviromental Science

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 13 December 2011

SUBJECT: Statutory Advocacy Matters

REASON FOR REPORT

1. This paper reports on proposals considered under Council’s statutory advocacy project and the Resource Management Act 1991 for the period 12 October to 13 December 2011.

Background

2. The proposals on which Council has an opportunity to make comments or lodge a submission include, but are limited to:

2.1 Notified Resource Consent Applications

2.2 Plan Changes

2.3 Private Plan Change Requests

2.4 Notice of Requirement

2.5 Non-statutory Strategies and Structure Plans.

3. The summary attached includes an actual list and description of the proposals, whether submissions were lodged in support or opposition, and the reasons for lodging a submission. A location map is also attached.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

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 Committee receives the Statutory Advocacy Update report.

Esther-Amy Bate

Planner

Gavin Ide

Team Leader Policy

Helen Codlin

Group Manager

Strategic Development

Attachment/s

1 View	Statutory Ad Map
2 View	Updated Statutory Advocacy Report

Updated Statutory Advocacy Report

Attachment 2

Statutory Advocacy Update

Received	TLA	Map Ref	Activity	Applicant/ Agency	Status	Current Situation
23 November 2011	WDC	6	Resource Consent – Subdivision The applicant seeks to subdivide a property at 790 Mahia East Coast Road to create 48 residential lots, 1 undeveloped farm lot, 1 lifestyle lot, 3 balance lots, 2 lots to vest as road, 2 access lots and 1 lot for the purpose of establishing a campground to accommodate 400 people.	Pongaroa Land Co. Limited Consultant – Consult Plus Ltd	Notified Non-complying	6 December 2011 Council staff are currently assessing the application. Submissions to the Wairoa District Council are to be received before January 11^th 2012.
12 August 2011	NCC	5	Draft Plan Change 7 – Jervoistown The purpose of the plan change is to create a new zone with new policies and rules for Jervoistown. The plan change seeks to counteract the effects of adhoc development within Jervoistown.	NCC	Draft	17 November 2011 · NCC held an “informal” hearing for the Hearing Committee to informally discuss the comments received on the draft plan change. 19 September 2011 · Council staff provided comments to NCC on the draft plan change. In general the Council is supportive of the broad intention of the plan change however noted servicing constraints as a limiting factor. In particular a high water table contributing to the cross contamination of wastewater and stormwater, at capacity stormwater drains and cross boundary runoff and flooding. · Council staff noted that Jervoistown is not included in the preferred settlement pattern included in the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy.
26 June 2011	NCC	4	Resource Consent – Subdivision The applicant seeks to subdivide 37 Jervois Road DP 411734 into three (3) Lots.	John Campbell Consultant – Kevin O’Connor & Associates Ltd	Pre Application	26 July 2011 · The applicant has provided minimal information on which to base any observations. Further information on proposed stormwater and wastewater solutions for the site has been requested. · It is noted that the applicant has previously subdivided the parent lot. This subdivision occurred in 2008 and was opposed by NCC and HBRC. HBRC opposed the subdivision due to concerns regarding the disposal of wastewater and stormwater. The original subdivision was granted by the Environment Court in 2009. This application seeks to divide the parent lot into a further three (3) lots. · The applicant’s consultant has been advised that HBRC is generally opposed to the intensification of housing in Jervoistown and has concerns regarding stormwater and wastewater disposal in that locality.
5 November 2010	NCC	3	Notice of Requirement – Te Awa Structure Plan Notice of requirement for designation to allow for the construction of public works in the Te Awa Structure Plan area by Napier City Council.	NCC	Notified by NCC	6 December 2010 · The Council’s Engineering Team has provided comment. The Engineering Team believes that the proposed second pump station is unnecessary due to sufficient infrastructure already available in that there is scope to utilise infrastructure previously built for the Cross Country drain. · Council will submit in support but provide further comments as stated below.
5 November 2010	NCC	3	Plan Change 6 – Te Awa Structure Plan The purpose of the plan change is to rezone the area from Main Rural to Main Residential and incorporate the outcomes sought in the Te Awa Structure Plan into the District Plan.	NCC	Notified by NCC	20 June 2011 · Council has received a Summary of Submissions from NCC. No action is required at this time. 6 December 2010 · The Engineering Team has provided comments. The proposed stormwater solution does not consider the principles of Low Impact Urban Design. · Council will submit in support of the application in principle but suggest some design principles that NCC could take into account when further developing the proposal. In particular the Council has recommended: 1. That decision making criteria and/or guidance be added that supports and encourages the principles of Low Impact Urban Design, and 2. That NCC develop a landscape plan that includes aspects to enhance the ecology, culture, recreation. Health and safety along Willowbank Avenue and the Serpentine Drain drainage corridor.
23 August 2010	NCC	2	Resource Consent – Subdivision The application seeks to subdivide 58 McElwee Street, Jervoistown Certificate of Tile HBM2/1351 into two separate lots.	Mr B. Joseph Consultant – Consult Plus Ltd	Notified Restricted Discretionary	14 November 2011 · Further mediation held 3 November. No resolution. · Mediator has stated that the next step is to appeal to the Environment Court. Applicant to decide whether to uphold the appeal by February 2012. 1 August 2011 · Further mediation is scheduled on 4 August 2011. Council’s position remains unchanged. 24 May 2011 · Mediation with the applicant and NCC to be held today. · Council staff will maintain the position that: o No further discharge of stormwater will be accepted into the Jervois Drain, and o The option of discharging stormwater via the Claudatos scheme is only viable if a number of conditions are met. 27 January 2011 · Council has become a party to the appeal lodged by the applicant under Section 274 of the Resource Management Act 1991. The Council is interested in all of the proceedings but in particular is interested in issues relating to the effects of increased site coverage and stormwater collection, treatment and disposal. 16 December 2010 · Council has received a Notice of Appeal from the applicant on the NCC decision. 17 November 2010 · Application was declined at Hearing held 17 November 2010 as it was decided that the creation of two 2000m²lots was contrary to the intent of the Napier District Plan. 20 September 2010 · HBRC lodged submission opposing application. · Reasons include: o No provision for stormwater disposal and will likely result in adverse conditions in terms of flood levels and duration of flooding at a local level and the wider Jervoistown community. o Proposal to increase maximum site coverage from 10% to 25%. Concern that this will also increase adverse conditions in terms of flood levels and duration of flooding. · A 2009 report prepared by this Council (Jervoistown Drainage Analysis, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, April 2009) outlines the drainage issues and provides the conclusion that incremental development at Jervoistown will continue to result in reduced drainage standard for the existing houses. A copy of this report was provided to Napier CC shortly after its publication.
24 May 2010	NCC	1	Resource Consent - Subdivision The application seeks to subdivide an area of land currently zoned as main rural on 66 Franklin Road, Bay View into 6 lots and undertake earthworks.	Brian Nicholls	Notified Restricted Discretionary	6 December 2011 Planning staff have met with the applicant and NCC planning staff to discuss stormwater and wastewater design for the proposed subdivision. Further information is required from the applicant. 26 July 2011 · NCC Planning staff have informed HBRC that they are waiting on further information from the applicant. 2 August 2010 · Policy staff have met with the applicant’s consultant. Options and scenarios for wastewater consenting and servicing are under consideration. 14 July 2010 · Council submitted in opposition to the application seeking that the application be declined unless all of the 6 Lots were fully serviced. 12 June 2010 · Comment has been sought from the Regulation and Engineering teams. The stormwater solutions for the site are acceptable due to the free draining nature of the soils. The same soil types present an issue with on-site wastewater disposal and insufficient treatment. Coupled with the proximity of the subdivision to the coastal marine environmental it is likely that the Council will submit against the application. Submissions close 24 June 2010.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 13 December 2011

SUBJECT: General Business

INTRODUCTION:

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

Item	Topic	Councillor / Staff
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.